text stringlengths 14 5.77M | meta dict | __index_level_0__ int64 0 9.97k ⌀ |
|---|---|---|
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
\label{sec:conclu}
In this paper, we presented the realisation of a user-oriented
domain-specific language, named Pantagruel, aimed to ease the
development of entity orchestration applications. The design of
Pantagruel is supported by a thorough analysis of the entity
orchestration domain, bringing out the domain requirements and the
needs of users. In addition, we used the formal methodology for
language development proposed by David Schmidt~\cite{davidschmidt}. It
identifies the key concepts in language design and
semantics. Throughout the realisation of Pantagruel, we shown how the
denotational semantics of our language reflects the domain analysis,
expressing the user-oriented concepts of the domain as first class
domains of the semantics. Finally, we hope the example of Pantagruel
serves as a basis to help and motivate language developers to provide
a proper semantic definition of their DSL.
Once the semantics of our language is formally defined, it can be used
both to derive implementations (\ie interpreters, compilers) and to
reason about programs by expressing various program analyses. An
interpreter for Pantagruel has been developed in OCaml; it is a
straightforward mapping of the formal definition. An implementation of
a compiler towards a Java platform has also been developed based on the
semantics, and was used for a demonstration of Pantagruel at a conference~\cite{dreypercom}.
As for future work, we will use the semantics of
Pantagruel to perform static program analysis, such as conflict
detection when rule execution affects the state of the same
entities. To do so, we can leverage Nakata's work on the While
reactive language~\cite{nakatadsl11}. Nakata uses the Coq proof
assistant to perform property verifications on the While language,
based on a denotational-style definition. We are also studying an
approach to allowing end users to express area-specific properties,
describing the intended behavior of their orchestration application,
in a user-friendly paradigm. Because they are most qualified to
determine what area-specific properties should be satisfied by
orchestration applications,
it is essential to provide them with high-level abstractions to make
accessible the description of area-specific properties. To support the
verification of orchestration applications against these properties,
this work will build upon the formal semantics of Pantagruel. Another
interesting direction based on the denotational semantics of
Pantagruel, is to develop tools such as debuggers and profilers, and
to make them accessible to end users.
\vspace{-.25em}
\subsection*{Acknowledgment}
\vspace{-.4em}
The formal definition of a programming language can be intricate and dense. David Schmidt has made landmark contributions on this topic, providing researchers with a practical methodology to formalize a programming language definition without sacrificing underlying mathematical foundations. His approach makes the design of a language definition systematic, rigorous and tasteful. Resulting definitions are easier to understand by implementers, to use for formal reasoning, and to leverage to introduce non-standard semantics. This paper is a testimony to the fact that the appealing nature of David Schmidt's methodology is strong across generations of researchers in programming languages.
\section{Pantagruel in the denotational style}
\label{sec:denstyle}
Defining the semantics of a language
usually relies on one of the following three methodologies:
operational, axiomatic, or denotational~\cite{schmidtintro}.
Denotational semantics focuses on the mathematical relation between
input data and output data, and makes
explicit the domain definition of these data. In our approach, the
structure and characteristics of the data related to the entities are
central to the dynamic
semantics of our language. Furthermore, because the denotational
semantics uses a functional style, a definition can easily be mapped
into an implementation. In fact, we have implemented in the OCaml
language an interpreter based on the semantics of Pantagruel.
Additionally, the functional style of the denotational semantics
enables us to generalize the definition of orchestration rules, from
an entity to a class of entities. Specifically, we leverage
higher-order functions to express the rule-evaluation process as a
pattern that is applied on a set of entities, similar to map-like
functions in higher-order languages. In contrast, an operational
definition would make explicit these generalization steps. We
illustrate this feature
in Section~\ref{sec:orchestration-syntax} with the valuation functions
of rules, events and actions.
\section{Orchestration of networked entities}
\label{sec:domain}
A wide variety of networked entities, both hardware and software, are
populating smart spaces that become prevalent in a growing number of
areas, including supply chain management, building automation,
healthcare, and assisted living. These entities have {\em sensing
capabilities}, enabling to collect data (\eg ambient temperature, or
user presence), and/or {\em actuating capabilities}, enabling to
perform actions (\eg turn on/off an entity, or display a
message). Additionally, they are characterized by {\em attributes}
(\eg a location or a status). Applications need to be developed to
exploit the capabilities provided by these entities. Such applications
determine the actions to be triggered according to sensed data and
values of entity attributes. We refer to such applications as {\em
orchestration applications}. The development of orchestration
applications is challenging, requiring to cope with heterogeneity and
dynamicity of networked entities.
\myparagraph{Heterogeneity} The entities of a smart space are
off-the-shelf software components and devices that use a variety of
communication protocols and rely on intricate distributed systems
technologies. The heterogeneity of these entities and the intricacies
of underlying distributed technologies tend to percolate in the code
of the orchestration logic, cluttering it with low-level details.
To facilitate the development of the orchestration logic, it is
necessary to raise the level of abstraction at which entities are
manipulated. To do so, an abstraction layer between the entity
implementation and the orchestration logic must be defined. We refer
to such a layer as a {\em specification layer}, enabling to describe
entities according to their sensing and actuating capabilities and
their attributes. This layer is coupled with the {\em orchestration
layer}
enabling to write an orchestration
application with respect to the entity descriptions from the
specification layer. Specifically, an orchestration application
consists of a set of rules that specify which actions on entities need
to be performed (the right part of rules) when some data are sensed by
entities (the left part of rules).
\myparagraph{Dynamicity} An application may interact with a changing
set of entities because they may become (1) available after the
application is deployed, (2) unavailable due to malfunction (\eg power
loss), or (3) unreachable due to a network failure. The code of the
orchestration logic should manage these variations at a high level,
abstracting over current entities of a given smart space. To do so, we
define an abstraction for interacting with a set of entities sharing
some capabilities and attributes, regardless of the current entities of
the smart space. We refer to such an abstraction as an {\em
interface}. An interface groups together a set of sensing and
actuating capabilities and attributes to which entity implementations
must conform. Interfaces may be organized hierarchically, enabling
them to inherit capabilities and attributes.
We have built a domain-specific language, named
Pantagruel~\cite{jvlc12, dsl09}, for developing orchestration
applications using the methodology for language development proposed
by Schmidt~\cite{davidschmidt}. Pantagruel consists of two language
layers: a specification layer for describing the entity interfaces,
and an orchestration layer for describing the orchestration logic. The
syntax and denotational semantics of both layers are presented in the
following sections. Notably, Pantagruel relies on a pervasive
computing platform, named DiaSuite~\cite{diaspectse}, for dealing with
the variety of underlying, low-level technologies.
\section{The orchestration logic}
\label{sec:dynsem}
In this section, we present an overview of the reactive computation
model of the orchestration layer. We then formalize it by defining its
semantic algebras, its abstract syntax and its valuation functions.
\subsection{A simple reactive computation model}
Pantagruel is a reactive programming language in that a program constantly
interacts with the outside, reacting to \emph{context changes} that
are observed by changes occurring on the sensed data and the
attributes provided by entities. A program execution therefore
corresponds to an infinite loop. Each iteration is called an
\emph{orchestration step}, where each step consists of executing
actions on entities according to some conditions on the sensed data or
the attributes of these entities. Each orchestration step produces a
new state reflecting the actions performed.
To facilitate reasoning about the orchestration steps of a program,
we assume :
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i)]\emph{Discrete time and atomic execution.} Discrete time is
modeled as clock ticks. Each tick corresponds to an orchestration
step, where all the rules are evaluated within a tick. Invoked
actions are executed until completion. In doing so, an orchestration
step is executed with respect to a logical cycle, abstracting over
time as well as implementation of the actuating capabilities of
entities.
\item[ii)]\emph{Noninterfering parallelism.} Parallelism assumes that
all the rules whose conditions are satisfied at a given
orchestration step, are executed with the same state, making this
execution simultaneous. Furthermore, we assume a noninterfering
parallelism, as defined by Schmidt~\cite{davidschmidt} (Chapter~5):
two rules are executed independently of each other within an
orchestration step, producing two disjoint, partial states. At the
end of the execution, states are joined into a final state without
deleting each other's effects.
Checking conflicting states that would occur in interfering
parallelism is left for another paper.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Semantic algebras}
\label{sec:dynalgebras}
\paragraph{Interface-centric behavior.}
The interface abstraction is used to select entities on which an
action needs to be triggered. Such an abstraction also enables
applications to deal with the disappearance or appearance of new
entities while they are executed. In doing so, dynamicity is taken in
account by our language.
The interface-based selection mechanism is ensured by the use of
entity variables involved in rules. For example, Rule (1) of
Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer} declares an \pre{m} entity variable
of \pre{MotionDetector} interface.
To use interface abstraction in rules, we define the ~\DN{Env-entity}
domain as in Figure~\ref{fig:storestruct}, part~\ref{dom:env-entity}:
it maps the identifier of an entity variable to a reference
\DN{Reference} of an entity. The \DN{Reference} domain is a
disjoint union of an \DN{Interface}, reflecting the interface of an
entity that may match a rule, and of an \DN{Instance},
reflecting the entity on which a rule eventually
applies. Entity variables can only be mapped to current entities after
events and actions are evaluated (we examine this point in
Section~\ref{sec:rule-evaluation}). As a consequence, to evaluate
events in a rule with respect to interface abstraction, we define the
intermediate domain \DO{$\BB$-function} of boolean functions, as
in Figure~\ref{fig:storestruct}, part~\ref{domain:bool}. Specifically,
it needs an environment \DN{Env-entity} to evaluate a boolean
operation. Boolean operators \DO{and$_\rho$} and \DO{or$_\rho$}
are defined accordingly.
Entity variables are inside the scope of a rule; this
makes our language be a block-structured language, as formalized by
Schmidt~\cite{davidschmidt}, Chapter~7: a rule is a block, which scope
is represented by the \DN{Env-entity} domain. Our approach is similar
to the \DN{Location}-based semantics (Chapter~3): a reference has the
same role as a location, holding the denotation of variable
identifiers.
However, in contrast to the \DN{Location} domain, the space of values
covered by entity variables in a rule is constant and restricted to
the elements present in the global store of entities, hence the use
of the specific \DN{Reference} domain.
\paragraph{Context change.}
To represent the reactive nature of Pantagruel, we leverage the
context data provided by the entities of a specification,
focusing on \emph{what} data are available at each orchestration step,
in order to abstract over the way these data are acquired.
The events produced by entities, along with their attributes,
represent the runtime state of a Pantagruel program, as defined by the
\DN{Store} domain (part~\ref{dom:stores} of Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}); orchestration steps are enabled by changes in this
state. To express changes due to new events, two stores must be
involved, enabling to compare event values between two iterations of
the reactive loop. We make this dual-store strategy explicit with the
compound domain \DO{DualStore}, illustrated in
Figure~\ref{fig:storestruct}, part~\ref{domain:store} .
\begin{figure}[h!tp]
\begin{SemanticAlgebra}
\vspace{-1em}\DomainTitle{Dual stores}\label{domain:store}
\DomainDefNoOp{$\delta$}{DualStore}{Store \mtimes Store}
\DomainTitle{References and environments of entities}
\label{dom:env-entity}
\DomainDef{$f$}{Reference}{Interface + Instance}
\Where{Interface}{Id \textnormal{\;\preg{and}\ } Instance = Id }
\vspace{.2em}
\DomainDef{$\rho$}{Env-entity}{Id \mto Reference}
\par Operations\par
\OperationDefMath{instantiate}{Store \mto Env-entity \mto \PowerSet{Env-entity}}
{\param{\sigma}\param{\rho}\SetOfMath{\param{i}
((\rho ~i) ~\DO{equals}~ \IN{Interface}{(\sigma~j)\dasub 1})
\mto (\IN{Instance}{j}) \ensuremath{\otherwise} (\rho~i)}{j \in Id}}
\DomainTitle{Boolean functions}
\label{domain:bool}%
\DomainDef{$b_\rho$}{$\BB$-function}{Env-entity \mto Tr}
\par Operations\par
\OperationDef{and$_\rho$}{$\BB$-function \mto $\BB$-function \mto Env-entity \mto Tr}
{\param{b_1}\param{b_2}\param{\rho} $(b_1~\rho) \DO{and} (b_2~\rho)$ \NOTE{same for \DO{or$_\rho$}}}\vspace{-.5em}
\end{SemanticAlgebra}
\caption{Semantic algebras for the orchestration layer}
\label{fig:storestruct}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Definition of the orchestration layer}
\label{sec:orchestration-syntax}
The syntax of the orchestration layer is given in
Figure~\ref{fig:astdyn}. An orchestration program P is given as a
specification S and a set K of rules R, relating events W to action
calls C. We examine the language constructs through the valuation
functions, described in the following sections.
\begin{figure}[h!tp]
\vspace{0pt}\begin{minipage}[t]{.3\textwidth}
\begin{syndom}
\DOMAIN{P}{Program}
\DOMAIN{K}{Rule-block}
\DOMAIN{R}{Rule }
\DOMAIN{W}{Event}
\DOMAIN{C}{Action-call}
\DOMAIN{D}{Declaration}
\DOMAIN{B}{Boolean-expression}
\DOMAIN{F}{Filter}
\DOMAIN{X}{Expression}
\end{syndom}
\end{minipage}\vspace{0pt}
\begin{minipage}[t]{.6\textwidth}
\begin{syndom}
\DOMAIN{I}{Identifier}
\vspace{8.5em}
\end{syndom}
\end{minipage}
\begin{grammar}
\RULE{P}\CASE{\NT S; \NT K}
\RULE{K}\CASE{rules \NT R end}
\RULE{R}\CASE{\NT{R$_1$} ; \NT{R$_2$} \gramor\ when \NT{W} trigger \NT{C} end}
\RULE{W}
\CASE{\NT{W$_1$} or \NT{W$_2$}
\gramor\ \NT{W$_1$} and \NT{W$_2$}
\gramor\ event \NT{I$_e$} from \NT D \NT{(}with \NT F\NT{)$^?$} \NT B
}
\RULE{C}
\CASE{\NT{C$_1$} {\small $\|$} \NT{C$_2$}
\gramor\ \NT{C$_1$} , \NT{C$_2$}
\gramor\ action \NT{I$_a$}\,(\NT{X}) on \NT D \NT{(}with \NT F \NT )$^?$}
\RULE{D}\CASE{\NT{I$_o$} : \NT{I$_c$} \gramor\ \NT{I$_o$}}
\RULE{B}\CASE{value changed \gramor\ value = \NT X}
\RULE{F}\CASE{\NT {I$_p$} = \NT X}
\RULE{X}\CASE{\NT N \gramor\ \NT{I$_o$}. \NT{I$_x$}}
\end{grammar}
\caption{Abstract syntax for the orchestration language}
\label{fig:astdyn}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Top-level evaluation : the reactive loop}
The \textbf{P} valuation function of a Pantagruel program is depicted
at the top of Figure~\ref{fig:dynsce}. We represent the reactive loop
as a function from the domain of infinite traces of input stores
($\DN{Store}^\omega$) to its output counterpart ($\DN{Store}^\omega$).
An input store $\sigma^{\pre{i\!n}}$ contains event values pulled from
the outside and captured by the available entities as well as new
entities deployed at runtime.
An output store $\sigma$ results from the evaluation step of a rule
set, as described below. The initial store $\sigma_{0}$ is defined
from the specification and has no preceding store ($\sigma_{-1}$ is
the empty store). This representation using traces conforms to usual
definitions of reactive languages, such as encountered
in~\cite{BenvenisteGSS92, Brogi97modelingcoordination, Kahn74}.
The evaluation of a program is as follows. The \textbf{S} valuation
function first builds a specification, consisting of an interface
environment $e$ and a store $\sigma_0$ containing the initial values
of the entity attributes. They are given as parameters of the rule
valuation function \textbf{K} along with two store snapshots:
$\sigma_{t-1}$ at time $t-1$, and $\sigma_t'$ at time $t$, including
events values pulled from the outside and new entities. These changes
from the external environment are abstracted by the
\DO{update-external} function. The evaluation of \textbf{R} results
in a new store, updating the current store $\sigma_t'$ to produce the
store at $t+1$ with the \DO{update-internal} function (its definition
is not shown here). This function is also in charge of setting back to
the undefined value
all the implicit events that were present in the current store $\sigma_t'$.
\begin{figure}[h!tp]
\FunDecl{P}{Program}{Store$^\omega$\mto Store$^\omega$}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{P}{S; K}
{\param{\Sigma}
\LetMath{\mtup{e, \sigma_0}}{\FC{S}}
\In{\SetOfMath[t \in \NN]{
(\DO{update-internal}~e~(\FC{R}e~\mtup{\sigma_{t-1}, \sigma_{t}'})~\sigma_{t}')}%
{\sigma^{\pre{i\!n}}_t \in \Sigma, \sigma_t' = (\DO{update-external}~\sigma^{\pre{i\!n}}_t~\sigma_t)}}}
\\\textnormal{\;\preg{where}\ } \sigma_{-1} = \DO{newstore}
\\ \textnormal{\;\preg{and}\ } \DO{update-external}: \DN{Store} \to \DN{Store} \to \DN{Store}
\\ \textnormal{\;\preg{and}\ } \DO{update-internal}: \DN{Env-interface} \to \DN{Store} \to \DN{Store} \to \DN{Store}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{K}{Rule-block}{Env-interface \mto DualStore \mto Store}\\\vspace{-.7em}
\FunDef{K}{\kw{rules} R \kw{end}}{\FC{R}}
\caption{Valuation function of the top-level program}
\label{fig:dynsce}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Rule evaluation}
\label{sec:rule-evaluation} The {\bf R} function requires an
environment $\rho$ and a dual store $\delta$ as illustrated in
Figure~\ref{fig:dynrule}. Rule events are evaluated with the {\bf W}
function with respect to the dual-store strategy. Their evaluation
produces an entity environment $\rho_e$, mapping variables, declared
in the event definition, to a reference (\DN{Reference}) to an current
entity. Event evaluation also produces a boolean function whose
execution is done once the $\rho_e$ environment is fully
defined. Actions are then evaluated with the {\bf C} function, taking
$\rho_e$, and updating it into $\rho_a$ with new variables appearing
in actions. Both $\rho_e$ and $\rho_a$ are in the scope of the rule
block~\textbf{when}~...~\textbf{end}.
\paragraph{Rule as a pattern.}
At this stage of the rule evaluation process, variables declared in
the $\rho_a$ environment do not refer to current entities yet,
preventing the action evaluation to complete. We thus need to
``instantiate'' $\rho_a$ by mapping each of its variables to a current
entity of the specification.
In fact, more than one entity for each variable of an entity
environment may be concerned by an event (an action, respectively).
As a result, more than one instantiation of environment may match the
events (the actions, respectively).
We thus need to construct a set of such entity environments, mapping
entity variables to identifiers of current entities. This is done by
defining the set $P$: given an entity variable $i_v$ declared with
interface $i_f$, it builds all the environments, such that for each
environment an entity of the same interface $i_f$ is mapped to $i_v$.
Each resulting environment is then given as an argument to the partly
evaluated actions, which return a store.
Stores produced by the actions are finally joined with
\emph{join}$^*$
\begin{figure}[h!tp]
\FunDecl{R}{Rule}{Env-interface \mto DualStore \mto Store}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunSeq{R}{\param{e}\param{\delta}%
(\FCI{R}{1} e~ \delta) \DO{join}
(\FCI{R}{2} e~ \delta)}\\
\FunDef{R}{\kw{when} W \kw{trigger} C \kw{end}}
{\param{e}\param{\mtup{\sigma_{t-1}, \sigma_t}}
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_e, b} = (\FC{W}\mtup{\sigma_{t-1}, \sigma_t}~\DO{empty}~(\param{\rho}\DN{true})) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\\hspace{2em}
\IndentedFormula{%
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_a, a} = (\FC{C}e~\sigma_t ~\rho_
~(\param{\rho}\DO{newstore})) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } P = \DO{instantiate} ~\sigma_t~\rho_a \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\DO{join$^*$}\SetOfMath{
((b~\rho_{inst})\to (a~\rho_{inst}) \ensuremath{\otherwise} newstore)}{ \rho_{inst}
\in P }}}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\caption{Valuation function of a rule}
\label{fig:dynrule}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Event evaluation}
\label{sec:event-evaluation}
The \textbf{W} function evaluates events with a dual store $\delta$
(in ``read-only'' mode), an environment $\rho$, and a boolean function
$b$. The functionality of \textbf{W} shows that an event produces a
pair of functions: an environment and a boolean function. The
environment is updated by the \textbf{D} function, and the boolean
function is defined by the \textbf{B} function. Specifically, the
\textbf{D} function is interpreted as a variable declaration when it
involves an entity variable, augmenting an environment.
The \textbf{B} function evaluates the B test condition on an event,
which is either of the form \kw{value =} X or \kw{value changed}.
Note that other comparison operators can be envisioned. We omit them
for simplicity.
The evaluation of B depends on an entity environment which is
completed after the evaluation of all the combined W events. As a
result, \textbf{B} produces an intermediate evaluation of the test
condition, waiting for an environment to complete. This intermediate
evaluation is specified by a \DN{$\BB$-function}, requiring an
environment to produce a boolean value.
The \textbf{B} function also depends on the dual store: when B is of
the form \kw{value =} X, it yields true if the value of event
\FID{I$_e$} equals \FC{X} at time $t$ and not at $t-1$. When B is of
the form \kw{value changed}, it yields true as often as the event
value changes, \ie when its value at $t$ is different from its value at
$t-1$.
Finally, to be concerned by an event, an entity may further need to
satisfy an extra condition. This condition is evaluated by the
\textbf{F} function, which is similar to \textbf{B}: instead of
testing an event value, it tests an attribute value, and produces a
\DN{$\BB$-function} denoting this test. We ignored the case where the
``\textbf{with} F'' term does not appear, for it is equivalent to
setting ($\FC{F}i~\sigma$) to the constant value (\param{\rho}true).
\begin{figure}[h!tp]
\FunDecl{W}{Event}%
{DualStore \mto Env-entity \mto \DN{$\BB$-function} \mto $($Env-entity \mtimes \DN{$\BB$-function}$)$}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{W}{W$_1$ \kw{and} W$_2$}
{\param{\delta}\param{\rho}\param{b}\\\hspace{2em}
\IndentedFormula{
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_1, b_1} = (\FCI{W}{1}\delta~ \rho~b) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
(\FCI{W}{2}\delta~\rho_1~b_1)}}
\\
\FunDef{W}{W$_1$ \kw{or} W$_2$}
{\param{\delta}\param{\rho}\param{b}\\\hspace{2em}
\IndentedFormula{
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_1, b_1} = (\FCI{W}{1} \delta~ \rho~b) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_2, b_2} = (\FCI{W}{2} \delta~ \rho_1~b)
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } \mtup{\rho_2, (\DO{or$_\rho$}~b_1 ~b_2)}}}
\\
\FunDef{W}{\kw{event} I$_e$ \kw{from} D \kw{with} F B}
{\param{\delta}\param{\rho}\param{b}\\\hspace{2em}
\IndentedFormula{\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{v, \rho'} = \FCOMP{D}{D}\rho \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } b_\rho = \param{\rho}\textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } (\DO{access}~v~\rho) \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ } \\\hspace{2em}\xtab
\IndentedFormula{\xchoice{\IS{Instance}{i_o}}{
\IndentedFormula{\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } x_e = \param{\sigma}(\DO{access-event}\FIDI{I}{e}~i_o~\sigma)
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\\hspace{.25em}
(\DO{and$_\rho$}~(\FC{F}i_o~\delta\dasub 1)~(\DO{and$_\rho$}~(\FC{B}~x_e~\delta)~b) ~\rho)}}
\\\ensuremath{\otherwise}\xchoice{\IS{Interface}{i_f}}{\DO{false}}~\textnormal{\;\preg{end}\ } \hspace{3em}\SEMNOTE{----- ``no entity was found \mto no event is caught''}}
\\ \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } \mtup{\rho', b_\rho}}}\\
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{D}{Declaration}
{Env-entity \mto $($Id \mtimes Env-entity$)$}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{D}{I$_v$:I$_f$}{\param{\rho} %
\mtup{\FIDI{I}{v}, (\DO{update}~\FIDI{I}{v}~\IN{Interface}{\FIDI{I}{f}}~\rho)}}
\\
\FunDef{D}{I$_s$}{\param{\rho}\mtup{\FIDI{I}{s},(
\FIDI{I}{s} \in \textnormal{\;\preg{domain}}(\DO{Store})
\to \DO{update}\FIDI{I}{s}~\IN{Instance}{\FIDI{I}{s}}~\rho \ensuremath{\otherwise}
\rho}}\\
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{B}{Boolean-expression}{$($Store \mto Value$)$ \mto DualStore \mto $\BB$-function}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{B}{\kw{value =} X}{
\param{x}\param{\delta}
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } b_\rho = \param{\sigma}\param{\rho}(x~ \sigma) \DO{~eq~} (\FC{X}\sigma~\rho) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
\\\hspace{2em}\DO{not}(b_\rho~\delta\dasub 1) \DO{~and$_\rho$~} (b_\rho~\delta\dasub 2))}
\\
\FunDef{B}{\kw{value changed}}{\param{x}\param{\delta}\param{\rho} %
((x~\delta\dasub 1) \DO{neq} (x~\delta\dasub 2))}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{F}{Filter}{Id \mto Store \mto $\BB$-function}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{F}{I$_p$ \kw{=} X}{
\param{i_o}\param{\sigma}
\param{\rho}
(\DO{access-attribute}\FIDI{I}{p}~i_o~\sigma)
\DO{~eq~}~(\FC{X}\sigma~\rho)}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{X}{Value}{Store \mto Env-entity \mto Value}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{X}{N}{\param{\sigma}\param{\rho} \FC{N}}\\
\FunDef{X}{I$_v$.I$_x$}{\param{\sigma}\param{\rho}%
\textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } (\DO{access}\FIDI{I}{v}~\rho) \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ }
\\\hspace{2em}
\xchoice{\IS{Instance}{i_o}}(\IfThen{\FIDI{I}{x} \in \textnormal{\;\preg{domain}}(\DN{Entity-event})}{\DO{access-event} \FIDI{I}{x}~i_o~\sigma \ensuremath{\otherwise} \DO{access-attribute} \FIDI{I}{x}~i_o~\sigma})
\\\hspace{2em}\ensuremath{\otherwise} \xchoice{\IS{Interface}{i_f}}{\DN{Undefinedvalue}}~\textnormal{\;\preg{end}\ }}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\caption{Valuation functions for events}
\label{fig:dynpred}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Action evaluation}
\label{sec:action-evaluation}
The semantic equations for the \textbf{C} valuation function are
defined in Figure~\ref{fig:dynact}. \textbf{C} requires an
environment of interfaces, an environment of entities, and a store.
The functionality of \textbf{C} shows that an action produces a pair
of functions: an environment and a function waiting for an environment
to produce a store.
The definition of \textbf{C} mirrors the one of \textbf{W}: similarly
to events, actions can declare variables, which are evaluated by the
\textbf{D} function, enriching the environment given as a parameter
to \textbf{C}. Similarly to \textbf{W}, \textbf{C} depends on an
environment which is completed after the evaluation of all the
combined C actions; the invoked action identified by \FIDI{I}{a}
produces an intermediate evaluation of this statement, waiting for an
environment argument to complete. This intermediate evaluation is
specified by the intermediate domain \DN{Env-entity \mto Store}
(mirroring the \DN{$\BB$-function} domain for events), requiring an
environment to produce an updated store, reflecting the effect of the
\FIDI{I}{a} action. In our language semantics, we abstract over the
implementation details through the action parameter, by making its
actual value corresponds to the value of the produced
effect. Specifically, it corresponds to the value of the implicit
event generated by the invocation of the action. The store is thus
updated by mapping this actual parameter to an event of the name of
the action, as specified by the \textbf{A} function
(Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-valuation-functions}).
When actions are executed in parallel, the final store is built by
joining the partial stores produced by these actions (see
Figure~\ref{fig:storestruct} for the\DO{join}operation). In contrast,
a sequential execution builds the argument of the second action by
cumulating the partial store produced by the first action and the
current store.
Note that this process assumes that the scope of a sequence of actions
is bound to the environment in which the concerned actions apply. In
other words, the order of actions defined sequentially over an entity
variable is preserved only for the actions of the current entity
to which the variable is mapped.
\begin{figure}[htp!]
{\small \FunDecl{C}{\small Action}%
{\! Env-interface \mto Store\! \mto Env-entity \mto $\!($Env-entity \mto Store$)$
\!\mto\! $($Env-entity \!\mtimes\!\! $($Env-entity\! \mto Store$)\!)$}}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{C}{C$_1$ $\|$ C$_2$}{\param{e}\param{\sigma}\param{\rho}\param{f_\sigma}%
\\\hspace{2em}\IndentedFormula{
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_1,
f_{\sigma_1}} = (\FCI{C}{1}e~\sigma~\rho~f_\sigma) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_2,
f_{\sigma_2}} = (\FCI{C}{2}e~\sigma~\rho_1~f_\sigma) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } %
\mtup{\rho_2,
\param{\rho}(f_{\sigma_2}~\rho) \DO{join} (f_{\sigma_1}~\rho)}}}
\\
\FunDef{C}{C$_1$ \kw , C$_2$}{\param{e}\param{\sigma}\param{\rho}\param{f_\sigma}%
\\\hspace{2em}\IndentedFormula{
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_1, f_{\sigma_1}} = (\FCI{C}{1}e~\sigma~\rho~f_\sigma)
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } (\FCI{C}{2}e~\sigma~\rho_1~f_{\sigma_1})}}
\\
\FunDef{C}{\kw{action} I$_a$ \kw ( X \kw ) \kw{on} D \kw{with} F}
{ \param{e}\param{\sigma} \param{\rho} \param{f_\sigma}
\\\hspace{2em}\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{v, \rho'} = (\FCOMP{D}{D}\rho) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
\\\hspace{2em}\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \sigma_\rho = \param{\rho}\textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } (\DO{access}~v~\rho) \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ }\\
\hspace{2em}\xtab \IndentedFormula{\xchoice{\IS{Instance}{i_o}}{
\IndentedFormula{\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } a_\rho =
(\DO{access-action}\FIDI{I}{a}~i_o~e~\sigma)
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } f_\sigma' = \param{\rho}(a_\rho~i_o~(\FC{X}\rho~\sigma))~(f_\sigma~\rho) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\IfThen{\FC{F}~i_o~\sigma~\rho}{(f_\sigma'~\rho)\ensuremath{\otherwise}
(f_\sigma~\rho)})}}
\\\ensuremath{\otherwise}\xchoice{\IS{Interface}{i_f}}{f_\sigma~\rho}~ \textnormal{\;\preg{end}\ } \hspace{3em}\SEMNOTE{----- ``no entity was found \mto no store update''}}
\\\hspace{2em} \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } \mtup{\rho', \sigma_\rho}}\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\caption{Valuation functions of actions}
\label{fig:dynact}
\end{figure}
\input{semexample}
\section{Introduction}
The realisation of domain-specific languages (DSLs) contrasts with
that of general-purpose programming languages (GPLs) where generality,
expressivity and power are expected. Instead, a DSL revolves around a
narrow, specific application domain and its users, providing
high-level abstractions and constructs tailored towards this domain
and the needs of users~\cite{conseldsl, martinfowler,
little-languages, annotated}. Thus, much time and effort must be
devoted to the domain analysis and the language design. Methodologies
and tools have been proposed to develop DSLs, covering the complete
development life-cycle, from design~\cite{conselmarlet, dsel} to
implementation~\cite{whenandhow, notablepatterns, tratt08, wangdsl},
including formalisation~\cite{liang96moddensem, davidschmidt}.
If such methodologies are well-known in the programming-language
community, they hardly have an echo in the end-user community yet. As
an illustration, in their state-of-the-art paper about end-user
software engineering, Ko \emph{et. al}~\cite{endusersoftware} address
the challenge of enabling the end user to produce reliable programs
that actually achieve his requirements, by supporting the programming
task with visualization and simulation tools.
However, they do not mention the need for a formal definition of an
end-user language so that the supporting tools be provably consistent
with the language definition.
A first step towards addressing this issue is
to bridge the gap between the domain analysis, taking the requirements
into account, and the design of a language, providing the constructs
to achieve these requirements.
In this paper, we present the formal definition of a domain-specific
language, named Pantagruel~\cite{jvlc12, dsl09}, following the
methodology proposed by David Schmidt for language
development~\cite{davidschmidt}.
This language is dedicated to programming applications that
orchestrate networked entities. It targets end users that are
professionals, in areas such as building management and assisted
living, and leverages networked entities to support daily tasks. For
example, security guards are assisted by an anti-intrusion system that
coordinates motion detectors and surveillance cameras to signal the
presence of an intruder on monitoring screens. For another example, a
range of assistive devices, like time trackers, task prompters, and
motion sensors, are available to support caregivers in assisting
people with disabilities in their daily life. Pantagruel offers a
number of features that address the requirements of the domain of
networked entity orchestration, while making it accessible to users
that do not necessarily have programming skills. Specifically,
Pantagruel provides two language layers, one for specifying interfaces
from which entities are manipulated, and another for orchestrating
entities. The orchestration layer offers high-level operators taking
advantage of the information defined in the specification layer to
discover, select concrete entities, and interact with them via their
interfaces.
This paper gives a definition of Pantagruel in the form of a
denotational semantics, exhibiting the domain-specific features of
this language. In particular, this formal definition makes the key
concepts of the orchestration of networked entities (\ie entity
discovery and interactions) explicit. It also brings out some
traditional programming language concepts (\eg the notion of memory
and loop, or variable assignment), which have been abstracted away
from the developer.
\subsection*{Outline}
The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:domain} presents the specificities and the key
concepts of the domain of the orchestration of networked
entities. Section~\ref{sec:tour} gives a tour of our DSL, Pantagruel,
illustrated by a working example of a building-automation
application. Section~\ref{sec:denstyle} motivates the use of the
denotational style for our language. Sections~\ref{sec:speclayer}
and~\ref{sec:dynsem} describe the syntax and the denotational
semantics of the specification layer and of the orchestration layer of
Pantagruel, respectively. Conclusion and future work are given in
Section~\ref{sec:conclu}.
\subsection{Applying the semantics to an example}
The static semantics analysis of Rule (1) in the
program example of Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer} is presented
in Figures~\ref{fig:example-semantics-one} and \ref{fig:example-semantics}.
This example demonstrates that the intended behavior of a Pantagruel
program is covered by its semantics. In particular, as illustrated in
Figure~\ref{fig:example-semantics}, the store $\sigma_{R1}$ produced
by the execution of Rule (1), contains two events, reflecting the
execution of the \texttt{switch} action on the \texttt{l10} and
\texttt{l11} lights, located in room \texttt{101}, where the
\texttt{m10} motion detector detected an event from $\sigma_1$ to
$\sigma_2$. Most \textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } constructs for handling \DN{Reference}
elements are skipped in our example, in order to keep the
clarity of the illustration.
\newcommand{\tikzmark}[1]{\tikz[overlay,remember picture] \node (#1) {};}
\tikzset{arrow/.style={to path={ -- (\tikztotarget)},
decoration={markings,mark=at position 1 with {\arrow[scale=1.5,#1]{>}}},
postaction={decorate},
shorten >=0.2pt}}
\newcommand{\DrawArrow}[3][]{%
\tikz[overlay,remember picture] {\draw[->,arrow, thick, #1]
($(.1,.1ex)+(#2.south)$) to ($(#3.north)+(.19,1.4ex)$);}
}
\begin{figure}[htp!]
Let \parbox[t]{.9\textwidth}{%
\begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
D$_0$ &=~ \pre{m:MotionDetector}\\
D$_1$ &=~ \pre{l:Light}\\
B$_0$ &=~ \kw{value =} \pre{true}\\
F$_0$ &=~ \pre{room = m.room}\\
W$_0$ &=~ \kw{event} \pre{detected} \kw{from} D$_0$ B$_0$\\
C$_0$ &=~ \kw{action} \pre{switch(true)} \kw{on} D$_1$ \kw{with} F$_0$\\
\end{tabular}
}
\\and an initial store $\sigma_0 = \FIDp{l10} \mapsto \mtup{\FIDp{Light}, \mtup{[\FIDp{room}\mapsto 101]\DO{empty}, \DO{empty}} ...}$ containing the entities of Figure~\ref{fig:specification-layer}.
Moreover, in this example, we assume that a motion was detected from $\sigma_1$ to $\sigma_2$.
~\vspace{.6em}\\
\FCOMP{R}{\kw{when} W$_0$ \kw{trigger} C$_0$}$e ~ \mtup{\sigma_{1}, \sigma_{2}}$\\
=\IndentedFormula{
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_e, b} =
(\FCI{W}{0})\mtup{\sigma_1, \sigma_2}~\DO{empty}~(\param{\rho}\;true) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{\rho_a, a} = (\FCI{C}{0}e~\sigma_2 ~\rho_e ~(\param{\rho}\DO{newstore}))
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } \\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } P = \DO{instantiate} ~\sigma_2~\rho_a
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } \DO{join$^*$}\SetOfMath{((b~\rho_{inst})\to (a~\rho_{inst})
\ensuremath{\otherwise} newstore)}{\rho_{inst} \in P}}
\vspace{1em}\\
\noindent Where : \vspace{.5em}\\
(1)~~\IndentedFormula{
\FCI{W}{0}\mtup{\sigma_{1}, \sigma_{2}}\DO{empty}~(\param{\rho}\DO{true})\\
= \FCOMP{W}{\kw{event} \pre{detected} \kw{from} D$_0$ B$_0$}
\mtup{\sigma_{1}, \sigma_{2}}\DO{empty}~(\param{\rho}\;true)%
\\
=\IndentedFormula{
\tikzmark{LET1}%
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{v, \rho'} = \IndentedFormula{
\FCOMP{\tikzmark{D}D}{\pre{m:MotionDetector}}\DO{empty} \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\~\\
\tikzmark{vD}\mtup{\FIDp{m},
\underbrace{
(\DO{update}\FIDp{m}~(\IN{Interface}{\FIDp{MotionDetector}})~\DO{empty})}_{\rho' \textnormal{ equals } \callupdate{\FIDp{m}}{\IN{Interface}{\FIDp{MotionDetector}}}{\DO{empty}}}} \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } b_\rho = \param{\rho}~... \left[\begin{array}{@{}l}
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } x_e = \param{\sigma}(
\underbrace{
\DO{access-event}\FIDp{detected}~(\DO{access}~\FIDp{m}~\rho)~\sigma}_{\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ }
\textnormal{this be } \xstr{m.detected}\sigma})
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\~\\
\tikzmark{vLET1}
\DO{and$_\rho$}~(\tikzmark{B}\FCI{B}{0}~x_e~\mtup{\sigma_{1},
\sigma_{2}})~(\param{\rho}\DO{true})~\rho~^{\DO{(note)}}
\end{array}
\right. }\\~\\
\hspace{16.5em}\IndentedFormula{
\tikzmark{vB}\FCOMP{B}{\kw{value =} true}\\
\begin{array}{@{}l@{}}=\\~\\~\\\end{array}\tikzmark{vB1}\left[\begin{array}{@{}l} \textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } b_\rho =
\param{\sigma}\param{\rho}
\underbrace{(x_e~ \sigma)}_{\xstr{m.detected}\sigma}
~\DO{eq}~
\underbrace{(\FCOMP{X}{true}\sigma~\rho)}_{true}
\textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
\\\DO{not}(b_\rho~\sigma_1) \DO{~and$_\rho$~} (b_\rho~\sigma_2)
\end{array}\right.
\\
= \DO{not}(\xstr{m.detected}\sigma_1)~\DO{and$_\rho$}~(\xstr{m.detected}\sigma_2)
}
\vspace{1em}\\ = \mtup{\underbrace{\callupdate{\FIDp{m}}{\IN{Interface}{\pre{MotionDetector}}}{\DO{empty}}}_{\rho_e},
\underbrace{\DO{not}(\xstr{m.detected}\sigma_1)~\DO{and$_\rho$}~(\xstr{m.detected}\sigma_2)}_{b}}}}
\DrawArrow{D}{vD}
\DrawArrow{B}{vB}
~\\\xnote{(note) no F filter in W$_0$ is
equivalent to the ``\kw{with} true'' filter, so we skipped it here}
\vspace{-2em}
\caption{Semantics applied on Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer}}
\label{fig:example-semantics-one}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!tp]
(2)~~\IndentedFormula{
\FCI{C}{0}e~\sigma_2~~\rho_e~(\param{\rho'}\DO{newstore})\\
=\FCOMP{C}{\kw{action} \pre{switch(true)} \kw{on} D$_1$ \kw{with} F$_0$}\\
= \textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \mtup{v, \rho'} = \tikzmark{D1}\FCOMP{D}{\pre{l:Light}}\rho_e \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
\\~\\\hspace{6.5em}\tikzmark{vD1}%
\mtup{\FID{l}, \underbrace{\DO{update}\FIDp{l}~(\IN{Interface}{\FIDp{Light})}~\rho_{e}}
_{\callupdate{\FIDp{l}}{\IN{Interface}{\FIDp{Light}}}{\rho_e}}} \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }
\\
\hspace{4em}\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } \sigma_\rho = \param{\rho}~ ... \IndentedFormula{
\left[
\begin{array}{@{}l}
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } a_\rho =
\underbrace{(\DO{access-action}\FIDp{switch}~(access~\FID{l}~\rho)~e~\sigma)}_{
(\param{i_o}\param{x}(\DO{update-event}\FIDp{switch}~i_o~x))(\DO{access}~\FIDp{l}~\rho)
}) \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ }\\
\textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } f_\sigma' = \param{\rho}
\underbrace{(a_\rho~(\DO{access}~\FIDp{l}~\rho)~(\FC{X}\rho~\sigma))~(f_\sigma~\rho)}
\vspace{-.4em}\\{\hspace{5em} }_{[(\DO{access}~\FIDp{l}~\rho) \mapsto \mtup{..., \callupdate{\FID{switch}}{true}{empty}}] \DO{newstore}, \textnormal{and let this be $\sigma_2'$}}
\\
\IfThen{~\tikzmark{F}\FCI{F}{0}~\FID{l}~\sigma_2~\rho}{(f_\sigma'~\rho)\ensuremath{\otherwise} \DO{newstore}}
\end{array}
\right.
\\~\\\hspace{2em}\IndentedFormula{\tikzmark{vF}\FCOMP{F}{\pre{room} \kw{=} \pre{m.room}}(access~\FID{l}~\rho)~\sigma_2~\rho
~\\
\\ \tikzmark{vF1}%
\underbrace{\DO{access-attribute}\FIDp{room}~(\DO{access}~\FID{l}~\rho)~\sigma_2}_{\textnormal{let this be} \xstr{l.room}\rho~\sigma_2}~\DO{eq}~
\IndentedFormula{\tikzmark{X}\FCOMP{X}{\pre{m.room}}\rho~\sigma_2\vspace{1em}\\
\tikzmark{vX}(3) \textnormal{-- see below}}
}}
\vspace{1em}\\= \mtup{
\underbrace{\callupdate{\FIDp{l}}{\IN{Interface}{\FIDp{Light}}}{\rho_e}}_{\rho_a},
\underbrace{\param{\rho}((\xstr{l.room}\rho~\sigma_2) \DO{~eq~} \xdots{(3)}) \to \sigma_2' \ensuremath{\otherwise} \DO{newstore})}_{a}
}}
\vspace{1em}\hspace{2em} \textnormal{where : }\vspace{1em}\\
(3)~~\IndentedFormula{\FCOMP{X}{\pre{m.room}}\rho~\sigma_2\\
= \textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } \DO{access}\FIDp{m}~\rho \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ }
\xchoice{\IN{Instance}{i_o}}{(\DO{access-attribute}\FIDp{room}~i_o~\sigma_2)}
\\\hspace{9.7em}\ensuremath{\otherwise} \xchoice{\IN{Interface}{\FIDp{MotionDetector}}}{\DN{Undefinedvalue}}
}
\DrawArrow{D1}{vD1}
\DrawArrow{F}{vF}
\DrawArrow{vF}{vF1}
\DrawArrow{X}{vX}
\noindent Where : \vspace{.2em}\\
(4)~~\IndentedFormula{\DO{instantiate} ~\sigma_2~\rho_a \\
= \textnormal{\;\preg{let}\ } P = \{
\begin{array}[t]{@{}l@{}}
\FIDp{m} \mapsto \IN{Instance}{j},
{\small \textnormal{ with } j \in \{\pre{m10, m20}\},
\textnormal{ and } (\sigma_2~j)\dasub 1 = \FIDp{MotionDetector}}\\
\FIDp{l} \mapsto \IN{Instance}{k},
{\small \textnormal{ with } k \in \{\pre{l10, l11, l20}\},
\textnormal{ and } (\sigma_2~k)\dasub 1 = \FIDp{Light}}\} \textnormal{\;\preg{in}\ } \\
\end{array}
\\\DO{join$^*$}\SetOfMath{((b~\rho_{inst})\to (a~\rho_{inst}) \ensuremath{\otherwise} newstore)}{ \rho_{inst}
\in P},
}
\vspace{1em}\\
Now, the $b$ and $a$ functions built in (1) and (2) can be fully evaluated with
\eg :
\\i) \IndentedFormula{P = \{\rho_1, \rho_2, ... \}, \textnormal{ such that }\\\hspace{1em}
\rho_1 = \{\FIDp{m} \mapsto \IN{Instance}{\pre{m10}},
\FIDp{l} \mapsto \IN{Instance}{\pre{l10}}\},\\\hspace{1em}
\rho_2 = \{\FIDp{m} \mapsto \IN{Instance}{\pre{m10}},
\FIDp{l} \mapsto \IN{Instance}{\pre{l11}}\},\emph{etc.}}
\vspace{1em}\\
ii) \IndentedFormula{
\sigma_1 = \IndentedFormula{
\left[\FIDp{m10} \mapsto [\FIDp{room} \mapsto \FIDp{101}][\FIDp{detected} \mapsto \texttt{false}]\DO{empty}\right]
\\ \left[\FIDp{l10} \mapsto [\FIDp{room} \mapsto \FIDp{101}]\DO{empty}\right]\DO{newstore}
\\ \left[\FIDp{l11} \mapsto [\FIDp{room} \mapsto \FIDp{101}]\DO{empty}\right]\DO{newstore}}
\\\sigma_2 = [\FIDp{m10} \mapsto [\FIDp{room} \mapsto \FIDp{101}][\FIDp{detected} \mapsto \texttt{\color{red}{true}}]\DO{empty}]~
... \textnormal{same as } \sigma_1... ] \DO{newstore}
}
~\vspace{.6em}\\As a result, the store $\sigma_{R1}$, resulting from the application of \DN{join}$^*$ equals :
\\$\sigma_{R1} = [$\IndentedFormula{
\FIDp{l10} \mapsto \mtup{\FIDp{Light},\xdots{\DO{entity-attributes}},[\FIDp{switch} \mapsto true]\DO{empty}}][\\
\FIDp{l11} \mapsto \mtup{\FIDp{Light},\xdots{\DO{entity-attributes}},[\FIDp{switch} \mapsto true]\DO{empty}} ]\DO{newstore}
}
\caption{Semantics applied on Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer} (continued (2))}
\label{fig:example-semantics}
\end{figure}
\section{The specification layer}
\label{sec:speclayer}
In this section, we present the specification layer of the Pantagruel
language: its semantic algebras, its abstract syntax and its valuation
functions. Let us first introduce some notations used thereafter.
\subsection{Some notations}
This section presents the notations used to define the specification
layer and the orchestration layer of Pantagruel. We use the following
conventions, inspired by Schmidt's methodology~\cite{davidschmidt}:
~\\
$\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{1em}}l}
\langle a, b \rangle & \textnormal{a tuple of two elements $a$ and $b$} \\
\infunmap{x}{v}{\rho} & x\textnormal{ maps to } v \textnormal{ in } \rho\\
x\dasub i, i\in\NN^* & \textnormal{projection on }i^{th} \textnormal{ element
of tuple } x \textnormal{, where } i \textnormal{ is a non-null integer }\\
\llbracket X \rrbracket & \textnormal{denotation of a
syntactic fragment}\\
T^\omega = \{ t_i \in T \}_{i \in {\mathbb N}} & T^\omega$ is the set of
infinite sequences of elements of set T
$\\T = [ ~ \tau_0, \tau_1, ... ~ ] & T$ is an infinite sequence$\\
\end{array}$
\vspace{1em}~\\
\noindent The last notation is borrowed from ~\cite{BenvenisteGSS92,
Brogi97modelingcoordination, Kahn74}. Following Schmidt's
methodology, we define the semantics of the specification layer of
Pantagruel in three steps : first, the semantic algebras are
specified, representing the semantic domains of the language; second,
the abstract syntax of the language is defined; third, the valuation
functions define the meaning of programs, by mapping the abstract
syntax to the semantic domains.
\subsection{Semantic algebras}
The semantic domains for the specification layer of Pantagruel are
listed in Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}. They show
that the specification layer is mainly understood in terms of
environments mapping identifiers of the language to some value. The
environments are defined in the usual form of a \textit{Map} domain as
illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-environments}, where X stands
for the type of the value stored by the environment. For clarity, the
\DN{Errvalue} domain used for ill-typed values has been omitted
from Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}. Let us
examine the domains of the specification layer.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{SemanticAlgebra}
\DomainDef{m}{Map}{Id \mto $($X + Errvalue$)$}
\Where{Errvalue}{Unit}
\par Operations\par
\OperationDef{empty$_m$}{Map}{\param{i}$\IN{Errvalue}{}$}
\OperationDef{access$_m$}{Id \mto Map \mto $($X + Errvalue$)$}{\param{i}\param{m}$m(i)$}\\
\OperationDefMath{update$_m$}{Id \mto X \mto Map \mto Map}{\param{i}\param{x}\param{m}\callupdate{i}{\IN{X}{x}}{m}}
\vspace{-.8em}\end{SemanticAlgebra}
\caption{Generic algebra for the definition of environment domains}
\label{fig:speclayer-environments}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Interface abstraction.} Interfaces are values from the
\DN{Interface} domain (part~\ref{dom:interfaces} of
Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}). To discriminate between
entities, an interface declares typed attributes stored in the
\DN{Interface-attribute} domain. An interface similarly declares its
sensing capabilities in the \DN{Interface-event} domain. Finally,
actuating capabilities are defined as method signatures, in the
\DN{Interface-action} domain, which maps a method identifier to a
pair: (1) the type of the method parameter and (2) a procedure,
defined by the \DN{Action-struct} domain, to update a store with the
value of an implicit event (see Section~\ref{sec:speclayer-def}).
For conciseness, methods have only one formal parameter. Interfaces
are stored in an \textit{Env-interface} environment
(part~\ref{dom:env-interface} of
Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}) mapping an identifier to
an interface. This environment is constant for a given Pantagruel
program.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{SemanticAlgebra}
\vspace{-.8em}
\DomainTitle{Basic domains : truth values, natural numbers, identifiers, and types (operations omitted)}\label{dom:basic}\vspace{.4em}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth
\DomainDef{t}{\DN{Type}}{\textnormal{Type-structure}}
\DomainDef{b}{Tr}{$\mathbb{B}$}
\end{minipage}\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\DomainDef{n}{Nat}{$\mathbb{N}$}
\DomainDef{i}{Id}{\textnormal{Identifier}}
\end{minipage}
\DomainTitle{Values}\label{dom:values}
\DomainDef{x}{Value}{Nat + Tr + Undefinedvalue, \textnormal{\;\preg{where}\ } UndefinedValue = Unit}
\par
\DomainTitle{Interfaces}\label{dom:interfaces}
\DomainDef{f}{Interface}{Interface-attribute \mtimes Interface-event \mtimes Interface-action}
\WhereIndentedFormula{
p \in \DN{Interface-attribute}}{\DN{Id} \mto \DN{Type}\\
s \in \DN{Interface-event} = \DN{Id} \mto \DN{Type}\\
a \in \DN{Interface-action} = \DN{Id} \mto (\DN{Type} \mtimes \DN{Action-struct})\\
u \in \DN{Action-struct} = \DN{Id} \mto \DN{Value} \mto \DN{Store} \mto \DN{Store}
}
\DomainTitle{Environments of interfaces}\label{dom:env-interface}
\DomainDef{e}{Env-interface}{Id \mto Interface}
\vspace{-.8em}
\end{SemanticAlgebra}
\caption{Semantic algebras for the specification layer}
\label{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Dynamic context data.} Entities are the elements that hold
the runtime information of a Pantagruel program. Entities are
explicitly represented in the semantics as named objects from the
\DN{Entity} domain; their implementation conforms to one or more
interfaces. For conciseness, we only define entities referring to a
unique interface. Each entity is identified with its current context
data, \ie its attributes and \emph{events}: they conform to the
attribute declarations and to the sensing capabilities of the entity
interface, respectively. Both context data are defined by the
\DO{Entity-attribute} and the \DO{Entity-event} domains.
The \DN{Store} domain (part~\ref{dom:stores} of
Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras-store}) holds the set of
available entities indexed by their name, corresponding to the store
variables. When new entities are discovered at runtime, new variables
corresponding to the name of these entities are introduced in the
store.
To cumulate the results produced by each rule and, within a rule, by
each action, the \DN{Store} domain further defines the \mita{join}
operation to join two partial stores which are produced either by two rules
or by two actions. The \mita{join} operation is
associative, assuming stores have disjoint
domains, thus suggesting noninterfering parallelism.
As suggested by
Schmidt~\cite{davidschmidt} (Chapter 5), \mita{join} combines the
effects of the execution of actions without overwriting them. This is
achieved by an appropriate definition of a \mita{combine} operation,
enabling partial stores to be combined; it is left unspecified here.
The values of the data sensed by entities, their attributes, and the
actual parameter of actions, are specified by the \textit{Value}
domain (part~\ref{dom:values} of
Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras}). The
\textit{Undefinedvalue} domain allows undefined values to be stored.
For simplicity, only natural numbers and truth values
(part~\ref{dom:basic} of Figure~\ref{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras})
are considered.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{SemanticAlgebra}
\vspace{-.8em}
\DomainTitle{Entities}
\DomainDef{o}{Entity}{Id \mtimes Entity-attribute \mtimes Entity-event}
\WhereIndentedFormula{
q \in \DN{Entity-attribute}}{\DN{Id} \mto \DN{Value}\\
t \in \DN{Entity-event} = \DN{Id} \mto \DN{Value}}
\DomainTitle{Stores}
\label{dom:stores}
\DomainDef{$\sigma$}{Store}{Id \mto Entity$_\bot$}
\par Operations\par
\OperationDef{newstore}{Id \mto Entity$_\bot$}{\param{i}$\bot$}
\OperationDef{join}{Store \mto Store \mto Store}
{\param{\sigma_1}\param{\sigma_2} %
$(\param{i} \sigma_1(i) ~combine~ \sigma_2(i))$}
\OperationDef{join$^*$}{\PowerSet{Store} \mto Store}
{\param{S} $
\sigma_1 \DO{join} ... (\sigma_{n-1} \DO{join} \sigma_n )$, \textnormal{\hspace{1em}where}
$\sigma_i \in S, i <
\left\vert{S}\right\vert$ \textnormal{and} $S$ \textnormal{ is finite}}
\OperationDefMath{\DO{access-action}}{Id \mto Id \mto Env-interface \mto Store \mto Action-struct}{
\param{i_a}\param{i_o}\param{e}\param{\sigma}~(\DO{access}~i_a~(\DO{access}~(\sigma~i_o)\dasub 1~e)\dasub 3)\dasub 2}
\OperationDefMath{\DO{access-event}}{Id \mto Id \mto Store \mto Value}{%
\param{i_e}\param{i_o}\param{\sigma}((\sigma~i_o)\dasub 3~ i_e)}
\OperationDefMath{\DO{update-event}}{Id \mto Id \mto Value \mto Store \mto Store}{%
\param{i_e}\param{i_o}\param{p}\param{\sigma}
\callupdate{i_o}{\mtup{(\sigma~i_o)\dasub 1, (\sigma~i_o)\dasub 2, \callupdate{i_e}{p}{(\sigma~i_o)\dasub 3}}}{\sigma} }
{\small \textnormal{Note : \DO{access-interface}, \DO{access-attribute} and \DO{update-attribute} are handled similarly}
}\vspace{-.5em}
\end{SemanticAlgebra}
\caption{Semantic algebras for the specification layer (continued)}
\label{fig:speclayer-semantic-algebras-store}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Definition of the specification layer}
\label{sec:speclayer-def}
The abstract syntax and the valuation functions for the specification
layer appear in Figures~\ref{fig:speclayer-abstract-syntax} and
~\ref{fig:speclayer-valuation-functions}. A specification S consists
of a set of interfaces F and an initial set of entities O. Note that,
at runtime, these entities can be removed and new entities can be
deployed.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth}
\begin{syndom}
\DOMAIN{S}{Specification}
\DOMAIN{F}{Interface-declaration}
\DOMAIN{P}{Attribute}
\DOMAIN{E}{Sensing-capability}
\DOMAIN{A}{Actuating-capability}
\DOMAIN{O}{Entity-declaration}
\DOMAIN{G}{Assignment}
\end{syndom}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\begin{syndom}
\DOMAIN{T}{Type-structure}
\DOMAIN{X}{Value}
\end{syndom}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.2\textwidth}
\begin{syndom}
\DOMAIN{I}{Identifier}
\DOMAIN{N}{Numeral}
\end{syndom}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\begin{grammar}
\RULE{S}
\CASE{\NT{F};\NT{O}}
\RULE{F}
\CASE{\NT{F$_1$};\NT{F$_2$} \gramor\ interface \NT{I} \char123\NT{P} ; \NT{E} ; \NT{A}\char125}
\RULE{P}
\CASE{\NT{P$_1$};\NT{P$_2$} \gramor\ attribute \NT{I} : \NT{T}}
\RULE{E}
\CASE{\NT{E$_1$};\NT{E$_2$} \gramor\ event \NT{I} : \NT{T}}
\RULE{A}
\CASE{\NT{A$_1$};\NT{A$_2$} \gramor\ action \NT{I$_1$}( \NT{T} )}
\RULE{O}
\CASE{\NT{O$_1$};\NT{O$_2$} \gramor\ entity \NT{I$_o$} : \NT{I$_f$} \char123
\NT{G}\char125}
\RULE{G}
\CASE{\NT{G$_1$};\NT{G$_2$} \gramor\ \NT{I} = \NT{X}}
\end{grammar}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{grammar}
\RULE{T}
\CASE{nat \gramor\ bool}
\RULE{X}
\CASE{\NT{N} \gramor\ true \gramor\ false}
\end{grammar}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Abstract syntax for the specification layer}
\label{fig:speclayer-abstract-syntax}
\end{figure}
The \textbf{S} valuation function produces a pair of two environments
named \DN{Env-interface} and \DN{Store}, corresponding to a mapping
from an identifier to an interface, and a mapping from an identifier
to an entity, respectively. This valuation function produces the
environment of entities of a given Pantagruel program by invoking the
\textbf{F} function to produce an environment of interfaces that is
passed as an argument to the \textbf{O} function. In doing so, the
entities can be checked against the interface that they implement.
The \textbf{P}, \textbf{E}, \textbf{A} and \textbf{O} functions are
composed similarly to the \textbf{F} function when involving a
sequence (\eg F$_1$;F$_2$). For conciseness, we have omitted them.
These three functions are responsible for enriching environments. The
\textbf{A} function defines a procedure of the \DN{Action-struct}
domain. Since an action is invoked on an entity, this entity is
referred to as the $i_o$ parameter. Following the procedure
specification suggested by Schmidt~\cite{davidschmidt} (Chapter 8), it
also takes an $x$ formal parameter, which is assumed to be of type
\textbf{T}. When it is invoked through an entity action, this
procedure generates an implicit event of the name of the concerned
action. Finally, the \textbf{O} function states that the values of
sensed data are initially undefined, and the \textbf{G} function
initializes the attributes to some value.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\FunDecl{S}{Specification}{Env-interface \mtimes Store}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{S}{F O}{\LetMath{e}{\FC{F} \DO{empty}}\InS{\mtup{e, \FC{O}e~\DO{empty}}}}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{F}{Interface-declaration}{Env-interface \mto Env-interface}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{F}{F$_1$;F$_2$}{\FCI{F}{2} \circ \FCI{F}{1}}\\
\FunDef{F}{\kw{interface} I \kw{\char123} P ; E ; A \kw{\char125}}{\param{e}\DO{update} \FID{I}
~\mtup{\FC{P} \DO{empty}, \FC{E} \DO{empty}, \FC{A} \DO{empty}} ~e}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{P}{Attribute}{Interface-attribute \mto Interface-attribute}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{P}{\kw{attribute} I \kw{:} T}{\param{p}\DO{update} \FID{I} ~\FC{T} ~p}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{E}{Sensing-capability}{Interface-event \mto Interface-event}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{E}{\kw{event} I \kw{:} T}{\param{s}\DO{update} \FID{I} ~\FC{T} ~s}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{A}{Actuating-capability}{Interface-action
\mto Interface-action}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{A}{\kw{action} I \kw{(} T \kw{)}}
{\param{a}\DO{update} \FID{I} \mtup{\FC{T}, \param{i_o}\param{x}(\DO{update-event}\FID{I}~i_o~x)}~a}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{O}{Entity-declaration}{Env-interface \mto Store \mto Store}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{O}{\kw{entity} I$_{o}$ : I$_{f}$ \kw{\char123} G \kw{\char125}}%
{ \param{e}\param{\sigma}
\IndentedFormula{
\DO{update} \FIDI{I}{o}~\mtup{\FIDI{I}{f},%
(\FC{G}(\DO{access}\FIDI{I}{f}~e)\dasub 1~\DO{empty}), \DO{empty}}~\sigma}
}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDecl{G}{Assignment}{Interface-attribute \mto Entity-attribute \mto Entity-attribute}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{G}{G$_1$;G$_2$}{\param{p}(\FCI{G}{2}p) \circ (\FCI{G}{1}p)}\\
\FunDef{G}{I \kw{=} X}{\param{p}\param{q}
\DO{update-attribute} \FID{I}~\FC{X}~q}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
\FC{X}\!:\DN{Value} (operations omitted; X is assumed to be a constant numeral or boolean here)
\caption{Valuation functions for the specification layer}
\label{fig:speclayer-valuation-functions}
\end{figure}
In our definitions, type checking is not performed yet. To check that
the value assigned to an attribute is consistent with the interface of
the concerned entity, the functionality of the \textbf{O} function
must be modified to take in account an erroneous \DN{Entity-attribute}
construction. To do so, we use the same definition as the one proposed
by Schmidt for the \DN{Store} domain (see ~\cite{davidschmidt}, Chapter
7): the \DN{Entity-attribute} domain is tagged to indicate
an attribute initialization failure, and a \DO{check} operation
prevents further assignments in case of an error.
\vspace{.6em}\\
\DomainDefInline{Post-entity-attribute}{p}{OK + Err}
\par\hspace{2em}\textnormal{\;\preg{where}\ } \DN{OK} = \DO{Entity-attribute} \DO{and} \DN{Err} = \DO{Entity-attribute}.
\\Operations\\
\noindent\OperationInfixDef{check}{}{f}{$($Entity-attribute \mto Post-entity-attribute$)$\mto $($Entity-attribute \mto Post-entity-attribute$)$}{%
$\param{p}\textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } (p) \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ } \xchoice{\IS{OK}{s}}{(f~s)} \ensuremath{\otherwise} \xchoice{\IS{Err}{s}}{p}
\textnormal{\;\preg{end}\ }$}
~\\\noindent Assignment is then adjusted to check type consistency by calling the \emph{check} operation : ~\\
\noindent\FunDecl{G}{Assignment}{Interface-attribute \mto Entity-attribute
\mto Post-entity-attribute}
\begin{ValuationFunctions}
\FunDef{G}{G$_1$;G$_2$}{\param{p} ~(\DO{check}~(\FCI{G}{2}p)) \circ (\FCI{G}{1} p)}\\
\FunDef{G}{I \kw{=} X}{\param{p}\param{q}
\textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } (\DO{access}~\FID{I}~p) \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ }\\\hspace{4em} \IndentedFormula{
\xchoice{\IS{Nat-type}{}}{\textnormal{\preg{cases}\ } x \textnormal{\;\preg{of}\ }\\\hspace{2em}
\xchoice{\IS{Nat}{n}}{\IN{OK}{(\DO{update} \FID{I}~(\FC{X})~q)}}
\ensuremath{\otherwise}
\xchoice{\IS{Tr}{b}}{\IN{Err}{q}} \textnormal{\;\preg{end}\ }\\
}
\xchoice{\IS{Tr-type}{}}{ ...~\textnormal{similar processing as above}~...}
\textnormal{\;\preg{end}\ }}}
\end{ValuationFunctions}
The introduction of the \DN{Post-entity-attribute} implies adjusting
the functionality of the \textbf{O} function accordingly. The same
modifications can be applied to the formal parameter of actions (not
shown here).
\section{Tour of Pantagruel}
\label{sec:tour}
The Pantagruel language is introduced using a working example: a
building-automation application. This application is responsible for
switching on/off lights of a room when a motion is detected in a
room. It also helps regulating the temperature of rooms using
fans. Although rather simplistic, this working example is sufficient
to illustrate the salient features of the Pantagruel language. More
elaborate examples can be found elsewhere~\cite{phddrey}.
A key feature of Pantagruel is the tight coupling of the
specification layer with the orchestration layer. It allows users to
easily and safely develop their own orchestration
applications. Figure~\ref{fig:specification-layer} gives a
specification for our working example. This specification consists of
four entity interfaces and eight entity instances. For example, the
\texttt{Motion\-Detector} interface declares a sensing capability,
named \texttt{detected}, enabling to signal the presence or the
absence of a motion. The \texttt{Light} interface declares an
actuating capability, named \texttt{switch}, enabling to switch on/off
the entity. Both interfaces have a \texttt{room} attribute, indicating
the location of the entity in the building. For simplicity, the types
of all the elements in this specification are either integer or
boolean. Next, entity instances are defined, according to the
declarations of interfaces. For example, \texttt{l10} is an entity
whose implementation conforms to the \texttt{Light} interface. As a
result, this entity can be switched on/off. Moreover, its
\texttt{room} attribute is initialized to the value \texttt{101}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{minipage}[t]{.48\textwidth}
\texttt{\underline{Interfaces}}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=pantagruel,
breakatwhitespace=true]
interface MotionDetector {
attribute room : Integer
event detected : Boolean }
interface Light {
attribute room : Integer
action switch( Boolean ) }
interface Fan {
attribute room : Integer
action setSpeed( Integer ) }
interface TemperatureSensor {
event temperature : Integer }
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\vline\vline\hspace{2em}
\begin{minipage}[t]{.40\textwidth}
\texttt{\underline{Entities}}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=pantagruel,
breakatwhitespace=true]
m10:MotionDetector { room : 101 }
m20:MotionDetector { room : 201 }
l10:Light { room : 101 }
l11:Light { room : 101 }
l20:Light { room : 201 }
fan10:Fan { room : 101 }
fan20:Fan { room : 201 }
thermo:TemperatureSensor{}
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\caption{A specification for a building equipped with motion
detectors, lights, fans, and temperature sensors}
\label{fig:specification-layer}
\end{figure}
Given a specification, an orchestration logic is then defined to
orchestrate the entities. In Pantagruel, this orchestration logic
consists of a set of rules, combining the sensing and actuating
capabilities of entities. Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer} gives
three orchestration rules for our working example. Rule~(1) switches
the lights on (referred to as \texttt{l}) in the rooms where a motion
has been detected (instance of motion detector referred to as
\texttt{m}). Inversely, Rule~(2) switches the lights off in the rooms
where no motion has been detected. This rule uses the operators
\textbf{all} and \textbf{groupby} to aggregate and group together some
data collected by entities. These domain-specific operators are not
detailed in this paper. Finally, Rule~(3) adjusts the
speed of a fan when two conditions are satisfied : (1) a light in the
room where the fan is located has been switched on, and (2) the
temperature sensed by the \texttt{thermo} entity is equal to
\texttt{30}. This rule illustrates the ability of an orchestration
logic to react to the execution of an action (here, a light is
switched on). To do so, each action in Pantagruel produces an {\em
implicit event} when it is triggered. This event has the same name
as the action and its type consists of the types of the action
parameters. These three rules show how the language constructs enable
to interact either with a particular entity (\eg the \texttt{thermo}
entity in Rule (3)), or with a set of entities via their
interfaces. Moreover, the dependencies between the entities within an
orchestration rule are made explicit by the \textbf{with} clause.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{lstlisting}[language=pantagruel,
breakatwhitespace=true]
rules
(1) when
event detected from m:MotionDetector value = true
trigger
action switch(true) on l:Light with room = m.room
end
(2) when
all event detected from m:MotionDetector value = false groupby room
trigger
action switch(false) on l:Light with room = m.room
end
(3) when
event switch from l:Light value = true
and event temperature from thermo value = 30
trigger
action setSpeed(10) on f:Fan with room = l.room
end
end
\end{lstlisting}
\vspace{-1.4em}
\caption{An orchestration logic for a building-automation application}
\label{fig:orchestration-layer}
\end{figure}
To illustrate the behavior of a Pantagruel program,
Figure~\ref{fig:statemachine} shows an excerpt of an execution trace
for the orchestration rules given in
Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer}. This trace illustrates the
behavior of our working example when a person enters the room
\texttt{101} which was empty until then.
It is represented as a sequence of states, where
each state consists of both the values of data collected by entities
and the implicit events. The transitions between states correspond
either to an update of collected data, or to a rule
execution. Consider Rule~(1) given in
Figure~\ref{fig:orchestration-layer}. When a person is detected in the
room \texttt{101}, the \texttt{m10} entity updates its
\texttt{detected} data, leading to the state \texttt{s1}. This
situation then satisfies the execution conditions of Rule~(1) for
\texttt{m = m10}, triggering the \texttt{switch} action on the
\texttt{l10} and \texttt{l11} lights. This leads to the state
\texttt{s2}, which contains the updated values for the implicit event
\texttt{switch} of these lights. At this state, the execution
conditions of Rule~(3) are verified for \texttt{thermo} (\ie
\texttt{temperature} value is 30), setting the speed of the
\texttt{fan10} entity. Note that the value of an implicit event is
initially undefined (\texttt{undef}), and after each update caused by
an action execution, it becomes again undefined at the next state
change. From the state \texttt{s3}, the temperature sensed by the
\texttt{thermo} entity is updated twice. Note that Rule (1) is
triggered only once in the trace, \ie as long as the \texttt{detected}
attribute of the motion detector remains true. The execution
continues indefinitely, either waiting for updates of data collected
by entities, or the appearance of new entities.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\input{statechart.tex}
\caption{An example of an execution trace of a Pantagruel program}
\label{fig:statemachine}
\end{figure}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 2,310 |
The Medical Medium Hype: Exploring the benefits of celery juice
in Juices
With the rise of the juicing trend, celery juice has been hailed as a hero. Are the health benefits of celery juice as staggering as they claim to be? There are pros and cons to drinking celery juice. The roots of this trend are thought to be sparked by the Medical Medium, Anthony Williams, who continues to tout the superfood powers of celery juice.
Who is the Medical Medium behind the celery juice trend?
The health benefits of celery juice
Celery's Phytochemicals and its effect on Cancer
Anecdotal Evidence of Celery Juice working
Can celery juice be bad for you?
Not everyone should consume celery
Citrus and celery can cause sunburn
Celery is an allergen
Although juicing has been popular for some time now, why did celery become the juice of choice?
The trend was spearheaded by Anthony Williams. A medium who wrote Medical Medium Celery Juice: The Most Powerful Medicine of Our Time Healing Millions Worldwide. Williams has been claiming that there are amazing health benefits of celery juice for years now. He also penned Medical Medium Life-Changing Foods and Summary Medical Medium Thyroid Healing: The Truth Behind Hashimoto's, Graves', Insomnia, Hypothyroidism, Thyroid Nodules & Epstein-Barr. Although he calls himself a "Medical Medium", he is not a doctor or a dietitian. In fact, according to Williams, his information is coming from spirits in the future he's communicating with.
The Medical Medium way to drink celery juice is to drink 16oz of freshly juiced celery on an empty stomach first thing in the morning. Then you can have breakfast 15-30 minutes later. The medium specifies that it must be pure celery juice to reap the benefits, and at least 16oz. For beginners, it's fine to drink less, or blend with other fruit or even space it between meals so long as the end goal is to get to the 16oz of pure celery juice.
The Medical Medium does not sell his own pre-made celery juice and is unlikely to condone purchasing some already made from other brands, as fresh celery juice is touted as best.
In a guest post for Goop, Gweneth Paltrow's lifestyle company, Williams explains that while eating celery stalks is important, it's not the same as juicing the herb. According to the Medical Medium, because the fiber is removed when juiced the healing benefits become more powerful and people are consuming more celery than they would by simply eating it.
He adds that one of the health benefits of celery juice is increasing and strengthening bile, which is needed to break down fat and eliminate waste from the body. This is because of what he calls "cluster salts". These cluster salts are "an undiscovered subgroup of sodium", not yet proven by science but Williams believes they kill toxins in the body.
Williams even appeared on Keeping Up with the Kardashians, where he told Kim Kardashian her psoriasis is caused by too much copper in her liver. He determined this diagnosis after waving his hands around her body. Research does suggest that people with more serum copper levels are more likely to have psoriasis. It well established that copper level is determined by measuring the level in the blood or urine.
The only source saying that celery juice can "disarm toxic metals" comes from the Medical Medium himself, who says that celery juice's "sodium cluster salts" diffuse the charge from copper and other metals.
Although copper is an essential micro-mineral, too much copper can cause jaundice, irritability, and in severe cases damage to vital organs. Copper toxicity is rarely caused by natural copper in the diet, but usually from water tainted with copper and from taking too many supplements.
Kim Kardashian's sister, Kylie Jenner who also has psoriasis, jumped on the trend, along with many more influencers.
There can be reasons to believe that celery juice is good for you, based on the health benefits of celery alone.
Celery contains folate, potassium, vitamin C, and vitamin K. The low-calorie vegetable is 95% water which means that although it contains vitamins and minerals, other vegetables are richer in nutrients. It is, however, a good source of vitamin K as there's 30% of the RDA of vitamin K in one cup of celery. While celery is low on vitamin C, vitamin A, and some B vitamins, it will still contribute to your daily needs of these nutrients.
One stalk of celery provides 3% of the RDA of potassium, 4% of the RDA of Vitamin A, 2% of the RDA of vitamin C, 2% of the RDA of calcium, and 3% of the RDA of fiber. One large stalk of celery equates to the 16oz of celery juice.
You need to consume one and a half sticks of celery for it to count as one of your 5 pieces of fruit and veg a day.
As celery contains phytochemicals such as luteolin and apigenin, it has antioxidant properties. As antioxidants protect the skin from free radical damage, it can leave regular celery consumers and even those drinking celery juice with more youthful-looking skin.
Celery is also claimed to have anti-cancer properties due to the presence of phytochemicals. Phytochemicals are compounds found in plants which developed to help them survive and outlast predators and pathogens. It is important to add that more research is needed to substantiate this claim. The research conducted on this topic has been on mice, human trials are needed to substantiate claims for treatment of humans.
Phytochemicals found in foods in our diets have had a long history with cancer treatment as they're safe, non-toxic, and easy to come by. Studies have shown that those with high consumption of fruit and vegetables have a lower risk of cancer. Not only do phytochemicals reduce the risk of cancer, but can also be helpful for those going through chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The American Cancer Society recommends that people consume 2 and a half cups of fruit and vegetables a day.
Limited research did find that both celery and green peppers can combat inflammation as they contain luteolin. However, this study looked at whole celery stalks, and not celery juice.
Although celery is good for you, is it the cure-all it is claimed to be by the Medical Medium?
Anecdotally, some followers of the trend believe that it works and that they have reaped the health benefits of celery juice. One writer who was curious about the health benefits of celery juice, challenged herself to drink it every morning for one week. In the end, she found that her skin was much clearer.
Youtuber, More Salt Please, also tried the week-long celery juice challenge. Although she admitted that it will take more than a week to see real results, she felt that she was craving fewer sweets, and had good digestion. She also encouraged people with acne to try it.
There are countless non-experts singing the praises of celery juice online. This has been magnified with celebrity attention to the fad. Remember that the roots of this fad are from a person claiming to communicate with spirits telling him to drink celery juice. That being said, consuming celery juice is rarely harmful. If you are otherwise healthy, consuming celery juice may be something to try to find out if there are any benefits for you.
A stalk of celery has 3% of the RDA of fiber, but celery juice has less. Juicing any fruit or vegetable can strip it from fiber and antioxidants. Although the Medical Medium believes that the removal of fiber from celery juice is good for you, it is well established that we need fiber to absorb nutrients in fruit and vegetables.
The big claim in the overall juice trend is that it detoxes your liver and kidneys. Our bodies already naturally detox themselves. By simply eating well and being active, our organs do the rest without the need of celery juice and other detox juices.
Juicing might strip fiber and antioxidants, but what it doesn't strip is sugar. Although celery is already low in sugar, it still gets concentrated in its juice form. One medium stalk of celery has only 1 gram of sugar, whereas 16oz of celery juice has 12 grams of sugar. As celery juice is already bitter, drinkers may be tempted to add more sugar to make it palatable. With the fiber removed from the juice, the sugar is absorbed quicker causing a spike in blood sugar level.
Celery is a natural diuretic due to the presence of butylphthalide. This triggers the kidneys to produce more urine. People who are pregnant, and those who may have issues with their kidneys or bladder may want to avoid celery juice as urinating more may put more strain on these organs. Celery juice is perfectly safe to drink during pregnancy, but the diuretic effect might be irritating. However, everyone else, and especially those who are bloated due to excess salt and water in their diet, might find the diuretic properties of celery juice to be a good thing.
Citrus fruits and celery have the potential to increase sensitivity to sunlight. Phytophotodermatitis is a condition where the skin that came into contact with the juices of celery or citrus fruits is more likely to get sunburnt. Drinking celery juice won't cause phytophotodermatitis but it's likely that your hands came into contact with some celery juice when making it. As our hands are one of the areas of our body with the most sun exposure, and often the one we forget to protect from the sun, this can be a bit worrying if you're going out into the sun after your morning glass of celery juice. Make sure you didn't spill any juice on yourself first, or either cover the areas that came in contact with the celery juice or use a strong SPF before going outside. Even carrots, parley, parsnip, and figs can cause phytophotodermatitis so keep this in mind when juicing.
Celery is also an allergen, people who are allergic to celery, celeriac, and celery seeds shouldn't partake in this superfood trend. Interestingly, allergic to celery can also be associated with an allergy to pollen, specifically birch pollen and mugwort pollen.
Despite the potential health benefits of celery juice, it's not something everyone should try.
To answer the question, is celery juice good for you? There are health benefits of celery juice such as the boost in vitamins and minerals. It also counts as one of your five portions of fruit and vegetables per day. However, claims made by the Medical Medium saying that its "undiscovered cluster salts" will cure conditions like psoriasis is unproven.
Despite this, celery juice is good for you in the sense that it's a vegetable, packed with vitamins and minerals, and in most cases there's nothing wrong with eating a stalk of celery.
Unlike most vegetables that lose nutrients as they cook, steamed celery is just as healthy as raw celery. Boiling can leach some nutrients, a lot remains. If you want more celery in your diet it's just as good cooked in a meal or as a light snack with your favorite spread.
If you're looking for a way to try to get some extra nutrients, celery juice will do the job but feel free to add in other vegetables to get a varied distribution of vitamins and minerals.
If you're hoping celery juice is good for treating medical conditions, you will find a lot of the claims unfounded. A better approach will be to speak to your medical team first.
If you're sure the diuretic effects and risk of phytophotodermatitis aren't reasons for concern, then drinking celery juice is mostly harmless.
Tags: Drink BenefitsNatural RemedyThe Science Behind...Trends
How To Make Green Tea Taste Good
5 Health Benefits Of Chrysanthemum Tea
7 Breakfast Drinks That Are Better Than Orange Juice
Grapefruit Juice Benefits: The Good & Not So Good
Is Drinking Orange Juice For A Sore Throat or Cold Effective?
This article has been peer reviewed by Abigail, a clinical dietitian based in Chicago, Illinois. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 9,381 |
Matt Helm - The Wrecking Crew
Donald Hamilton
Matt Helm, code name Eric, has been recently reactivated as an operative for a secret American government organization after 15 years as a sedentary photographer and family man in Santa Fe, New Mexico. In his first assignment after returning to the service, he is sent to Sweden to eliminate Caselius, a long-time enemy agent. In order to do so, he must leave a trail of bodies in his wake.
More Books by Donald Hamilton
Matt Helm - Death of a Citizen
Matt Helm - The Removers
Matt Helm - The Silencers
Matt Helm - The Annihilators
Matt Helm - The Ambushers
Matt Helm - Murderers' Row | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 4,333 |
\section{Discussion}
\label{section:discussion}
\subsection{What is next?}
We plan to expand our framework to test more sophisticated localization algorithms and develop propagation models enabled by our rapid data gathering capability across many sensors. Hundreds of participants can accumulate millions of pair-wise propagation measurements between different transmitting and receiving nodes to generate new highly accurate trained models. Extending the server-side GNU Radio application, we can apply {Sitara} to experiments in distributed, coordinated signal processing as proposed by others~\cite{electrosense, charm, chorus}. Our system can be adapted to operate as a mesh network with other devices, perhaps as a limited fallback for cellular networks. By adapting the network topology and allowing a single mobile gateway to act as a central device to multiple {Sitara}s, and improving the ability to synchronize the clock oscillator, we may leverage diversity gain and perform experiments in distributed multiple input multiple output (MIMO) and coherent combining at each node.
\subsection{When should {Sitara} not be used?}
Having presented a number of applicable use cases for our system, there remain areas where the {Sitara} is not particularly well suited. The CC1200 transceiver and RF front end limit the frequencies in which {Sitara} can operate. Additionally, the maximum sampling rate and Bluetooth throughput constrain the SDR to narrowband operation. This is a direct consequence of the design choices made to minimize cost and maximize portability via a wireless back-channel. A more sophisticated receiver would require an FPGA or another ASIC with a much higher clock frequency and a delicate analog RF front-end. This would not only substantially reduce battery life, but also increase device cost. Our platform is designed to operate in ISM bands where transmission is permissible and operating frequency is inherently restricted; it is not intended to be a wideband receiver. Despite these limitations, there still exist many applications where {Sitara} would be a suitable test platform~\cite{Hattab2018}. \\%A final limitation of the {Sitara} is synchronization. The clock stability and interrupt timing resolution would present challenges for use cases requiring high clock accuracy such as time-of-arrival (TOA) ranging or distributed large-scale MIMO system.
\subsection{Challenges of Crowd-Sourcing}
A final topic not previously addressed in this paper but vital to the success of any crowd-sourced operation is that of user participation. A valid concern relating to the deployment of any crowd-sourced system is privacy. Increased scrutiny about how user data is collected, and potential for misuse, would necessarily impact how this system could be deployed. Does the information collected guarantee an appropriate level of anonymity? What techniques are possible which could conceal the precise location of participants but still provide enough information to capture useful information for sensing applications? Another question of equal if not greater importance is that of recruitment. What incentive do individuals have to participate in such a system--especially if participation could present a burden in any way to daily activities? If we wish to use the system to locate unauthorized transmitters then we could seek to determine the actual economic cost of RF spectrum abuse in order to assign a value to this data. Once the cost is established, we would allocate a commensurate reward to individuals that help locate an offender. These questions of privacy and incentive are beyond the scope of the work presented here, but we intend to explore these ideas in future work.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{section:conclusion}
The absence of viable options for large scale, coordinated, crowd-sourced spectrum sensing catalyzed our development of {Sitara}, which we present here. We characterize the system and highlight its advantages for distributed spectrum measurement activities. We promote our design based on its merits as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Energy efficiency, with a battery life lasting up to one week --- sufficient for a broad range of experiments.
\item An inexpensive, compact form-factor including a wireless back-haul, offering an ideal solution for mobile, crowd-sourced scenarios.
\item Capability of local, manual or automated, and remote operation of sensors within a network distributed across a wide geographical area.
\item SDR capabilities to measure complex temporal and spatial RF interactions.
\end{itemize}
We showcase the {Sitara}'s capabilities in real-world scenarios and evaluate its performance. The {Sitara}
is a valuable open-source resource for research in distributed software-defined radio sensing.
\section{Evaluating Our Solution}
We now present measurements characterizing the performance of our system under varying conditions. A large enough sample size of {Sitara} devices was not available to thoroughly characterize the statistical variability for mass production/manufacturing purposes, so instead we present these results as a reasonable expectation of performance.
\subsection{Data Throughput}
\label{section:throughput}
Three data paths potentially limit the real-time throughput of the {Sitara} system. The Bluetooth data rate, the SPI interface from the CC1200 radio to the $\mu$C, and the on-board $\mu$C itself. Depending on the use case, any of these could become a bottleneck. In our application, the maximum data transfer across the SPI bus exceeds the data rate of the Bluetooth link.
The CC1200 specifications limit the minimum SPI clock rate to 7.7 MHz for extended register reads, which include the registers of interest. In practice we have successfully achieved an 8 MHz clock rate. Two common modes of operation read from the CC1200 either three magnitude and two angle registers (8-bits each) or only the two angle registers. The maximum achievable sampling rates for these two modes were 64 kS/s and 104 kS/s, respectively. This was determined experimentally by gradually increasing the sampling rate while measuring the actual transfer rate on an oscilloscope until data transfer ceased. These sampling rates were achieved using the programmable peripheral interconnect (PPI) of the nRF chip which allows a burst (consecutive) read of multiple registers --- up to five in this case. This allows a faster and more consistent (in terms of timing) sample transfer than would be achievable with $\mu$C software interrupts.
The Bluetooth 5 standard defines a maximum transfer rate of 2~Mbps~\cite{blue}. By utilizing this LE 2M PHY option, packet length extension and configuring the Bluetooth Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) to match the packet length, we achieved highest throughput. Initial throughput testing using special firmware achieved a peak effective data rate of approximately 1.3 Mbps between a {Sitara} device and Bluetooth 5 capable mobile phone. In typical usage scenarios we observe an average throughput greater than 1 Mbps. This determination results from a series of tests under varying environmental conditions using two different mobile phones, denoted \emph{device 1} and \emph{device 2} in Fig.~\ref{image:bluetooth}. For each of these measurements, 244KB of data was transmitted over the Bluetooth link while the {Sitara} recorded the transmit time on its system clock. The 244KB transmission was then repeated at least 10 times for each test. For the environmental test (Fig.~\ref{image:bluetooth}, top) we used two controls, the first places a mobile phone within 15 cm of the {Sitara} in an environment without in-band WiFi or Bluetooth activity as observed on a spectrum analyzer. The second control repeats this test, but separates the paired devices by 12 meters. We then perform additional measurements as follows: with the participant keeping the {Sitara} in a pocket while holding the phone in hand (Test 1), with the {Sitara} inside a backpack while the participant holds the phone in hand (Test 2), and finally, in a variety of different indoor and outdoor environments with the {Sitara} in the participant's pocket (Test 3). In addition to the environmental tests, we also conduct interference tests (Fig.~\ref{image:bluetooth}, bottom). For these experiments, up to four interfering devices transmit over Bluetooth at their maximum data rate while the unit under test performs measurements. For these tests, the paired devices are separated by one meter. The controls consist of the same test, with no interferers (Control 1) and four interferers (Control 2); though in the case of the latter, the separation is reduced to 15 cm while other conditions remain the same. Test 3 of the interference measurements notably exhibits higher deviation than others. We speculate that this is due to characteristics of the Bluetooth protocol at marginal capacity or differences in hardware among devices. Further analysis of the Bluetooth performance and characterization is beyond this scope of this work as these tests are intended only to approximate worst-case conditions expected in real-world scenarios.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering\includegraphics[width=7.4cm]{parts/BT5env4.jpg}
\hfill
\centering\includegraphics[width=7.4cm]{parts/BT5intfr4.jpg}
\caption{Measured Bluetooth 5 data rate between {Sitara} and two mobile devices under varying test scenarios (top). Measured Bluetooth 5 data rate in the presence of varying numbers of interferers, where test number refers to the number of interferers (bottom). All error bars represent standard deviations.}
\label{image:bluetooth}
\end{figure}
In our application, minimal processing was required by the onboard $\mu$C during sample acquisition and was not found to impact throughput, therefore no attempt was made to evaluate load or processor utilization on the {Sitara}. If additional signal processing were to be carried out on the {Sitara}, then this may require further investigation.
\subsection{Power Characteristics}
The {Sitara}'s power consumption ranges from approximately 18 mW to 180 mW depending on operational mode. Power usage in typical scenarios is shown in Fig.~\ref{image:power} below. In the {Sitara} idle state, the CC1200 radio is set to a low powered state, maintaining power only to the crystal oscillator and digital core; when no other commands are present the $\mu$C in the nrRF52840 chip receives the wait-for-event (WFE) command which likewise powers down nonessential modules. The $\mu$C will periodically wake up to handle events necessary to maintain a Bluetooth connection. During RX and TX states, the CC1200 remains powered on along with necessary RF, clock and interface peripherals; the $\mu$C is more heavily utilized in these states, but no quantitative analysis was performed to determine the duty cycle of the active versus inactive/WFE state. It is worth noting that our implementation of the continuous triggered measurement mode continuously captures RF samples but will only retain and send the data across the Bluetooth link if the RSSI threshold is reached. This is not particularly energy-efficient but was implemented this way to maintain a brief history of samples before the trigger event. A much more energy-efficient implementation is possible which would allow the ARM core to sleep while awaiting a threshold detection trigger event from the CC1200, at which point sample acquisition would begin. The trade-off is that this would introduce a delay between the trigger event and sample capture that could be as long as a millisecond. For spectrum measurements this may suffice, but for IQ sample measurements, a signal of interest could be missed during this delay.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering\includegraphics[width=7.4cm]{parts/power_usage_v3c.jpg}
\caption{Comparison of maximum {Sitara} energy consumption across a range of operational states.}
\label{image:power}
\end{figure}
We initially tested battery life with a 3.7 V 180 mAh LIPO battery, allowing the {Sitara} to operate for several hours in any state. Repeated tests demonstrate that at full charge, the {Sitara} maintains a consistent Bluetooth connection until loss of power after 37 hours; this is consistent with the estimated battery life based on the measured idle power consumption. After testing we chose to replace the 180 mAh battery with a 850 mAh battery to extend battery life up to a week with a commensurate improvement in high duty-cycle operation. For comparison, the USRP E312 SDR uses a 3200 mAh battery to achieve 5.5 hours at idle~\cite{ettus}.
\subsection{Timing and Synchronization}
The CC1200 contains a phase-locked loop (PLL) which allows timing recovery in hardware for available modulation schemes. In other applications, our firmware performs a phase-lock function to effectively tune to a signal of interest. While the {Sitara} proved effective for our scenarios, there remains a temperature dependency in the oscillator which could present a challenge for long term clock stability in some applications. Use cases requiring higher clock stability and accuracy such as Doppler, time-of-arrival, or synchronous RF network architectures may not be possible or may required frequent re-synchronize of devices. A future board revision will incorporate a more accurate temperature compensated crystal oscillator to mitigate these effects.
For system timing and timestamp information relating to signal measurement, the {Sitara} maintains a system clock. The {Sitara} can synchronize its clock by receiving a clock command containing current GPS time from the mobile gateway over Bluetooth. Multiple such clock commands are sent until the mobile gateway observes a minimum round-trip time between the sent time and command acknowledgement --- a technique not very different from many network time protocols. This provides a simple method of synchronizing devices with GPS time with an error on the order of milliseconds. In order to achieve a more accurate synchronization, {Sitara} devices can perform a triggered RSSI measurement which will upload a timestamp associated with the trigger event to the server. From a collection of triggered RSSI measurements on the server for a single transmit event, relative clock offsets between different devices can then be easily computed. If an application requires a more accurate node synchronization, then a more sophisticated approach would be appropriate \cite{synch, chorus}.
\subsection{Server Performance}
Although some performance compromises are necessary to meet our hardware design goals for the {Sitara}, server-side resources present few practical constraints as they are easily re-configurable at run-time. By hosting our server on a cloud-computing service, our application can quickly scale to meet demand. As a base configuration we reserve a host with 1 vCPU and 0.5 GB of RAM. We find this adequate to display and manage 250 simultaneous clients each reporting one RSSI measurement per second. Additional clients reporting RSSI, or multiple clients uploading IQ samples may require a more capable server if the live reporting mode is desired. As our system is expected to handle dropouts and latency associated with mobile data links, we place no hard timing requirements on server resources and assume best-effort.
\section{Design and Implementation}
\label{section:design}
In this section, we examine some of the technical challenges and design decisions during the development of the {Sitara}, beginning at the hardware component level and then continue with the firmware development. We also briefly discuss the software development associated with the mobile gateway and server applications.
\subsection{Component Choice}
In order to develop a low cost, low power solution we look at transceivers capable of RF digital sample output. After considering many options we tended toward wireless transceivers such as the TI CC1200, Atmel RF-233, AT86RF215, Atmel AT86RF215IQ, and Silicon Labs EFR32FG. Among these, interface options and operational frequencies lead us to the CC1200 which tunes to frequency bands between 137~MHz and 950~MHz~\cite{cc1200}. The CC1200 is energy efficient and allows raw IQ samples to be exported while still operating over a wide enough frequency range to prove useful.
The RF network can be configured to match the frequency and bandwidth of operation. In this paper, {Sitara} uses a 915 MHz balun, which places the optimal operating frequency between 902 to 928~MHz. Future development could add an RF switch or wide-band matching network to improve performance across other bands.
The CC1200 transceiver operates using a SPI interface to read and write data and control registers, respectively. General-purpose IO (GPIO) connections between the CC1200 and SoC $\mu$C allow interrupt-driven functions such as IQ sample acquisition and RF power level triggering. We adapt the register configurations for optimal spectrum monitoring. The CC1200 provides 3 registers (17 bits total) of magnitude and 2 registers (10 bits total) of angle measurements from the output of its coordinate rotation digital computer (CORDIC) algorithm.
We choose the nRF52840 SoC because it was one of the first available low-power Bluetooth 5 SoCs with a well-supported SDK~\cite{nrf}. Additionally, the ARM Cortex-M4 within the SoC provides a floating point unit (FPU) which is necessary for some SDR applications. Once powered on, the SoC initializes the CC1200 transceiver and executes the program stored in flash. The PPI together with the DMA controller allows many tasks to be automated independent of the $\mu$C. In our application this allows repeated magnitude and angle sample reads from registers on the CC1200 to be loaded directly into RAM allocated as receive buffers within the program. This feature is essential to provide uniform sample capture for DSP applications which would otherwise be subject to interrupt-driven $\mu$C preemption by the Bluetooth stack, resulting in jitter and other non-deterministic timing anomalies. While all sample acquisition and storage is accomplished in hardware, a software interrupt is necessary to switch buffers.
The RF output from the nRF52840 is connected to a 2.4 GHz 3dBi SMD chip antenna~\cite{bt_antenna}. While chip antennas are inefficient, the use case is to have a very short Bluetooth link, for example a volunteer might carry both devices in the same handbag, or in two different pockets. Such short links can be reliable even with the antenna loss as we can see from the Bluetooth throughput measurements in section \ref{section:throughput}.
A power management IC (PMIC) regulates voltage, charges and manages the LiPo battery connected through the standard JST connector. {Sitara} contains a JLink interface to allow programming, terminal logging and debugging. The CC1200's RF chain interfaces with an RF-tuned circuit terminating on a $\mu$.FL connector. For our experiments and the results presented here, we use a Yageo Penta-Band WWAN antenna \cite{antenna}, but other antennas could also be used.
The board, battery, and antenna are designed to fit within a standard 70 by 50 by 20~mm plastic case, which provides mechanical protection while being carried by a volunteer. The battery is recharged by the volunteer using a standard micro USB cable, likely to be familiar to an Android phone user.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=7.4cm]{parts/sitara_better.jpg}
\caption{{Sitara} printed circuit board}
\label{image:pcb}
\end{figure}
At the time of writing, the total cost for the bill of materials (BOM) in quantities of 1000 was estimated to be \$38.00 per device. Please refer to our github repository to view the current BOM, source code and design documents: \url{https://github.com/SPAN-UofU}.
\subsection{{Sitara} Firmware}
We develop the SoC firmware using the nRF5 SDK v13.0.0 from Nordic Semiconductor~\cite{nrf}, compiled using the GNU ARM toolchain v7.2.1~\cite{arm}. The firmware executable code resides in flash on-board the nRF52840 SoC. The SoftDevice, a pre-compiled protocol stack, is also stored in flash and loaded into RAM at run-time. An event-driven API allows the firmware to interface with the SoftDevice to access Bluetooth functions.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/Sitara_state_diagram.png}
\caption{Simplified state diagram for {Sitara}}
\label{image:state}
\end{figure}
Once powered on, the $\mu$C initializes and configures the external CC1200 transceiver, on-chip Bluetooth radio and other peripherals then enters a sleep state while awaiting commands. As we mention, minimizing power consumption is a key design driver, so minimizing the time that components are powered on and active is a recurring theme. This allows us to achieve an 80\% power reduction for most applications. As a result, most functions and all commands are event-driven. Commands are received on incoming Bluetooth packets, triggering an event that wakes the $\mu$C and enters an event handler which parses the message and extracts a valid command. These commands are encoded as ASCII characters and correspond to the functions listed in Table \ref{table:commands}; a state diagram is shown in Fig.~\ref{image:state}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\captionsetup{position=below, skip=10pt}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{1.9cm} p{5.9cm}|}
\hline
Command & Description\\
\hline \hline
ACCESS REGISTER & Allow access to any (or all) registers in the CC1200\\ \hline
SAMPLE CAPTURE & Begin continuous or carrier-triggered sampling of magnitude, angle or RSSI and upload values to gateway via Bluetooth\\ \hline
TUNE FREQ & Tune the radio to a user-provided frequency with 1 kHz resolution\\ \hline
CHANGE PHY & Increase the Bluetooth data rate to 2~Mbps for compatible devices\\ \hline
TRANSMIT & Transmit provided text string over the air using a supported modulation scheme or continuously transmit a single RF tone\\ \hline
RECEIVE & Receive incoming transmissions using a supported modulation scheme and send the results across the Bluetooth link\\ \hline
LOCK FREQ & Attempts to phase lock to the strongest signal near a selected frequency\\ \hline
STOP & Halt any current measurement or transmit operation and return the radio to a low-power idle state\\ \hline
RESET & Reset the {Sitara}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{List of {Sitara} commands}
\label{table:commands}
\end{table}
Most commands perform a single function then return the $\mu$C to a sleep state. The SAMPLE CAPTURE command enters a loop in which data is continuously acquired and sent via the Bluetooth interface. Because continuous sample capture is an important aspect of our design we will discuss its operation in more detail. The SAMPLE CAPTURE command allows additional parameters to determine how and which data will be captured and uploaded. These parameters include MAGNITUDE, RSSI-DIRECT, RSSI-CALCULATED, PHASE and TRIGGERED. The differences between these parameters are presented in Table \ref{table:capture} below.
\begin{table}[ht]
\captionsetup{position=below, skip=10pt}
\begin{tabular}{ p{2.1cm} | p{5.9cm}}
Parameter & Description\\
\hline \hline
\small MAGNITUDE & continuously captures both magnitude and angle (I/Q) data\\
\small RSSI-DIRECT & continuously captures RSSI as reported by the CC1200 with 8-bit resolution\\
\small CALCULATED & continuously captures magnitude and calculates RSSI with 17-bit resolution\\
\small PHASE & continuously captures angle measurements with 10-bit resolution\\
\small TRIGGERED & continuously captures data while RSSI is above a threshold\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{{Sitara} sample capture parameters}
\label{table:capture}
\end{table}
Sample capture utilizes the Programmable Peripheral Interconnect (PPI), which permits on-chip peripherals to interact through task-event relationships, independent of the CPU. We configure an interrupt event associated with the magnitude-valid output signal from the CC1200 to trigger a burst-read SPI transaction task which reads the registers containing the sample data. The magnitude-valid signal asserts when a new IQ sample is ready on the CC1200 and occurs at a set rate dependent on the configured receiver filter bandwidth. The sample data automatically load into a pre-allocated receive buffer using the PPI and DMA. The completion of the SPI transaction triggers another event which increments a counter using the PPI. Once this counter reaches a predetermined count, another task begins which temporarily disables the capture function and triggers a software interrupt event. The purpose of this software interrupt is to assign the pointer to the receive buffer to a new memory address so sample capture can resume while the previously-filled buffer is processed and sent over the Bluetooth interface. Unfortunately, the nRF52840 SoC does not provide a method of switching receive buffers for the SPI-DMA transaction without $\mu$C intervention; however, the time required to service the interrupt is approximately 22 $\mu s$. Therefore, sampling rates with a period equal to or greater than 22 $\mu s$ (45 kS/s) may be delayed by at most 1 sample period. An additional factor that complicates this process and limits the maximum sampling rate over SPI is the absence of a hardware-enabled control function which allows consecutive burst reads from multiple registers (although this is available for repeated reads from a single register). This negatively impacts performance in two ways:
\begin{itemize}
\item Each sample read must include two command bytes for SPI burst read which are added to the total length of the transaction, thus increasing each transfer duration.
\item During a SPI transfer, a byte is received during each clock cycle, thus the receive buffer will always contain the two status bytes received during the clock cycles which the two command bytes are sent, in addition to the bytes containing the actual data.
\end{itemize}
This results in inefficient use of memory and a receive buffer containing status bytes interleaved with sample data requiring extra processing steps to extract samples. Nevertheless, this does not impact performance because the Bluetooth connection ultimately limits throughput as we discuss in Section \ref{section:throughput}.
We define three rotating buffers to store received samples. This allows SPI transfer using DMA to occur in one buffer while simultaneously processing another in preparation for Bluetooth transmission. The third buffer stores the processed data awaiting awaiting Bluetooth transmission. Prior to transmission over Bluetooth the samples are compressed to increase transport efficiency and improve the data rate. During sample capture, up to 5 bytes are read from the magnitude/angle registers but the values are represented by 17 and 10 bits, respectively. Because the Bluetooth serial service operates on bytes and supports flow control and acknowledgement, we compress this data into 3 bytes as follows. We observed through initial experimentation that the 3 least significant bits of magnitude are mostly measurement noise, thus we remove them from the magnitude and keep the full 10 bits of angle, for a total of 24 bits. The number of captured samples per array and array size were chosen to fill a maximum-length Bluetooth packet data payload of 244 bytes. During IQ sampling 81, 5-byte samples are captured, sent over the SPI interface and then compressed to 3-byte samples to fit into the 244 byte Bluetooth packet payload. This process is shown in Fig.~\ref{image:buffers} below.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/buffer.jpg}
\caption{{Sitara} buffer system designed to maximize throughput}
\label{image:buffers}
\end{figure}
Bluetooth transfer of packets is not real-time, and due to packet collisions and errors, MAC delays and retransmissions, any finite buffer can experience an overflow. This is handled by pausing capture acquisition and discarding samples while the Bluetooth interface catches up. This is problematic for RF sample capture because it can break continuity and introduce timing offsets. In order to compensate for these errors, we maintain a 16~MHz counter during acquisition which is activated while sample capture is paused and then reports the elapsed pause time once sample capture resumes. This information is then also sent over Bluetooth so the end-user is able to accurately reconstruct and preserve timing of sample captures.
\subsection{Crowdsourcer and Server Software}
The choice of server architecture and software frameworks were driven primarily by convenience, ease of use and adaptability rather than resource optimization as we see for the {Sitara}. The server application uses the Python Flask micro web framework on an Apache front-end paired with Gunicorn, a Python WSGI server. The control functions are accessed from an interactive Javascript-based GUI in a web browser. Socket.IO libraries for Python, Javascript and Java provide low-latency, standardized event-based communication between different the server, Web GUI and the device gateways, respectively.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=7.4cm]{parts/pocketSDR_GUI_anon.jpg}
\caption{Server homepage showing locations of active sensors}
\label{image:page}
\end{figure}
The user issues commands from the web client which are sent to the server and relayed to the appropriate client device gateways. The web client, server, and gateway each activate a set of event listeners which filter relevant messages. Messages containing measurement results in response to commands, such as RSSI and IQ data, are stored in the server's database. The web interface provides a Google Maps overlay which can display real time client location and associated measurement data as shown in Fig~\ref{image:page}. In addition to real-time monitoring of sensors, the web client also provides convenient tools for filtering and displaying subsets of measurements according to a number of parameters such as time, frequency, RSSI threshold and location. Some of these capabilities will be demonstrated in section \ref{section:results}.
Messages to and from the server are formatted as JSON data relevant to the context. Using the Crowdsourcer application installed on the mobile gateway, the user initiates a connection to the server which persists until manually terminated at either end. The server can issue the following commands:
\begin{itemize}
\item Report RSSI - commands the {Sitara} to report measured RSSI values at a user-configured rate
\item Triggered Capture - commands the {Sitara} to report measurements once an RF threshold is achieved
\item Continuous Capture - commands the {Sitara} to continuously upload IQ data
\item Clock - synchronizes the {Sitara} clock with GPS time obtained by the mobile gateway
\item Stop - disables any capture mode and returns {Sitara} to idle state
\item Transmit - commands the {Sitara} to transmit a CW signal or modulated message
\item Upload - upload captured data beginning at user-specified time point
\item Debug mode - sends arbitrary commands directly to the {Sitara}
\end{itemize}
The Server application was designed to provide a high-level abstraction for commands, leaving the implementation details and low-level commands to the client device gateways. For example, a server RSSI command emits a single message containing several parameters such as frequency, bandwidth, reporting interval and report type. The device gateway receives this message and issues multiple commands as appropriate, such as frequency tune and RSSI capture, over Bluetooth to individual {Sitara} devices. A {Sitara} in turn will interpret each of these commands and perform additional steps to accomplish this task. Combining and abstracting commands at the top level in this way reduces latency, preserves bandwidth and spares server resources by minimizing the number of message exchanges for a given task. This abstraction also provides a modular approach making the sensor implementation-agnostic to the server.
While developing this architecture, we considered implementing an existing standard such as IEEE 802.22.3 Spectrum Characterization and Occupancy Sensing (SCOS) Sensor~\cite{scos}, an extension of the SigMF specification~\cite{sigmf}. We find that such specifications provide a level a complexity beyond our immediate needs. Specifically, SCOS implements a restful API requiring each sensor to host a web server; we instead use the Socket.IO protocol to maintain persistent connections necessary for managing mobile devices. Notwithstanding the differences, our implementation could be adapted to comply with the SCOS standard as follows: Rather than implementing a RESTful API on each sensor, a gateway could be installed on the server which is compatible with the SCOS standard and emulates the API for each device. As requests are received at this server, the SCOS gateway would forward the appropriate commands to the server application. This would provide all the benefits of compatibility with the SCOS standard without a system redesign.
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Future mobile wireless advancements will continue a trend of increasing densification, distribution and coordination, and spectrum-agile operation~\cite{shafi2017,wang2014cellular,sharma2017dynamic}. The performance of these new technologies depends not only on the mobility of individual users with respect to base stations, but users' mobility with respect to each other. Ideally, to quantify performance experimentally, one would run a large-scale distributed wireless experiment with tens or hundreds of software-defined radios (SDR) programmed to deploy/test a new technology, while individual volunteers each carry these SDRs with them during their normal daily activities. Such an experiment would allow technologies to be tested with users' real-world mobilities, including temporal, spatial, and person-to-person correlations, rather than in artificial testbed or simulation environments that implicitly or explicitly assume independence and stationarity.
For researchers to be able to run such experiments, the SDR must be \emph{truly portable}, so that a volunteer participant is not burdened by the carrying of the device, and in fact does not ordinarily notice it. Furthermore, the hardware must be \emph{low cost} to enable experiments with hundreds of volunteers. We define portable to mean capable of operating for extended periods of time without an external power supply, small enough to carry without encumbering the user --- small enough to easily fit into a pocket --- and {\em not tethered} to wires, cables,
or external connectors. Its energy consumption must allow it to last as long as most smartphones so that volunteers can charge it on the same schedule as their mobile device.
In terms of cost, a researcher should be able to purchase a set of 100 on a standard grant, which would translate to around US \$50 or less per device.
Unfortunately, no existing SDR meets the requirements of performing such experiments. Recent products include devices such as the Kickstarter-funded ``portable SDR'' (PSDR)~\cite{ColtonSDR}, RTL-SDR~\cite{rtlSDR}, LimeSDR~\cite{limeSDR} and Ettus USRP radios~\cite{ettus}. While each of these possess useful capabilities, all fall short in one area or another for large scale mobile experiments. The most suitable among these would be the Ettus USRP E312, a battery-powered portable SDR~\cite{e312}. The E312, however, is far too large to fit into a pocket and it must be tethered, i.e., it would still require a cable connection to a mobile device or laptop to provide a control channel. Additionally, the steep price of the E312 would present a practical limit to large scale distributed experiments. The RTL-SDR is low cost, but requires an external processor, to which it must be connected to by USB cable, and most importantly, has no transmit capability. Most true SDRs, capable of digital processing of RF samples and RX/TX, cost at least US \$100 in the most basic form and quickly reach 10 times that cost for more sophisticated offerings. Such SDRs quickly become cost-prohibitive for large-scale experiments, and are not appreciated by volunteers for their size or tethering requirements.
We also point out that current mobile phones, while packed with cellular, Wi-fi and Bluetooth radios, do not provide the flexibility to make arbitrary changes across layers which researchers want to explore, despite their suitability for some particular applications in localization and sensing \cite{improved_wifi, wireless_localization, fingerprint}. Differences in chipsets, firmware implementation, protocols and carrier-imposed restrictions preclude uniform or arbitrary access and control of the underlying hardware. Even with unrestricted access to the underlying hardware, such operation would disrupt data services and inconvenience the volunteer --- something we wish to avoid.
\subsection{A Novel Software-Defined Radio}
Our contribution is a novel open-source device and cloud framework aimed at enabling large-scale experimental research in mobile dynamic spectrum access, propagation modeling, distributed and coordinated reception, and localization. Our device, that we call \emph{Sitara}, is a truly portable software-defined radio. It is especially suited for distributed, crowd-sourced experiments. It is designed to have a battery life of up to a week on a single charge, to be smaller than a credit card, and to cost less than existing fully-featured SDRs. Our {Sitara} is convenient for volunteers to carry and is accessible to a broad set of researchers. We anticipate this to be particularly useful for scenarios in which simultaneous, near real-time, geographically distributed narrow-band RF measurements are desired. We will later demonstrate how the {Sitara} can become a valuable tool, quickly amassing measurement inputs for models and providing insights to inform decisions for wireless research.
\subsection{Achieving True Portability}
The aim of achieving a compact, cordless, energy efficient device constrains key design decisions. The inconvenience of frequent charging and limited space for batteries make the power requirements of field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) commonly used in other SDR solutions unfeasible~\cite{fpga}. For a device to be practical for crowd-sourcing it must also be convenient for volunteers to carry, which means we cannot connect it via cable to their smartphone, and little to no interaction should be required from the volunteer. With the recent availability of Bluetooth 5 devices and the ubiquity of smartphones, we arrive at the solution presented here: a low power transceiver paired with a Bluetooth interface. By pairing with the volunteer's phone, we can piggyback on the phone's WiFi or cellular connection to communicate with a remote server, as well as its location service.
But how can we avoid the large cost and size of most fully-functional SDRs? We apply a lesson from the RTL-SDR, which re-purposed a mass-produced digital video receiver (the RTL2832U) for its ability to output complex-baseband (IQ) samples.
We use the Texas Instruments (TI) CC1200 transceiver \cite{cc1200} which, although not designed as an SDR transceiver, has an IQ sample feature as well as transmit capability.
This transceiver supports operation below 1 GHz. The experiments we perform in this paper are in the 902-928 MHz ISM band. Our firmware limits transmission to one of several ISM bands below 1 GHz.
The {Sitara} complements the CC1200 with a Nordic Semiconductor nRF52840 system on chip (SoC) and supporting circuitry \cite{nrf}. This SoC contains a single-core ARM microcontroller ($\mu$C) as well as a Bluetooth 5 stack for communication with a mobile device/gateway and a serial peripheral interface (SPI) for communication with the CC1200 transceiver. Any mobile app compatible with the Nordic UART Bluetooth service can interact with the device. The {Sitara} supports reading from and writing to arbitrary registers on the CC1200 radio, tuning radio frequency, measuring RSSI, continuously capturing IQ samples, sample capture on carrier-sense, frequency phase lock, and transmission and reception of messages using various modulations.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/sitara_with_case.jpg}
\caption{{Sitara} PCB with antenna and rechargable battery housed in an ABS plastic enclosure}
\label{image:sitara}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Balancing Power and Throughput}
For any mobile device, the power budget is always an area of concern. For our application, while targeting low-cost, lower power components, we introduce the challenge of maintaining high sample throughput on hardware that was originally designed for intermittent, bursty operation; continuously operating the $\mu$C alone would deplete our initially specified battery in a matter of hours. We address this problem by designing an architecture that maximizes efficiency by exploiting hardware peripherals to maintain a high data rate while minimizing $\mu$C activity. To prove useful as an SDR, we must maintain a uniform sampling rate for IQ data. This requires solving a difficult problem to achieve a careful coordination between transceiver data acquisition, sample processing and the Bluetooth radio.
In general terms, we achieve this by minimizing processing overhead in software and optimizing parameters for Bluetooth transmission. Among the Bluetooth features that make this possible are Low-Energy Data Packet Length Extension introduced in Bluetooth 4.2 and the optional 2~Mb/s bit rate, LE 2M PHY, introduced in Bluetooth 5~\cite{blue}. Because the Bluetooth stack is implemented as a ``SoftDevice'', a precompiled binary image, which runs on the single ARM core, there is inherent contention for the $\mu$C's resources. Any timing anomalies occurring while servicing interrupts by the SoftDevice result in a critical fault. Consequently, the SoftDevice must be given interrupt priority, resulting in non-deterministic timing for servicing other interrupts such as sample capture. To overcome this challenge and guarantee uniform sampling, we use the on-chip programmable peripheral interconnect (PPI) together with receive buffers accessed through a direct memory access (DMA) controller to automate necessary tasks, independent of the $\mu$C. To maintain timing uniformity during sampling, we synchronize transfers with a hardware-enabled timer to record the delay caused by any buffer overflows. This allows us to preserve relative symbol timing even if some samples are lost due to an overflow. We further explain this approach and provide more details in Section \ref{section:design}. Our solution allows continuous sample capture over SPI and only requires $\mu$C intervention to rotate between receive buffers. The result of our efforts is a maximum, hardware-limited, continuous sampling rate up to 104 kS/s across the SPI interface and Bluetooth data rates exceeding 1Mb/s. The maximum sampling rate across the SPI interface effectively limits our receiver bandwidth to 52 kHz for IQ sampling.
\subsection{Cloud-based Command and Control Server}
In addition to the {Sitara}, we develop a mobile application and command and control server interface allowing hundreds of devices to operate in coordination, as shown in Fig.~\ref{image:sys_diagram}. The server provides a convenient web-based GUI for live monitoring and control of connected clients (Fig.~\ref{image:page}) and processing of historical measurement data. This allows monitoring real-time measurements in a distributed, mobile environment or delayed logging and upload for later analysis. Accessible records contain RSSI measurements, IQ samples, location, time and device ID. These capabilities enable passive crowd-sourced measurements using remote control, or to function as a standalone SDR, controlled wirelessly through a user's mobile device. This architecture provides many benefits which allow adaptation for use with additional devices and increased processing and analysis capabilities. For example, abstracted software interfaces and open protocols allow straightforward adaptation for use with other sensor platforms and software-defined radios; the server also provides a convenient platform to run and test various transmitter localization algorithms.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\raggedright
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/sys_diagram2.png}
\caption{{Sitara} backhaul system includes the Bluetooth connection (blue) between the {Sitara} and mobile gateway, and the WiFi or cellular connection (green) between the mobile device and the remote cloud server. }
\label{image:sys_diagram}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/flowchart.png}
\caption{{Sitara} measures signals from other {Sitara}s or other test devices, and uses the phone and its data connection and GPS to log data and receive commands. }
\label{image:flowchart}
\end{figure}
In this paper we provide a system overview discussing the concept and function of the {Sitara}. We then share implementation details, design choices and technical specifications. Experimental results from the following usage scenarios illustrate the utility of our SDR:
\begin{itemize}
\item Transmitter localization using RSSI measurements
\item Crowd-sourced measurements using multiple concurrent participants, suitable for spectrum monitoring or RF propagation modeling
\item Server-side demodulation from IQ sample captures of a 2-FSK transmission
\end{itemize}
We conclude by comparing our solution to existing systems and discussing future areas of research related to our crowd-sourced measurement approach.
\section{System at a Glance}
The system as presented consists of three primary components depicted in Fig.~\ref{image:sys_diagram}. These are the {Sitara}, app on the mobile gateway (typically a smartphone), and the remote command and control server. The {Sitara} produces measurement data which is then sent to the mobile gateway over Bluetooth. The Crowdsourcer application on the mobile gateway either uploads the measurement data to the server over a cellular or WiFi connection or logs the data for upload at a later time. This architecture is designed to accommodate hundreds of simultaneous users. We provide a brief overview of these three components and later continue with implementation details in Section \ref{section:design}.
\subsection{Sitara}
The {Sitara} functions as the mobile low-power software-defined radio, responding to commands (Table \ref{table:commands}), performing RF signal capture and spectrum measurements, and processing acquired data for transfer to the mobile gateway and, subsequently, the server. The {Sitara} features a single circuit board populated with a Texas Instruments CC1200 transceiver acting as the radio and a low-power Nordic nRF52840 SoC as its $\mu$C. The SoC is equipped with a Bluetooth 5 transceiver to maintain high throughput of the raw IQ samples generated by the Texas Instruments CC1200 transceiver~\cite{luong2016rss, Luong:2018:STF:3207947.3207959}. The {Sitara} relies on a Bluetooth connection for operation.
\subsection {Mobile Gateway - Crowdsourcer}
Local and remote control of the device operate over a Bluetooth link to the mobile gateway. The mobile gateway hosts our Android Crowdsourcer application. This application runs on the mobile gateway, sends commands and receives information from the {Sitara}. The Crowdsourcer application is designed to capture and log samples from several different RF measurement devices. For the {Sitara}, the application permits two configurations: standalone manual operation and unattended remote control. In remote control, the server interfaces with the application to issue commands to specific devices with no need for input from the participant. During local operation the mobile owner is able to issue commands and view measurements using the Crowdsourcer application.
\subsection{Command and Control Server}
The Crowdsourcer application communicates with a cloud-based server. All requests are served by a Python Flask~\cite{flask} application through a Gunicorn Web Server Gateway Interface (WSGI)~\cite{gunicorn}. An Apache server is used as a pass-through for security on the front-end. Our application serves the web-based GUI for command and control as well as back-end socket communications among clients. A database stores uploaded measurements in addition to their timestamp, latitude, longitude and unique device ID. Uploaded measurement data may consist of RSSI or complex baseband (IQ) sample data. The server provides a client list to show current connections as well as a page for measurement data.The web-based GUI provides an embedded Google Map object to monitor sensor location and an input terminal for issuing commands. Additionally, the server accommodates scripts to automate commands and test scenarios --- a feature which becomes invaluable for the types of experiments we present in section \ref{section:results}.
\section{Related work}
We briefly compared {Sitara} with other SDRs in Section~\ref{intro}. In this section, we expand the comparison to examine their capabilities and suitability for our application. Table \ref{table:platforms} provides a side-by-side comparison of size, control interface, power source and approximate price for a number of SDRs.
\begin{table}[h]
\captionsetup{position=below, skip=10pt}
\begin{tabular}{p{1.5cm} | c | c | c | c}
SDR & Size (mm) & Interface & Power & Price\\
\hline \hline
\small USRP & 133x68x32 & USB/Eth & batt. & \$3200\\
\small PSDR & 110x70x30 & USB & batt. & \$500\\
\small HackRF & 124x80x18 & USB & USB & \$300\\
\small LimeSDR & 100x60 & USB & USB & \$300\\
\small PlutoSDR & 117x79x24 & USB & USB & \$100\\
\small RTL-SDR & 69x27x13 & USB & USB & \$20\\
\small Charm & 89x57x25 & Eth & PoE & n/a\\
\small {Sitara} & 70x50x20 & BT 5 & batt. & \$38\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Price and portability comparison of alternative SDR platforms}
\label{table:platforms}
\end{table}
We immediately see clear distinctions between these devices. {Sitara} is the only device that allows data transfer and control without external connections. High speed Bluetooth 5 was not available during development of most of the devices in the list, and prior Bluetooth versions offered either high throughput or energy efficiency, but not both~\cite{blue}. Other wireless solutions such as WiFi-direct provided high throughput but consume too much power~\cite{carroll} and can be inconvenient to configure. Beyond power consumption, a direct WiFi connection would not be suitable for our application because it would be disruptive to the user's smartphone WiFi connection and require the cellular connection for access to the server. {Sitara} is also among the smallest of the devices listed, second only to the RTL-SDR, which cannot function without a USB host. The PSDR is noteworthy in that it is relatively small, battery powered and can perform many functions as a standalone device; however, its hardware is limited to shortwave radio operation, up to about 30 MHz~\cite{ColtonSDR}. It does contain a GPS sensor, but it provides no mechanism to conveniently aggregate and monitor signals over a wide area for spectrum monitoring functions. The other devices could be used to perform spectrum monitoring functions and signal processing but are not suitable for wide scale, mobile experiments.
Beyond a comparison of sensor devices and software radios, we can also compare our system to other recent distributed software defined radio and spectrum sensing efforts. Two examples of distributed sensing systems which offer similarities are the Electrosense~\cite{electrosense} and Charm~\cite{charm} systems. Each of these employ stationary sensors and gateways which upload IQ measurements to a server. Electrosense is specifically designed for crowd-sourced spectrum monitoring, offering an open API and web-based frontend with a convenient waterfall display to visualize measurement data. Charm similarly samples RF spectrum to upload to a server, but instead of being used for spectrum monitoring specifically, it uses similar concepts to coherently combine distributed sensor measurements to recover degraded RF signals~\cite{charm}.
\section{Case Studies}
\label{section:results}
In this section, we present experimental results demonstrating how our system is used in two different applications. We specifically choose these applications to demonstrate the versatility and key features of our system namely: the portability of the {Sitara} for crowd-sourced measurement and its utility as an SDR. We also explain how these demonstrations can extend to much more complicated experiments. In our two examples we use the terms \emph{local} and \emph{remote}, respectively, to denote a user who manually performs measurements using the mobile gateway at the location of measurement and a user who issues a command from the server to perform measurements at a remote location where a {Sitara} is present. Additionally, in a crowd-sourced environment, we say a participant can be \emph{active} or \emph{passive}, respectively, meaning the participant has some information or direction from the user conducting the experiment or the participant has no knowledge about or communication with the user conducting the experiment. For example, if a user conducting an experiment instructs participants to sweep location $X$ to find a transmitter, then these would be considered active participants.
Note that for experiments involving volunteers, to ensure consent and handling of potentially sensitive user data is adequately addressed, we maintain an institutionally-approved IRB.
\subsection{Spectrum Sensing}
One of our primary design goals for the {Sitara} is to offer a convenient platform for crowd-sourced spectrum sensing. As such, we demonstrate the versatility of our system in this capacity in real-world settings. \\
\subsubsection{Transmitter Localization: Single {Sitara}}
In this scenario, we deploy one {Sitara} acting as a receiver which is controlled locally using an open-source third-party mobile application: \textit{nRF UART v2.0}. The user walks around the test site, issues commands from the mobile gateway to capture RSSI measurements which are later used to estimate the location of a ``rogue" transmitter.
A USRP B210 radio serves as a transmitter, broadcasting a 910 MHz continuous wave signal at 20dBm as measured at the antenna interface. Considering the typical output power of consumer wireless devices and the propagation characteristics within this frequency band, 20dBm would be a conservative value bordering on worst case for the purposes of detecting a disruptive transmitter; a malicious actor, intent on disruption, would likely employ a more powerful transmitter to degrade performance of devices over a wider area. The transmitter broadcasts through a 3dBi vertical omni-directional antenna.
Multiple RSSI measurements are taken to estimate the location of a receiver. The measurement points are chosen arbitrarily along pedestrian-accessible paths. The measurement points used for localization are indicated by green circles overlaid onto the site map in Fig.~\ref{image:site_interp} (Left). The radius of the green circles are proportional to the measured RSSI value at each of these points. The red circle denotes the transmitter location. The test site covers a roughly 28,000~$m^2$ area, with the farthest discernible measurement captured at a distance approximately 120~m from the transmitter. In order to ensure that the intended signal is measured, each sample measurement is recorded after issuing a LOCK FREQ (See Table \ref{table:commands}) command to the {Sitara} at 910 MHz. Any measurements that do not converge to a phase lock, fall below the noise floor, or fall outside the span of 10kHz centered at 910 MHz are discarded. The user is able to observe the frequency scan and lock in real time.
\begin{figure} [ht]
\centering
\centering\includegraphics[width=4.1cm]{parts/test_site2.jpg}
\hfill
\centering\includegraphics[width=4.1cm]{parts/interp2.png}
\caption{(left) Outdoor test area with transmitter location (\textcolor{red}{$\bullet$}) and measurement locations (\textcolor{green}{$\bullet$}), with radius proportional to the measured RSSI value. (right) Transmitter location estimation map and true location (\textcolor{red}{$\times$}).} \label{image:site_interp}
\end{figure}
Once the data is captured, the coordinates of the measurement points are associated with individual pixels of a captured overhead image of the test site retrieved from Google Maps. To make localization more challenging, we choose to discard the highest three RSSI measurements. The remaining points are used to produce Fig.~\ref{image:site_interp} (left), then as inputs to a Matlab interpolant object from which Fig.~\ref{image:site_interp} (right) is generated. In this case, linear interpolation is used. We can see that this small data set performs reasonably well in locating the transmitter. The true location is approximately 9 m away from the best estimate as indicated by the peak of the yellow region in the figure. Clearly with more measurements, either from an increased sampling rate or multiple simultaneous devices, we would see this accuracy improve.
Here, we deploy a single {Sitara} with a local, active participant to capture RSSI measurements at different points. Local {Sitara} operation may be convenient for directed experiments which may not accommodate multiple passive users in a crowd-sourced scenario. A more typical use case will involve multiple participants--active or passive--and rely on automated, server-initiated measurement commands. We demonstrate these capabilities next. \\
\subsubsection{Crowd-sourcing: Multiple {Sitara}s}
We deploy up to twelve {Sitara}s among passive participants in a series of experiments. Again, by passive we mean the participants are not directed but walk around freely while the nodes are operated remotely from the server, requiring no interaction from participants. By automating different test scenarios using server-side scripts, we are able to rapidly acquire large volumes of data. Fig.~\ref{image:path_loss} depicts path loss in a suburban environment calculated from RSSI measurements and GPS coordinates of multiple devices obtained using a round-robin transmit scheme, in which individual nodes take turns operating as a transmitter while others measure RSSI. This is a fast and efficient method to generate data for inputs into complex propagation models that may otherwise be difficult to obtain \cite{propagation}. Fig.~\ref{image:crowd-source} (left) presents a server-generated overlay of RSSI measurements obtained from twelve {Sitara}s scanning a range of frequencies over a user-specified duration. Here, each point radius scales relative to RSSI and each color, again, represents a unique device. These measurements could be used for transmitter localization as we demonstrated previously, or as inputs to environmental RF propagation models.
Fig.~\ref{image:crowd-source} (right) shows a server-generated overlay from prior measurements stored in the database using an automated command script. This image is generated by querying the server for measurements (blue dots) from a specific device between two time points. These measurements are not intended to locate a known transmitter, but instead demonstrate the passive crowd-sourcing capability. Regardless, if our object was to determine locations of possible sensors, we could request another overlay including multiple devices and an RSSI threshold. Along one path in the figure, we also see a drop in measurements, this likely indicates a loss of mobile data service in that particular area. In cases where cellular service is less reliable, or where large amounts of data are required, it may be more appropriate to use the logging report mode; during live measurement mode, the {Sitara} makes a best effort attempt to send measurement data back to the server, but in the absence of a network connection, no data is available. If logging mode is enabled, the {Sitara} will continuously record measurements, log them to a file on the mobile device and later upload the data upon request from the server.
\begin{figure} [ht]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/path_loss2.jpg}
\caption{A snapshot in time showing path loss using RSSI measurements from multiple {Sitara}s, distinguished by color, as a function of distance from a transmitter. Using {Sitara}, such data sets are easily generated and can be used for propagation models.}
\label{image:path_loss}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\includegraphics[width=4.9cm]{parts/RSSI_combined.jpg}
\label{image:multiple_devices}
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=3.1cm]{parts/wide_area_rssi.jpg}
\label{image:commute_measurements}
\caption{Server-generated overlays of remote RSSI measurements from twelve devices carried by participants over a series of experiments, where each color represents a unique device and each point radius is scaled relative to RSSI value (left) and server generated overlay of RSSI measurements from one device over a wide-area (right).}
\label{image:crowd-source}
\end{figure}
We present these examples to demonstrate the utility of the {Sitara} for conducting distributed spectrum measurement experiments. In Section \ref{section:discussion}, we discuss ways we can adapt our platform to accommodate much more sophisticated experiments.
\subsection{Server-side Processing with GNU Radio}
In this application, we report the capability of the {Sitara} to capture IQ samples from an over-the-air FSK transmission, upload the raw data to a remote server and recover the original message by demodulating the signal in software using GNU Radio. While this may superficially appear to be an unnecessarily complex method of performing a relatively simple demodulation, we present this as a proof of concept and later discuss the compelling implications when extended to future areas of research.
The experimental setup uses two {Sitara}s, one acting as the transmitter, the other as the receiver. The user gives the transmitter a transmit (see Table \ref{table:commands}) command which directs the {Sitara}'s radio to send a short message consisting of a preamble, sync word and user-defined payload, using the CC1200's native 2-FSK modulation format. The receiving {Sitara}, instead of demodulating the signal directly in hardware, is configured to perform a triggered capture command while a carrier signal is detected. Once the sample capture is complete, the IQ samples, consisting of 16 bit integers, are uploaded to the server where further processing occurs. In this case, the measurements are converted to floating point for ease of use with our GNU Radio flow-graph. A plot of the angle samples can be seen in Fig.~\ref{image:multi_signals}. A Python script is generated from the flow-graph which extracts the payload message from the signal after synchronizing on the preamble and sync-word. A screen capture of the GNU Radio flow graph is shown in Fig.~\ref{image:gnuradio}.
Beginning with an initial estimate for sampling rate and frequency offset, an iterative approach is used for symbol timing recover. As this experiment was only for demonstration purposes we opted for a naive implementation for the software receiver.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/gnuradio_flowgraph.png}
\caption{A GNU Radio flow-graph used to generate the 2-FSK demodulator script}
\label{image:gnuradio}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.4cm]{parts/distributed_waveform_capture2.png}
\caption{Waveform phase measurements obtained from a triggered waveform capture using three {Sitara}s}
\label{image:multi_signals}
\end{figure}
Although only one captured signal was needed to demodulate the incoming signal in this case, using multiple {Sitara}s, several copies of the same waveform captured at different geographical locations can be uploaded to the server for more sophisticated signal processing. Fig.~\ref{image:multi_signals} presents example snapshots from such a capture event. Here the waveforms do not appear to be synchronized, but the relative timing information can be recovered using the capture timestamp and correlating between waveforms. This example demonstrates the {Sitara}'s capability to capture an RF signal and upload the data to the server for cloud-based reception. We want to enable experimentation in coordinated mobile multi-antenna reception, using centralized cloud computing, to be able to separate signal from interference and demodulate signals that may not be recoverable from any one receiver alone. Such experiments have been demonstrated to be powerful with static receivers \cite{charm}, and {Sitara} can enable such experiments with crowd-sourced mobile endpoints.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 1,691 |
14969 Віллакатер (14969 Willacather) — астероїд головного поясу, відкритий 28 серпня 1997 року.
Тіссеранів параметр щодо Юпітера — 3,585.
Названо на честь американської письменниці Вілли Катер (, 1873 — 1947).
Примітки
Див. також
Список астероїдів (14901-15000)
Посилання
Інформація про малі планети на сайті minorplanetcenter.net
Астрономічні об'єкти, відкриті 1997
Головний пояс астероїдів | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,651 |
Belaja Glina () ist ein Dorf in der Region Krasnodar (Russland) mit Einwohnern (Stand ).
Geographie
Der Ort liegt im nordöstlichen Kuban-Gebiet im Kaukasusvorland, etwa 190 Kilometer Luftlinie nordöstlich des Regionsverwaltungszentrums Krasnodar am Flüsschen Rassypnaja, in den wenig unterhalb die Mekleta einmündet. Die Rassypnaja ist ein Zufluss des Manytsch-Nebenflusses Jegorlyk.
Belaja Glina ist Verwaltungszentrum des gleichnamigen Rajons Belaja Glina (Beloglinski). Zur Ländlichen Siedlung Belaja Glina gehört noch die kleine Siedlung bei der zehn Kilometer nordwestlich, unmittelbar an der Grenze zur Oblast Rostow gelegenen Bahnstation Mekleta.
Geschichte
Der Ort wurde 1820 von Umsiedlern aus dem Gouvernement Woronesch gegründet. Der Ortsname steht im Russischen für Weißer Ton, nach dem in der Umgebung zu findenden Kaolinitvorkommen.
Zunächst gehörte der Ort zum Gouvernement Stawropol, in dessen äußerstem Nordwesten er lag. Am 2. Juli 1924 wurde Belaja Glina im Rahmen einer Verwaltungsreform Zentrum eines Rajons, der 1937 der Region Krasnodar zugeordnet wurde.
Bevölkerungsentwicklung
Anmerkung: ab 1939 Volkszählungsdaten
Kultur und Sehenswürdigkeiten
Es existiert ein Museum zur Rajon- und Ortsgeschichte. Der Ort besitzt ein Erlebnisbad, den Aquapark "Oasis".
Wirtschaft und Infrastruktur
In Belaja Glina als Zentrum eines Landwirtschaftsgebietes mit Anbau von Getreide und technischen Kulturen sowie Viehzucht gibt es Betriebe der Lebensmittelindustrie sowie der Bauwirtschaft. Im Ort ist der regionale Brennstoffversorger Ametist ansässig, der dort für 2010 die Eröffnung einer kleinen Erdölraffinerie plant.
Der Ort liegt an der 1897 eröffneten Eisenbahnstrecke Wolgograd – Salsk – Tichorezkaja (Stationsname Beloglinskaja; Streckenkilometer 466), die auf diesem Abschnitt von der Nordkaukasische Eisenbahn betrieben wird. Entlang der Bahnstrecke verläuft auch eine Regionalstraße von Tichorezk an der Magistrale M29 nach Salsk in der benachbarten Oblast Rostow.
Söhne und Töchter des Ortes
Wiktor Anpilow (1945–2018), Politiker, Führer der Bewegung Werktätiges Russland (Trudowaja Rossija)
Anatoli Ljapidewski (1908–1983), Generalmajor, Flieger (einer der ersten Helden der Sowjetunion, ausgezeichnet 1934 für die Rettung der Cheliuskin-Besatzung)
Einzelnachweise
Weblinks
Webseite der Rajonverwaltung (russisch)
Ort in der Region Krasnodar | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 290 |
{"url":"https:\/\/www.impan.pl\/pl\/wydawnictwa\/czasopisma-i-serie-wydawnicze\/fundamenta-mathematicae\/all\/159\/2\/111041\/strong-fubini-properties-of-ideals","text":"Wydawnictwa \/ Czasopisma IMPAN \/ Fundamenta Mathematicae \/ Wszystkie zeszyty\n\nStrong Fubini properties of ideals\n\nTom 159 \/ 1999\n\nFundamenta Mathematicae 159 (1999), 135-152 DOI: 10.4064\/fm-159-2-135-152\n\nStreszczenie\n\nLet I and J be \u03c3-ideals on Polish spaces X and Y, respectively. We say that the pair \u27e8I,J\u27e9 has the Strong Fubini Property (SFP) if for every set D \u2286 X\u00d7 Y with measurable sections, if all its sections $D_x = {y: \u27e8x,y\u27e9 \u2208 D}$ are in J, then the sections $D^y = {x: \u27e8x,y\u27e9 \u2208 D}$ are in I for every y outside a set from J (measurable\" means being a member of the \u03c3-algebra of Borel sets modulo sets from the respective \u03c3-ideal). We study the question of which pairs of \u03c3-ideals have the Strong Fubini Property. Since CH excludes this phenomenon completely, sufficient conditions for SFP are always independent of ZFC. \u00a0We show, in particular, that: \u00a0\u2022 if there exists a Lusin set of cardinality the continuum and every set of reals of cardinality the continuum contains a one-to-one Borel image of a non-meager set, then \u27e8MGR(X), J\u27e9 has SFP for every J generated by a hereditary $\u043f^1_1$ (in the Effros Borel structure) family of closed subsets of Y (MGR(X) is the \u03c3-ideal of all meager subsets of X), \u00a0\u2022 if there exists a Sierpi\u0144ski set of cardinality the continuum and every set of reals of cardinality the continuum contains a one-to-one Borel image of a set of positive outer Lebesgue measure, then $\u27e8NULL_\u03bc, J\u27e9$ has SFP if either $J= NULL_\u03bd$ or J is generated by any of the following families of closed subsets of Y ($NULL_\u03bc$ is the \u03c3-ideal of all subsets of X having outer measure zero with respect to a Borel \u03c3-finite continuous measure \u03bc on X): \u00a0(i) all compact sets, \u00a0(ii) all closed sets in $NULL_\u03bd$ for a Borel \u03c3-finite continuous measure \u03bd on Y, \u00a0(iii) all closed subsets of a $\u043f^1_1$ set A \u2286 Y.\n\nAutorzy\n\n\u2022 Ireneusz Rec\u0142aw\n\u2022 Piotr Zakrzewski\n\nPrzeszukaj wydawnictwa IMPAN\n\nZbyt kr\u00f3tkie zapytanie. Wpisz co najmniej 4 znaki.\n\nOd\u015bwie\u017c obrazek","date":"2019-10-15 16:38:15","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.9172004461288452, \"perplexity\": 1374.9273559910569}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": false, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2019-43\/segments\/1570986660067.26\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20191015155056-20191015182556-00415.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
The mission of the Museum of Arts and Design (MAD) is to collect, display, and interpret objects that document contemporary and historic innovation in craft, art, and design. In its exhibitions and educational programs, the Museum celebrates the creative process through which materials are crafted into works that enhance contemporary life.
MAD champions contemporary makers across creative fields, presenting artists, designers, and artisans who apply the highest level of ingenuity and skill to their work. Since the Museum's founding in 1956 by philanthropist and visionary Aileen Osborn Webb, MAD has celebrated all facets of making and the creative processes by which materials are transformed, from traditional techniques to cutting-edge technologies. Today, the Museum's curatorial program builds upon a rich history of exhibitions that emphasize a cross-disciplinary approach to art and design, and reveals the workmanship behind the objects and environments that shape our everyday lives. MAD provides an international platform for practitioners who are influencing the direction of cultural production and driving 21st-century innovation, fostering a participatory setting for visitors to have direct encounters with skilled making and compelling works of art and design.
The Museum first opened its doors in 1956 as the Museum of Contemporary Crafts, with an original mission of recognizing the craftsmanship of contemporary American artists. Nurtured by the vision of philanthropist and craft patron Aileen Osborn Webb, the Museum mounted exhibitions that focused on the materials and techniques associated with craft disciplines.
Click here to learn about the Museum's board of trustees.
Click here to learn about job openings at the Museum.
Email: info@madmuseum.org
Click here to view the Museum's staff list.
Is photography allowed in the Museum? The answers to this question and more can be found at the faq page.
Various spaces in the Museum are available for private events, including our 7th floor, atrium, and our 143-seat theater.
Click here to read more about rental opportunities.
Brian Clarke: The Art of Light
Through Feb 21, 2021
Beth Lipman: Collective Elegy
Through Apr 4, 2021
45 Stories in Jewelry: 1947 to Now
MAD Moments: André Leon Talley and Darren Walker
Virtual K-12 Educators Open House
Jan 22 / 12 PM
Digital Drop-in: Weaving What's to Come
Jan 23 / 10 AM
In the Crafts Abyss: Warped Bead Weaving
In the MAD Loupe: Eleanor Moty's Quiet Elegance | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 5,837 |
\section{Introduction}
Constraint programming (CP) is successfully used in solving combinatorial problems.
In CP, problems are modeled as constraint satisfaction problems (CSP), often
NP hard.
Due to their intractability, CP solvers combine constraint solving
with a search strategy to instantiate variables.
A good search strategy can significantly reduce the size of the search space
giving faster problem solving.
Many variable search heuristics, e.g.~\textit{ddeg/dom}~\cite{bessiere96mac,Smith98ddeg},
\textit{wdeg/dom}~\cite{boussemart04boosting},
\textit{impact}~\cite{refalo04impact},
\textit{activity}~\cite{michel12activity}
and \textit{corr}~\cite{corr2017}, have been proposed.
However, choosing a heuristic from the
many existing variable ordering heuristics
which works well for a particular problem instance
or family is not simple. It may require expertise or experience.
A wrong (choice of) heuristic may mean that the solving time is slower
by several orders of magnitude, e.g.,
the \textit{activity} heuristic can be more than 100X faster than
\textit{wdeg/dom} for some nurse-rostering problem instances,
but can be slower for other benchmarks like radiation therapy
\cite{michel12activity}.
By the nature of heuristics, no heuristic always outperforms another.
In order to provide an efficient solution to a problem,
specific search heuristics may need to be used,
requiring considerable effort in choosing/designing
the heuristics for good performance.
A drawback of an individual heuristic is that it may only make a good decision at a certain solving state of a problem, e.g.~some heuristic may only perform well at a certain search depth, but not for the whole solving process.
To address this challenge, we propose automatic and adaptive CSP
search heuristics.
Our approach is motivated by the multi-armed bandit (MAB)
problem~\cite{Gittins:1989} in reinforcement learning.
We consider the search heuristic choice as selecting dynamically from
several candidate variable ordering heuristics during search.
Each choice of search heuristic is akin to selecting an action
(arm) in the MAB.
Failures from a search node are turned into rewards for the choice made
which affect subsequent choices.
The idea is that learning from the rewards of choosing a particular
heuristic will reduce making poor choices and in turn lead to a
search heuristic which is more robust.
We adapt two MAB algorithms, Thompson Sampling~\cite{mabts1933} and UCB1 (upper confidence bound)~\cite{mabucb12002} with reward functions to select the ``best arm'', i.e.~``variable ordering heuristic''.
Our variable heuristics learn from information collected
during the solving of the particular problem.
Thus, learning is {\em online} and differs from
supervised learning approaches which require training examples and
an offline training solving phase.
We study the performance of the original heuristics and our MAB-based heuristics
on a variety of benchmark families.
We also compare with a purely stochastic baseline method that randomly
selects a candidate heuristic at each node during search.
Preliminary experiments show that our proposed adaptive learning techniques are more robust than the original heuristics with less variance for different classes of problems and instances.
Our online adaptive heuristics also outperforms the original heuristics
on many problem instances.
Making CP solvers black box and robust is highly desirable.
This paper is a step in this direction as the solver can determine
the search strategy rather than being specified in the constraint
model while still giving good performance.
\subsection{Related work}\label{sec:ref}
Adaptive CSP search strategies using machine learning techniques have been studied in CP.
One distinguishing factor is whether an offline training phase is used.
Portfolio methods employ offline training, using the learned training
to select a solving strategy, which could be a search algorithm or a heuristic,
when solving a particular problem instance.
Some portfolio approaches are CPHydra~\cite{cphydra2008} and Proteus~\cite{proteus2014}.
In addition,
some approaches learn and generate new solving strategies in the offline phase, e.g.~\cite{epstein2007,xu2009}.
Online learning approaches differ in that they do not
include a static learning phase before solving a problem.
For example, the Monte-Carlo tree search based method in \cite{mcstbandit2013}
tries to expand the most promising nodes with online learning.
The score function of the value heuristic is learned using a
linear regression method in~\cite{Chu2015}. Bachiri et al.~\cite{Bachiri15}
propose to learn the rewards of nodes and use the rewards to
guide the search to backtrack to certain nodes.
A recent work on adaptive search heuristics is the parallel strategies selection (PSS) approach~\cite{pss2016}.
PSS first decomposes the CSP into a large number sub-problems.
As the sub-problems are independent, parallelism can be readily used.
Sampling is used with parallel solving to select a heuristic and
the remaining sub-problems are solved in parallel with the heuristic.
The closest work is Balafrej et al.~\cite{paparrizou2015} which proposes
a MAB framework to select different levels of propagation during search.
They use the UCB1 algorithm to adaptively select the consistency level
at each node of the search tree.
In their experiments on binary CSPs, they show that learning can find when
higher consistencies than arc consistency should be employed during search.
Our work differs in that we adapt their MAB framework
for the problem of selecting search heuristics dynamically
and our experiments are on non-binary CSPs.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:pre}
A constraint network $\mathcal{P}$ (CSP) is a pair $\mathcal{(X,C)}$ where
$\mathcal{X}$ is a set of $n$ variables $\{x_1, \ldots, x_n\}$ and
$\mathcal{C}$ a set of $e$ constraints $\{c_1,\ldots,c_e\}$. $D(x)$ is
the domain of $x \in \mathcal{X}$.
Each $c \in \mathcal C$ involves two
components: a scope ($scp(c)$) which is an ordered subset of variables
of $\mathcal X$; and a relation over the scope ($rel(c)$). Given
\emph{scp}($c$) = $\{x_{i_1}, \dots, x_{i_r}\}$, $rel(c)$ $\subseteq$
$\prod_{j=1}^{r}$ $D(x_{i_j})$ represents the set of satisfying
combinations of values for the variables in $scp(c)$.
We define {\em degree} of variable $x$ to be the number of constraints that $x$ belongs to.
The \emph{arity} of $c$ is $|scp(c)|$.
A binary CSP is of arity 2, while a non-binary CSP has constraints with arity $> 2$.
A \emph{solution} to
$\mathcal{P}$ is an assignment to all variables in $\mathcal{X}$ such that every constraint is satisfied.
Constraint solvers typically explore the solution space
by instantiating variables in some order.
Usually, a variable ordering heuristic defines a score function,
instantiating the variable with highest score at each search node.
Static variable ordering heuristics compute variable scores before search,
thus variable ordering is static.
Dynamic ones update scores and tune the variable ordering dynamically during search.
In practice, most of the successful variable ordering heuristics are dynamic ones, including \textit{ddeg/dom}~\cite{bessiere96mac,Smith98ddeg}, \textit{wdeg/dom}~\cite{boussemart04boosting}, \textit{impact}~\cite{refalo04impact}, and \textit{activity}~\cite{michel12activity}.
The \textit{ddeg/dom} and \textit{wdeg/dom} heuristics take the degrees and the current domain sizes of variables as parameters
to the score functions.
In \textit{ddeg/dom}, a variable's score is the value of its current degree divided by the variable's current domain size.
The current degree of a variable is the number of constraints, involving the variable, whose non-instantiated variables are more than one.
This is extended to weighted degree in
\textit{wdeg/dom}, a variable's score is the values of its weighted degree divided by variable's current domain size.
The weighted degree of a variable is the number of accumulated failures of the constraints which the variable belongs to.
The \textit{impact} heuristic selects the most influential variable which has made the most search space reduction in the space have been explored.
The \textit{activity} heuristic measures activity, i.e.~how often a variable's domain is filtered by constraint propagation, selecting the most active.
The multi-armed bandit problem~\cite{Gittins:1989} comes from slot machines (one-armed bandit).
A player chooses a slot machine from multiple ones (multi-armed bandit) to maximize the total expected payoffs or rewards for a sequence of plays.
In MAB, an important consideration is the tradeoff between
{\em exploration} and {\em exploitation}.
An MAB algorithm should
exploit the actions with maximal rewards. However, without
exploring other actions enough, the algorithm may lose the
opportunity for finding better actions. Thus, an MAB algorithm
balances between exploration and exploitation.
One way is to minimize the cumulative regret.
Two of the successful and well-known MAB algorithms are the \textit{Thompson Sampling} (TS) algorithm~\cite{mabts1933} and the \textit{Upper Confidence Bound algorithm} UCB1~\cite{mabucb12002}.
Thompson sampling is one of the earliest algorithms and easy to implement.
In practice, UCB1 is widely used for MAB due to its simplicity.
It guarantees a logarithmic increase in regret.
We apply these algorithms to our problem
because of recent promising results~\cite{paparrizou2015,phillips2015efficient}
and due to their simplicity.
They can also be used as a standard baseline~\cite{mabucb12002,NIPS2011_4321}.
\section{Multi-armed bandit for adaptive search}\label{sec:mab}
We consider the problem of selecting a variable ordering heuristic to pick
which variable to explore in the search tree to be analogous to the
multi-armed bandit (MAB) problem.
We map the automatic selection of variable ordering heuristics as
a multi-armed bandit problem as follows.
We define a set of $\mathcal{K}$ arms $\{\mathcal{L}_1, \ldots,\mathcal{L}_k\}$ where each arm $\mathcal{L}_i$ corresponds to one candidate heuristic.
MAB algorithms aim to maximize the total rewards and take actions based on
the reward of each arm.
We can determine the rewards during search, thus,
a \textit{reward} $R_i(j)$ is associated with each arm $i\in[1,k]$
at each node $j$ in the search tree.
While solving CSPs, we would like to explore the solution space more
quickly. One strategy is to try to make the search tree smaller.
Note that the propagators are fixed during search since the propagators
come from the constraints of the problem.
Thus, we define the rewards of candidate heuristics taken at each search node to be based on the number of children of the node.
\subsection{MAB-based adaptive search framework}
In this paper, we propose a generic MAB-based search framework
and adapt two specific MAB algorithms,
Thompson Sampling and Upper Confidence Bound 1,
to this framework.
Our MAB search framework adapts MAB algorithm
for the problem of dynamic selection of heuristics during backtracking
search in CSP solving as follows:
\begin{enumerate
\item (\prog{initialize}) Initialize data structures of the MAB algorithm before search starts.\label{case:1}
\item (\prog{chooseArm}) For each unexplored search node, first use the MAB algorithm to select a heuristic (an arm) and bind the selected heuristic to the node.
Then use the selected heuristic to instantiate variables at the node.
\item (\prog{update}) Once search backtracks from a child node to its parent, which indicates that the child node is fully explored, update the mean rewards of the heuristic bound to the child node.
\end{enumerate}
The main question is how to define the rewards for the MAB.
Our aim is to speed up solving by reducing the size of the
explored search tree.
As we select a heuristic at each search node, we will define the
reward of the heuristic to be based on observations of the node.
We propose to use the number of children of each search node to
estimate the exploration of each search node since
search cost is usually correlated with the number of choices from a node.
Thus, we set the reward of the heuristic taken at a certain search node
to be based on the number of children of that node.
We emphasize that at each search node, only one heuristic is taken.
Thus, the MAB selection of the choice of heuristic is performed
only once at a node.
Some of the underlying heuristics used (in arm selection)
may the scores of variables in some accumulated fashion during search, e.g.~\textit{wdeg/dom} counts the accumulated number of failures.
So the scores of variables for all the relevant heuristics need to be maintained at each search node during search.
When search backtracks from a child node $j$ to its parent node,
we compute the rewards of the heuristic taken at node $j$ and update
the rewards of the particular heuristic and other parameters depending
of the particular MAB algorithm during the execution of the update step.
\subsection{Thompson adaptive search}\label{sec:ts}
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\DontPrintSemicolon
\textbf{procedure} \prog{initialize}()\;
\Begin{
\For{$i \in \{1 \ldots k \} $}{
$R_i^{ts} \leftarrow 0$, $R_{best}^{ts}[i] \leftarrow 0$ \;
$\alpha_i \leftarrow 1$, $\beta_i \leftarrow 1$\;
}
}
\textbf{procedure} \prog{chooseArm}() \;
\Begin{
\For{$i \in \{1 \ldots k \} $}{
\tcp{sample from the distribution}
$\rho[i] \sim Beta(\alpha_i,\beta_i)$\;
}
\textbf{return} arm $i$ s.t.~$\rho[i]=max\{\rho[1], \ldots, \rho[k]\}$\;
}
\textbf{procedure} \prog{update}(i, r)\;
\Begin{
$R_i^{ts} \leftarrow r$ \;
\nl \eIf{$R_i^{ts} \geq R_{best}^{ts}[i]$}{ \label{alg:ts:l1}
$R_{best}^{ts}[i]\leftarrow R_i^{ts}$ \;
$\alpha_i \leftarrow \alpha_i + 1$\;
}{
$\beta_i \leftarrow \beta_i + 1$\;
}
}
\caption{Thompson Sampling}\label{alg:ts}
\end{algorithm}
Thompson sampling (TS) is an MAB algorithm which maintains a beta distribution
for the reward of each arm \cite{mabts1933,NIPS2011_4321},
where arms are pulled randomly
according to their probabilities of being optimal.
The idea is that the reward is based on the number of
direct choices made from a variable selected at node $j$ in the search tree.
The rationale is to make the reward more position dependent compared with
sub-tree size which varies depending on position.
However, we employ the usual 2-way branching for search
(i.e. left branch ($x = a$), right branch ($x \neq a$))
so the node degree is not the desired number of children.
We define the ({\em effective}) {\em number of children} of node $j$, $C(j)$
as follows. When node $j$ fails, $C(j)$ is the number of left branches along the right most
failed path in the sub-tree from node $j$.
To make larger rewards better,
we take the inverse value of $C(j)$ to be the reward $R^{ts}(j)$ of the heuristic at node $j$:
\begin{equation}\label{equa:tsreward}
R^{ts}(j) = 1/C(j)
\end{equation}
Algorithm~\ref{alg:ts} is the TS algorithm applied
to our MAB adaptive search framework,
with a simple an efficient implementation.
The functions \prog{initialize}(), \prog{chooseArm}(), \prog{update}() correspond to the
three steps in the framework.
In \prog{initialize}(), we initialize the two parameters $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ for each MAB selector to be 1, so the beta distribution starts as a
uniform distribution.
The mean rewards $R_i^{ts}$ and best rewards $R_{best}^{ts}[i]$ of each arm
$i$ are initialized to $0$.
We call \prog{chooseArm}() to select the heuristic before exploring a search node.
In \prog{chooseArm}(), we draw a sample from each arm's beta distribution and choose the arm with maximum sample value.
Once the arm is selected, the algorithm applies the selected heuristic to instantiate variables and explore the search node.
When a backtrack happens, we compute the reward $r$ for arm $i$, and update the beta distribution of arm $i$ in function \prog{update}(i, r).
We compare an arm's current reward with its best reward seen so far (line~\ref{alg:ts:l1}).
If $r$ improves or equals the current best reward $R_{best}^{ts}[i]$ of arm $i$, i.e.~arm $i$ explored the fewest number of children at current node,
we consider as a success trial and increase $\alpha_i$ in the $Beta$
distribution by $1$,
otherwise it is a failed trial, increasing $\beta_i$ by $1$.
\subsection{UCB1 adaptive search}\label{sec:ucb1}
UCB1 \cite{mabucb12002} is designed to give
an expected logarithmic growth of regret.
In UCB1, the MAB selector pulls the arm, arm $i$,
which maximizes the value of $\rho(i)$ according to the following function:
\begin{equation}\label{ucb1}
\rho(i) = R_i + \sqrt{2 log(m)/m_i}
\end{equation}
In Equation \ref{ucb1}, $R_i$ is the mean of the past reward of arm $i$, $m_i$ is the number of past trials of arm $i$ and $m$ is the total number of trials that have been done.
So the first term $R_i$ promotes the arm gaining more rewards in the past,
while the second term is for exploration by encouraging the arms which
have been less frequently applied.
Typically, each constraint in a CSP can be thought of as mapping to
a propagator in the solver and each propagator has a certain level of
consistency, e.g., generalised arc consistency, bounds consistency, etc.
Since the size of search tree, the number of explored nodes, can
dominate the solving time of solving a CSP solutions where the consistency level of propagation is fixed, we define a reward function which depends
on the ability of the heuristic (arm) in reducing the search space.
The reward $R_i(j)$ for arm $i$ at search node $j$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{equa:mabreward}
R_i(j) = 1 - C(j)/{max_{m=1..j}(C(m))}
\end{equation}
Our reward is inspired by ~\cite{paparrizou2015} but
uses the number of effective children of a node versus
CPU time of sub-tree and a uniform selector.
In our framework for UCB1, the mean reward $R_i$ is initialized as 0 in
the \prog{initialize}() procedure.
Before backtracking, all candidate heuristics are selected in a
round robin fashion, because rewards are only updated when a backtrack happens.
This setting follows the second term of UCB Equation (\ref{ucb1}).
There is also the possibility of customizing the initial mean rewards
of different arms to make the selection biased towards some heuristic
in cases where certain heuristics may be known to give good results for
certain problems.
Before exploring a search node, the MAB arm-select procedure \prog{chooseArm}()
selects an arm which maximizes $\rho(i)$ in Equation (\ref{ucb1}),
then the chosen heuristic from the arm is used to explore the tree node.
When search backtracks from node $j$, the rewards of the heuristic $i$
used at $j$ is computed using Equation (\ref{equa:mabreward})
as in procedure \prog{update}() to update the mean reward of arm $i$.
\subsection{Dynamic UCB1 and TS search}\label{sec:ts}
The TS and UCB1 algorithms are meant for when the distribution of rewards
during search are fixed, i.e. a stationary probability distribution.
We can take the view that rewards could vary over time during search, thus,
we propose to apply a non-stationary form of TS and UCB1, which consider the rewards of the most recent $K$ search nodes dynamically.
A non-stationary form of the UCB algorithm, sliding-window UCB,
was proposed in ~\cite{swucb2011}. We also apply the sliding-window
form of UCB to TS.
This gives us two dynamic adaptive heuristic variants
with window size $K$: UCB1-$K$ and TS-$K$.
In our UCB1-$K$ (TS-$K$) algorithm during search, we first check the number of explored search nodes. When this number is less and equal than $K$, UCB1-$K$ (TS-$K$) is the same as UCB1 (TS); and when the number is greater than $K$, we only take the most recent $K$ search nodes into consideration. Specifically, for UCB-$K$, the value of $R_i$ and $m_i$ in Equation (\ref{ucb1}) are based on the recent $K$ nodes, and $m$ equals $K$.
Similarly, for TS-$K$, the value of $R_{best}^{ts}[i]$, $\alpha_i$, and $\beta_i$ are also from the recent $K$ nodes. Note that $R_i$ and $m_i$ of UCB1-$K$ can be updated in constant time, while
$R_{best}^{ts}[i]$ needs a priority queue to find the minimum within logarithmic time in the worst-case. Thus the overhead of TS-$K$ is more that of the UCB1-$K$.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:exp}
We present experiments to evaluate our MAB inspired search
heuristics.
Our aim is to investigate if the MAB-based heuristics are more robust than
the original ones. We also want to investigate the overall performance
of all the tested heuristics.
We compare our MAB-based methods with
the candidate variable search heuristics used
as choices with the MAB algorithms.
Thus, the candidate search heuristics are one baseline.
We also compare with another straightforward baseline stochastic strategy,
\textit{random-arm}, which chooses one heuristic from the candidate ones
randomly at each search node.
Note that random-arm is different from a pure random heuristic which
instantiates variables randomly.
In the TS and UCB1-based methods, we employ only a single MAB selector
for the whole search tree.
An alternative is to have multiple MAB selectors for each search level.
Preliminary experiments on MAB with multiple search level selectors
did not show them to be superior to a single selector.
We have omitted the results due to lack of space.
In the evaluation, the TS and random-arm methods are stochastic, while
UCB1 and the four baseline heuristics are deterministic.
\begin{table*}[!th]
\centering
\small
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.5pt}
{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|} \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{ } & \scriptsize{ddeg/dom} & \scriptsize{wdeg/dom} & \scriptsize{impact} & \scriptsize{activity}& \scriptsize{UCB1} & \scriptsize{UCB1-100} &\scriptsize{UCB1-500} &\scriptsize{TS} & \scriptsize{TS-100} &\scriptsize{TS-500} & \scriptsize{random-arm} \\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\scriptsize{\#solved instance}} & 311 &311&314& 311&323& 318 &316&324&322&\textbf{328}& 317 \\\hline
{\scriptsize{runtime}} &{ \scriptsize{mean}} & 44.3&43.3&13.9&6.4&\textbf{3.5}&7.9&7.2&15.4&8.3&5.1&12.6\\
{\scriptsize{ratios}} & \scriptsize{standard dev.} & 332.1&331.5&31.3&25.4&\textbf{9.1}&40.2&34.9&96.6&34.9&12.2&53.5 \\
{\scriptsize{to}} & \scriptsize{geomean} & 2.3&2.5&4.8&2.3&\textbf{2.1}&2.4&2.3&3.1&2.9&2.7&3.5 \\
{\scriptsize{VBS}} & \scriptsize{maximum} & 4607.8&4619.1&298.7&308.4&\textbf{120.7}&553.9&452.7&1348.6&416.5&136.6&516.9
\\\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Overall results for all search heuristics.\label{exp-overall}}
\end{table*}
We evaluate our search heuristics on a variety of
structured and unstructured problems,
to investigate the search behavior across a range of problems.
The benchmarks are from the CSP solver competition
({\small \tt \url{http://www.cril.univ-artois.fr/CSC09}}).
We use 363 problem instances from 15 problem series.\footnote{Instances that are solved with no search or those where all heuristics timeout are ignored.
Note that applying SAC at the root node can solve some problems
without search.
}
The structured problems are: traveling salesman (TSP), costas array, resource constrained project scheduling (RCPSP), balanced incomplete block designs (BIBD), all-interval, golomb ruler, crossword, FPGA, ssa and modified-renault.
The unstructured problems are the hard random ones: rand3-20-20, rand3-20-20-fcd, rand8-20-5, dagrand, and half.
The benchmark CSPs are all non-binary (but can have some binary constraints)
and chosen to have diverse constraints,
including extensional (table), intensional and also global constraints.
The experiments were run on a 3.40GHz Intel i7-4770 machine.
\begin{figure}[!th]
\centering
\hspace*{-5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{allyx.pdf}
\hspace*{-3.3cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{allratios.pdf}
\hspace*{-5cm}
\hspace*{-5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{allyxmab.pdf}
\hspace*{-3.3cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{allratios100plusmab.pdf}
\hspace*{-5cm}
\caption{Distribution of runtime and runtime ratios to VBS. \label{fig:graph1}}
\end{figure}
We use the AbsCon solver ({\small \tt \url{https://www.cril.univ-artois.fr/~lecoutre/software.html}})
for its versatility as a blackbox solver:
many propagation algorithms and heuristics are implemented and selectable.
We focus on search heuristics and their relative effectiveness in the experiments, thus the consistency levels and propagators for constraints are
the AbsCon defaults.\footnote{The default consistency is Generalized Arc Consistency.}
We employ a full initialization of variable impact and activity at the root node of the search tree using the singleton arc consistency~\cite{sac2000} propagator SAC3~\cite{sac32005} in AbsCon which is needed to
initialise the activity and impact heuristics.
In order to ensure that search starts from the same state for different solving strategies, we apply the SAC3 propagation at the root node for all methods. The overhead of this initialization is negligible.
CPU time is limited to 1800 seconds per instance and
memory to 8GB.
In our experiments, we employ the four well-known and commonly used variable ordering heuristics (discussed previously): $ddeg/dom$,
$wdeg/dom$, \textit{impact}, and \textit{activity}.
We use these heuristics as the candidates (arms) of the MAB methods
and also for random-arm.
As we focus on investigating variable heuristics, we use the
same lexicographic value heuristic (\textit{lexico}) for
all cases.
\subsection{Overall results}
To investigate robustness, we can measure performance with respect
to the best runtime (Virtual Best Solver (VBS)) per instance as
the runtime ratio to VBS, i.e. runtime/(VBS runtime).
In order to compute the runtime ratios of all heuristics, we ignore
an instance if there is one evaluated heuristic which cannot solve the instance
within the timeout.
Thus, the runtime ratios are computed based on 256
(out of 363) instances that are solved by all heuristics.
Table~\ref{exp-overall} gives the overall statistics (arithmetic and geometric
mean, standard deviation, maximum) of all search heuristics
using their runtime ratios.
We see that UCB1 is the most robust with the smallest
standard deviation and maximum ratio with respect to the VBS runtime.
UCB1 also has the smallest mean ratio of 3.5 to VBS.
The maximum ratio of UCB1 is 120.7, which is about 38X smaller than \textit{ddeg/dom} and \textit{wdeg/dom}.
This shows that the baseline heuristics can give highly variable results
highlighting the importance of robust heuristics.
We see that TS-500 solves the most problems, slightly more than UCB1,
but has higher means and standard deviation.
The graphs in Fig.~\ref{fig:graph1} show the
overall runtime distribution. The top two graphs are for individual heuristics and non-dynamic MAB-search while the bottom two graphs are
for the dynamic MAB-search methods.
The graphs on the the left are based on all 363 instances as they use solving
time while the graphs on the right use the runtime ratio to VBS
and are based on 256 instances solved by all search heuristics.
Each point (x, y) in the left graphs shows that the technique solves x
instances within y seconds\footnote{
Note that the y coordinate represents the runtime of each individual x instance, not the total runtime of all x instances.
}
while each point (x, y) in the right graphs shows that the technique solves x instances within y times of the VBS runtime.
From Table \ref{exp-overall}, we saw that UCB1 had good robustness,
the runtime distribution in Fig.~\ref{fig:graph1} show that
UCB1 (red line) also has the best overall result for the majority of
instances.
We highlight that the MAB methods have higher overheads
as they also include the overhead of maintaining the rewards of the
heuristic taken at each search node, as well as the variable scores of the unselected heuristics, whereas the underlying heuristics do not have this overhead.
The runtime of the TS method is also robust.
In both of the graphs in Fig.~\ref{fig:graph1}, the lines for TS
are closer to the best search strategies compared with the worst ones.
We also see a surprising result.
The simple random-arm heuristic is not the worst strategy,
which might not be expected a priori, and can beat some of the original
baseline heuristics.
We observe that the random-arm method choosing among the baseline heuristics
results in some robustness but as it does not have any exploitation,
it has worse overall performance.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\hspace*{-5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rand320yx.pdf}\hspace*{-3.7cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{lexvgyx.pdf}
\hspace*{-3.7cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{bibdyx.pdf} \label{fig:subb1}
\hspace*{-3.7cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rcpspyx.pdf}
\label{fig:subb2}
\hspace*{-5cm}
\caption{Runtime distribution for benchmark series rand3-20-20-fcd, dagrand, crossword-lexVg, RCPSP, BIBD and FPGA. All FPGA instances timeout under the $ddeg/dom$ heuristic, thus there are no points in the FPGA graph for $ddeg/dom$.\label{fig:graph2}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{1.0\textwidth}{
\hspace*{-5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vsddeg17.pdf}\hspace*{-3.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vswdeg17.pdf}
\hspace*{-3.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vsimpact17.pdf}\hspace*{-3.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vsact17.pdf}
\hspace*{-5cm} }\centering \caption{UCB1 vs. individual candidate heuristics}\label{fig:graph3:a}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{1.0\textwidth}{
\hspace*{-5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vsucb110017.pdf}\hspace*{-3.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vsts50017.pdf}
\hspace*{-3.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{ucb1vsrandom17.pdf}\hspace*{-3.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{tsvsrandom17.pdf}
\hspace*{-5cm}
\label{fig:graph3a}}\centering \caption{Comparison of MAB search strategies} \label{fig:graph3:b}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Runtime comparison of MAB methods, individual candidate heuristics, and random heuristic on all instances.\label{fig:graph3}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Robustness by benchmark series}
The graphs in Fig.~\ref{fig:graph2} present in detail the runtime distribution
of four specific problem series showing that the MAB methods are
robust--especially the UCB1 strategy.
Dynamic MAB methods are not given to avoid cluttering the
graph as they were not as good overall as UCB1 on these series.
Fig.~\ref{fig:graph2} illustrates that the baseline heuristics while being
good on some series are not robust.
For example, if we ignore the UCB1 method, $ddeg/dom$ and the $wdeg/dom$ are the best two variable heuristics for rand3-20-20 and rand3-20-20-fcd, and the worst is the $impact$ heuristic.
However for RCPSP, the result is just the opposite that $impact$ is much better than $ddeg/dom$ and $wdeg/dom$.
We also see large differences between different heuristics for other problems.
For example, in BIBD, the $ddeg/dom$ heuristic is faster than $activity$ by several orders of magnitude, but for the FPGA problem, $ddeg/dom$ does not solve any instance (graph for FPGA is not given for space reasons).
This highlights the importance of having a robust heuristic.
We compare the runtime of different methods in pairs in Fig.~\ref{fig:graph3}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:graph3}(\subref{fig:graph3:a}) compares the runtime of UCB1
with individual heuristics.
The points located on the top and right boundaries are
instances which timeout
on the individual heuristics and UCB1 respectively.
We can see that there are more points above the $x=y$ line
including timeout points,
indicating that UCB1 is faster than the compared heuristic.
Furthermore, we see that the points in the upper portion are further away from the $x=y$ line than the points in the bottom portion, e.g.
most UCB1 points are within the 10x (dotted) line while
$wdeg/dom$ have many points outside the 10x line.
This shows that when $wdeg/dom$ is slower than UCB1, it is much slower;
but when UCB1 is slower, the slowdown is lesser.
We see a similar trend in the other graphs.
Similarly, Fig.~\ref{fig:graph3}(\subref{fig:graph3:b}) gives the runtime
of UCB1 compared with the dynamic MAB methods UCB1-100 and TS-500,
and also UCB1 and TS compared with the random-arm.
The graphs of "UCB1 vs. UCB1-100" and "UCB1 vs. TS-500" show that UCB1 is better than the dynamic UCB1-100, but close to TS-500.
The graphs of UCB1 and TS versus random-arm
show that learning is effective.
Note that UCB1 is deterministic while TS and random-arm are stochastic.
\subsection{The frequency of candidate heuristics}
We investigate the frequency of candidate heuristics of MAB search and
its correlation with the performance of the candidate heuristic on various
problems.
Fig.~\ref{fig:graph5} gives the mean frequency of application of each heuristic
when solving a benchmark series by UCB1 and TS.
We see that UCB1 and TS can automatically differentiate between different
heuristics.
A correlation can be seen between the performance of individual heuristic and
its application frequency in the MAB-based method.
For example, in rand3-20-20 and rand3-20-20-fcd, the worst heuristic as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:graph2}, is $impact$ which is used the least frequently.
However as our MAB-based methods are online,
such a correlation is not always the case, e.g.~for BIBD $activity$
is the worst heuristic but is the most frequent heuristic applied
in UCB1 and TS.
We can also see that the frequency of heuristics used in the MAB-based
algorithms vary significantly which suggests some
complex interaction with the search process.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\hspace{-2cm}
{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ucb1-cts-histogram17.pdf}
\vspace{-2mm}
\vspace*{-3mm}
\hspace{-2cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ts-cts-histogram17.pdf}}
\label{fig:subb9}
\caption{Frequency of candidate heuristics applied in the MAB-methods. \label{fig:graph5}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Discussion on PSS}\label{sec:exp:mabpss}
Recently, parallel strategies selection (PSS)
was shown to be a promising approach for selecting search heuristics
\cite{pss2016}.
PSS is quite different from online or supervised learning based methods.
Firstly, it exploits that a CSP can be decomposed into a large number
of sub-problems which are independent and hence parallelism can be
easily exploited.
Secondly, it uses a statistical sampling approach,
sampling sub-problems to choose the heuristic.
As PSS exploits a large parallelism factor from independent parallelism,
it is not comparable with sequential methods.
Most works on search heuristics are sequential as is this paper.
However, PSS was shown to work well, hence, we also investigate PSS although
it is not learning-based.
We implemented a form of PSS, sequential PSS (sPSS),
which is PSS with a parallelism factor of one.
This allows decomposition and sampling strategies to be compared
independently of the parallelism.
For space reasons, we summarize the results.
We found on our benchmarks that sPSS is much slower than the MAB method
especially on unsatisfiable problems.
This is because all the sampled subproblems and the remainder subproblems
have to be solved and there is no super-linear speedup from parallelism.
Preliminary experiments show that the total number of explored search nodes
of all subproblems of sPSS can be much more than that of MAB heuristics, e.g.~for rand3-20-20-1, the total search nodes of sPSS is 507K while the search nodes of MAB-UCB1 is 73K. This makes the sPSS much slower than MAB and also other individual search heuristics.
We also found that sometimes the decomposed subproblems are too easy,
with few search nodes, which makes the solver initialization overhead
more significant in the sequential case.
For example, the mean number of search nodes of each subproblem of the
unsatisfiable instance ruler-34-9-a4 is 8.4, although the total number of search nodes of all subproblems is close to that of UCB1.
As such the total runtime of sPSS is 116.8s, compared with 6.9s of UCB1.
We also found that the performance of sPSS approach can depend greatly
on the decomposition, which suggests that sPSS not as robust as our MAB methods.
We caution that sPSS is not PSS and comparing sequential versus parallel
algorithms is tricky.
One results illustrate the expected behavior that sequential solving
of sub-problems independently can fall into the unlucky cases that
satisfiable subproblems are only selected late in execution.
As such to benefit from the PSS approach,
one should have sufficient parallelism, consistent with \cite{pss2016}.
We also note that our sPSS implementation is only preliminary
and can possibly be more efficient.
\section{Conclusion}
We propose a bandit-based approach which applies various variable heuristics automatically during CSP solving.
Unlike independent heuristics, which explores the search space only based on a
single approach (e.g.~score function), our method considers several
individual heuristics together and learns to apply better ones dynamically
during search in an online fashion.
Experiments show that our MAB methods are more robust than the original
heuristics and can also give better performance.
Search heuristics for CSPs has been investigated extensively, e.g.~utilizing the failures of constraints in $wdeg/dom$, or measuring the \textit{activity} of variables during propagation.
However the combination of various heuristics deserves more study as
the solving can benefit from applying different heuristics according to
a different status of the problem during search.
Our MAB-based learning methods shows promise in this direction.
Making a CP solver automatic and as ``black box'' as possible is highly
desirable.
Our experiments show that an automatic search strategy
within the solver can be robust with good performance on many problems.
In contrast, the common practice for performance requires
the model or constraint program to provide a good search strategy.
However, manual search heuristic selection may require
expert knowledge with extensive tuning effort.
It would be interesting to combine online search heuristic selection with
propagator selection. To be general, the solver should have
non-binary propagators of different consistencies which may be interesting
for global constraints.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by MOE2015-T2-1-117.
\input{mab.bbl}
\end{document}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 8,671 |
Omskolning genom arbete (pinyin láodòng jiàoyǎng) är en i Kina förekommande åtgärd mot individer som anses ha begått mindre allvarliga brott, alternativt gärningar som inte nödvändigtvis är brott i juridisk mening, men som gränsar till att vara det. Polisen kan besluta om en sådan åtgärd, och då det formellt inte räknas som ett straff behövs ingen rättegång. Den maximala tiden för omskolning genom arbete är tre år, men det kan förlängas med ett år om det anses nödvändigt. Personer som är föremål för omskolning genom arbete vistas i särskilda omskolningsläger utanför det traditionella fängelsesystemet, och utför straffarbete. Systemet med omskolning genom arbete infördes formellt 1957. Systemet, både vad avser levnadsförhållandena i lägren, rättssäkerheten för de intagna och de gärningar som kan medföra omskolning genom arbete, har kritiserats av ett flertal människorättsorganisationer.
Källor
Kinas rättsväsen
Mänskliga rättigheter
Tvångsarbete
WP:Projekt Kina | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 4,264 |
New York Times contributing columnist Roxane Gay delivered a keynote address in celebration of Smith College's Otelia Cromwell Day; a holiday commemorating the achievements of Smith College's first African American graduate.
Following the performance the Co-Chair of the Otelia Cromwell Day Planning Committee, Kim Alson, spoke. She gave a speech on the life and accomplishments of Cromwell.
Audience members then watched the short award-winning video, "The Life and Legacy of Otelia Cromwell," which chronicled her life and the Smith College holiday bearing her namesake.
Gay began the talk by speaking to the problems she finds when people discuss the issue of diversity.
Gay retold the story of how shocked she felt the day after the 2016 election. She recalled how she refused to get out of bed the next morning, despite text messages she received from her mother telling her everything would be alright.
She spoke on how she regretted the fact that she was not more public with her support for Hillary Clinton, and detailed her fear to admit how much she supported her.
After the election, Gay said she focused on what to do in what she calls "The Age of American Disgrace." She read a long list of controversial acts that have been issued under the Trump Administration, such as the immigration ban, his verbal attacks on Black women and his behavior on Twitter.
Gay disagreed with this phrase, calling it something that millions of people who had no understanding of the world would utter.
She spoke about the reactions from liberal white Americans who were outraged by the result of the election. Gay said that a lot of the sentiment expressed by white, liberal Americans during this time were of shame, which she believed was counterintuitive.
As her speech came to a close, Gay touched upon issues of diversity, identity politics and alliance-building, which she refers to as a "comfortable distance." She also stressed the importance of participating and focusing on local politics.
At the end of the keynote address members of the audience were given the opportunity to ask questions.
Lorretta Ross, co-founder and national coordinator of the SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, asked Gay to speak about the "white tribalism" of the left, and how white liberals have thrown out discussion of identity politics to focus on the economic anxiety.
"White people on the left, especially those who are into politics, are using identity politics as an offering and say 'Hey, we're going to blame identity politics and get on board with Bernie Sanders and economic populism, so that we can get forward, and then we'll come back to you,'" Gay said.
What about white working class? What about white conservative social workers? I love that there is always a victim card for everyone but white working class. It is ok to be white! I am now glad Trump won. I was a liberal but I have been red pilled and won't go back, not after the indoctrination introduction as a 40 year old non traditional student going back to college to pursue BSW. I have had my fill of this BS. Roxane Gay needs to go out and get to know others outside her bubble of privilege. We are sick of your rhetoric Roxane; you all upset many people that were on your side due to your constant shaming of white people and families; we are taking a stand now because we see through you and won't do this to future generations. You brought it on yourselves. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 2,377 |
Trochocarpa (Greek trochos = wheel, carpos = fruit) is a genus of shrubs or small trees, of the plant family Ericaceae. They occur naturally through coastal and montane eastern Australian rainforests and mountain shrublands and in New Guinea, Borneo and Sulawesi (Malesia).
Species
This listing may be incomplete.
Trochocarpa arfakensis – Arfak Mountains, New Guinea
Trochocarpa bellendenkerensis – Wet Tropics of NE. Queensland endemic, Australia
Trochocarpa celebica – C. Sulawesi, N. Borneo (Malesia)
Trochocarpa clarkei – Victoria Australia
Trochocarpa cunninghamii – Tasmania, Australia
Trochocarpa dekockii – New Guinea
Trochocarpa disperma – New Guinea
Trochocarpa disticha – Tasmania, Australia
Trochocarpa gjelleruppi – NW. New Guinea
Trochocarpa gunnii – Tasmania, Australia
Trochocarpa laurina – NSW, Qld, Australia, New Guinea
Trochocarpa montana – NE. NSW restricted endemic, Australia
Trochocarpa nubicola – New Guinea
Trochocarpa nutans – New Guinea
Trochocarpa papuana – New Guinea
Trochocarpa thymifolia – Australia
Formerly included here
Trochocarpa parviflora ⇒ Acrotriche parviflora – WA, Australia
References
Cited works
Ericaceae genera | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 2,522 |
Copyright © 2019 by Dan Schilling and Lori J. Longfritz
Cover design by Flag
Cover photograph courtesy of Lori Longfritz
Photograph of flash by Brian Lemus
Cover copyright © 2019 by Hachette Book Group, Inc.
Hachette Book Group supports the right to free expression and the value of copyright. The purpose of copyright is to encourage writers and artists to produce the creative works that enrich our culture.
The scanning, uploading, and distribution of this book without permission is a theft of the authors' intellectual property. If you would like permission to use material from the book (other than for review purposes), please contact permissions@hbgusa.com. Thank you for your support of the authors' rights.
Grand Central Publishing
Hachette Book Group
1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10104
grandcentralpublishing.com
twitter.com/grandcentralpub
First Edition: June 2019
Grand Central Publishing is a division of Hachette Book Group, Inc. The Grand Central Publishing name and logo is a trademark of Hachette Book Group, Inc.
The publisher is not responsible for websites (or their content) that are not owned by the publisher.
The Hachette Speakers Bureau provides a wide range of authors for speaking events. To find out more, go to www.hachettespeakersbureau.com or call (866) 376-6591.
Maps by Jeffrey L. Ward
Print book interior design by TexTech/Jouve and Thomas Louie.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Schilling, Dan, author. | Longfritz, Lori Chapman, author.
Title: Alone at dawn : Medal of Honor Recipient John Chapman and the untold
story of the world's deadliest special operations force / Dan Schilling &
Lori Chapman Longfritz.
Other titles: Medal of Honor Recipient John Chapman and the untold story of
the world's deadliest special operations force
Description: First edition. | New York : Grand Central Publishing, [2019] |
Includes bibliographical references.
Identifiers: LCCN 2019000376| ISBN 9781538729656 (hardcover) | ISBN
9781538729670 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Chapman, John Allan, 1965–2002. | Afghan War, 2001—Aerial
operations, American. | United States. Air Force—Combat
controllers—Biography. | Takur Ghar, Battle of, Afghanistan, 2002. |
Special forces (Military science)—United States—Biography. | United
States Air Force—Commando troops—History. | Afghan War, 2003—Campaigns.
Classification: LCC DS371.412 .S35 2019 | DDC 958.104/742—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019000376
ISBN: 978-1-5387-2965-6 (hardcover), 978-1-5387-2967-0 (ebook)
E3-20190603-DA-PC-ORI
E3-20190530-DA-NF-ORI
E3-20190529-DA-NF-ORI
E3-20190522-DA-NF-ORI
E3-20190509-DA-NF-ORI
## Table of Contents
1. Cover
2. Title Page
3. Copyright
4. Dedication
5. Introduction
6. Prologue
7. Part I: Evolution
1. Chapter 1
2. Chapter 2
3. Chapter 3
4. Chapter 4
5. Chapter 5
6. Chapter 6
7. Chapter 7
8. Chapter 8
8. Part II: Anaconda
1. Chapter 9
2. Chapter 10
3. Chapter 11
4. Chapter 12
5. Chapter 13
6. Chapter 14
7. Chapter 15
8. Chapter 16
9. Chapter 17
10. Chapter 18
11. Chapter 19
12. Chapter 20
13. Chapter 21
14. Chapter 22
15. Chapter 23
9. Part III: Aftermath
1. Chapter 24
2. Chapter 25
3. Chapter 26
4. Epilogue
10. Acknowledgments
11. Discover More
12. Selected Bibliography
13. About the Authors
14. Also By Dan Schilling
15. Photos
## Navigation
1. Table of Contents
And you till trump of doomsday
On lands of morn may lie,
And make the hearts of comrades
Be heavy where you die.
—A. E. Housman, _A Shropshire Lad_
This book is dedicated to the seven U.S. servicemen who died at
Takur Ghar:
SPC Marc Anderson, MSgt John Chapman, CPL Matthew Commons, SGT Bradley Crose, SrA Jason Cunningham, PO1 Neil Roberts, and SGT Philip Svitak
**Explore book giveaways, sneak peeks, deals, and more.**
Tap here to learn more.
# Introduction
What follows is a select history of one of the deadliest and least-known forces in the history of human warfare. It begins, as many heroic combat tales do, with a crisis.
It's also the story of one man, John Chapman, who would earn the nation's highest honor for bravery when he saved the lives of twenty-three comrades at the willing cost of his own.
Finally, it is the history of John Chapman's fellow Combat Controllers during Operation Anaconda, America's first major operation in its ongoing Global War on Terror. How a handful of Combat Controllers managed to stave off disaster and destroy Al Qaeda and Taliban forces by the score using their unique expertise and wits has gone down in history, even as the doomed operation continues to reveal its secrets to this day.
The history of the men of the Combat Control Teams (known universally by the acronym CCT, whether applied collectively or to an individual) laid down in these pages is by no measure comprehensive; rather it is representative, a distillation of commitment, capability, success, and loss. Delta Force officer Tom Greer, who led the hunt for Osama bin Laden, writes in his book _Kill Bin Laden_ that Combat Controllers are "the best-rounded and uniquely trained operators on the planet. The initial training 'pipeline' for an Air Force special tactics squadron Combat Controller costs twice as much time and sweat as does the journey to become a Navy SEAL or Delta operator....And that is just to get to a place where they can do the job for which they are really trained, calling those deadly airstrikes."
What's unique about the role of CCT is that wherever the need arises, they are there. In _Kill Bin Laden_ , Greer notes that, "In the relatively finite black SOF world, assaulters and snipers are a dime a dozen. Yes, these men are trained in multiple deadly skill sets and the dark arts of counterterrorism. But...Just because you are the best of the best does not mean you are the best at everything. Any Delta operator can vouch for the capabilities of the Air Force Combat Controllers, and very rarely goes on a 'hit' without the men who wear the scarlet berets." CCT is not permanently assigned to the Special Forces (SF) teams or SEAL platoons they fight alongside but they are attached, to use military parlance (think integrated or embedded), when needed for combat operations. Consequently, in America's longest-running war, the men of Air Force Combat Control collect, in aggregate, more combat action than their special operations counterparts in the Navy and Army—making some of them the most experienced veterans in all of America's previous wars. During global humanitarian crises, they are often the first to arrive, unsupported, to deliver salvation where no other first responders can. Their motto: "First There."
Born of America's disastrous first attempts to insert airborne forces into battle during World War II, Combat Control predates their better-known SEAL and Special Forces counterparts, with whom they've served silently for decades in some of the most dramatic missions in US history. This is the story of one such mission.
# Prologue
The Night Stalker sliced the frigid Afghan darkness of the Shahi Khot Valley. Bristling with two 6,000-round-per-minute M134 miniguns on its sides and an M60 machine gun mounted on the tailgate, it was prepared for small-arms fire from Taliban fighters.
Chief Warrant Officer Alan Mack was on the stick of the MH-47E, America's special operations workhorse of a helicopter. This particular Night Stalker's call sign was Razor-03. In the rear were six SEALs from the most famous unit in Navy history, SEAL Team Six. Mack's only other passenger, the seventh member of a most elite package, was a US Air Force Combat Controller named John Chapman. All seven men were highly trained and themselves bristling with weapons and purpose. Their mission call sign was Mako-30. It was the early morning hours of 4 March 2002.
Mack had flown countless insertions in the early stages of America's newly ordained Global War on Terror in response to the treachery of 9/11. He'd been in Afghanistan for months and was comfortable with the hazards of the mountainous terrain and with the habits of the enemy. The team's insertion point that night on the summit of their objective, a mountain called Takur Ghar, was determined last-minute, and Mack wasn't sure he could pull it off, but he and the SEAL team leader agreed to attempt it. Even the helicopter he was flying was a last-minute change. He and his copilot, Chief Warrant Officer Talbot, had swapped their previous helicopter for this one when the other's number-two engine "ran away," accelerating uncontrollably, and had to be shut down, grounding the bird. The two pilots took on the new helo and, with it, the assigned enlisted crew comprising a flight engineer (who doubled as the right door gunner), a left door gunner, and two tail-ramp members, one of whom manned the tail gun. After a quick crew brief, Razor-03 took to the unwelcoming sky.
As the Night Stalker made its way through the night, frigid air poured into the cargo cabin from the two doors just behind the cockpit, where both gunners stood behind their M134 miniguns, projecting their primed six-barreled lethality through the openings. The heaters failed to keep pace.
On the tail ramp, Sergeant Padrazza surveyed their "customers" through night vision goggles (NVGs) from his position on the "stinger," a 7.62mm M60 strap-mounted machine gun. Unlike during training missions back in the States, that night the mood of the SEALs and Chapman was grim. The men were to be inserted by Razor-03 directly on top of the 10,469-foot mountain peak to establish an observation post. From their commanding position, Chapman, as the team's air expert, would call in airstrikes on Taliban positions throughout the valley. The somberness of the Mako-30 team was intensified by multiple last-minute changes to the mission, not the least of which was their commanders ordering Mako-30 to insert directly atop Takur Ghar mountain instead of offsetting the team, which would have allowed them to approach the summit clandestinely to determine possible enemy locations and capabilities.
From the cockpit, Mack could see another SEAL team's helicopter landing zone (HLZ) as they passed over it. That team, Mako-21, had been inserted by another Night Stalker. Approaching his own mountain from the north, he was roughly two hundred feet above the summit. As they began their long final approach, Talbot had control of the helicopter. Mack continued scanning the HLZ through his NVGs and identified a location where they could set the massive twin-rotor helicopter down; it was a relatively level spot adjacent to a grouping of trees just below the summit. As they closed the distance, Mack noticed footprints on the snow-covered slope. This wasn't alarming in and of itself—Afghans traversed severe and remote terrain in even the most adverse weather—but as the helicopter settled toward the ground, pushing a blizzard of snow in every direction, a figure ducked behind a knoll at their nine o'clock.
Mack keyed his intercom mike and told the SEAL team leader, Britt Slabinski, "You've got a guy at nine o'clock, stuck his head up and disappeared."
"Is he armed?" asked the SEAL.
"I don't know."
Poised to exit the helicopter and anxious to be on the ground, where the team would have more control, he responded, "Roger, we're taking the LZ."
From the front of the helo, Mack was looking through his goggles as the SEALs and Chapman prepared to be inserted, when he noticed a DShK Russian heavy machine gun at their one o'clock position, almost directly in front of them and only 150 feet on the horizon. The DShK is a lethal antiaircraft weapon, and the range of this DShK was point-blank. Before he could call "contact" to the gunners, reports of contacts from multiple locations poured in simultaneously—a donkey at three o'clock, a man ducking behind cover at their ten. The team leader reiterated they were still willing to take the HLZ. Nodding to himself, Mack asked his left gunner if he had the man at their ten o'clock. "Yes."
Mack was about to authorize the left gunner to "engage," when their world exploded. Two rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) slammed into the helicopter's left side. The first warhead went through the left electrical compartment and then an ammo can before exploding, wounding the gunner and preventing him from shooting their assailant. He'd not been authorized to engage by Mack yet anyway, so the Taliban got in the first punch. And it was a knockout. The RPG killed all the AC electrical power to the stricken bird, and that in turn disabled the electrically powered miniguns. The gunner hit the floor. Before anyone in the helicopter could respond, a second RPG struck, knocking out their multimode radar system.
In the back, the SEAL team and Chapman kept their composure, readying to step off. Sergeant Dan Madden, in control of the ramp, put his arm out and blocked the team's exit just as their world caught fire. On the heels of this, he called to the pilots, "Ready rear, go go go, lift off!"
As the senior pilot, Mack took control of the damaged bird from Talbot as the helicopter's systems began failing, one after the other. First their multifunction displays failed, followed by the Nav system, then the automatic flight control system, and with it all the radios. The cockpit went black. One saving grace was the DC power, which remained, allowing the intercom to work so at least the crew could talk, even if they couldn't fight. The crew's NVGs, which were individually powered by helmet-mounted batteries, were also safe from the failing systems of the ravaged aircraft.
Mack rolled on more power through the collective stick and took off. But the added thrust for the high-altitude liftoff under extreme conditions caused a dangerous development: The rotors began to slow and droop. Though no instruments indicated this in the cockpit, years of experience told Mack he had a problem when he heard the pitch of the spinning rotors change. To compensate, he reduced power to regain desperately needed rotor RPM, causing the helicopter to jerk up and down above the now "very hot" LZ and mountain.
In the back, Petty Officer Neil Roberts, who'd not snapped his safety line to the aircraft, stood by the rear at the ramp's hinge, facing the blackness beyond, ready. The fact that he was not on the intercom wasn't a problem, since he wouldn't exit the helicopter until directed by the crew, and Madden had just blocked the ramp.
As the stricken helicopter struggled to lift, the situation worsened. A third RPG came screaming from the darkness and slammed into their right side, blowing out the right electrical box. Before they could gain any distance, yet another RPG hit the ramp where Roberts and Madden stood with Padrazza, the stinger gunner. The impact destroyed the flare dispenser, and the helo staggered under the impact. When it did, Roberts slid down the lowered ramp, with Padrazza on his heels, desperately trying to gain hold of the SEAL. Fully loaded with an eighty-pound ruck, combat gear, and an M249 SAW machine gun, Roberts weighed in excess of three hundred pounds. The two men managed to grab hold of each other as they tumbled toward the opening a few feet away.
Madden lunged for the two men. As they slid past, Roberts's legs flipped into the air. Still attached to the ramp by his gunner's harness, Madden grabbed on to the SEAL's ankle, only to be dragged along until he snapped to a violent stop at the end of his harness tether. Roberts slid past him, flailing as he approached the void. Madden and Padrazza briefly suspended the SEAL by the ankle above the snowy slope.
In an instant, he was gone.
Meanwhile, the helicopter picked up momentum as Mack battled to save all their lives, oblivious to what had just happened behind him. Madden watched helplessly as Roberts dropped ten feet to the snow, slamming onto his back, and receded into the night as the helicopter limped away.
Before Madden could call "lost man," the grim situation became even worse. One of the crew came on the intercom—they'd lost an engine. Mack, unaware they'd also lost the SEAL, knew they did not have single-engine capability, and he also had no way to determine which engine was out from his dead instrument control panel. The best he could do was to autorotate (land without power, essentially a controlled crash) somewhere in front of them and at the base of the hostile mountain. As Mack was working through the challenges of power, glide slope, a landing spot, and no instruments, Madden was pulling in Padrazza, who was dangling from the ramp and swinging wildly by his gunner's strap. On the intercom Madden shouted, "Both engines are running!" several times. He could hear them directly above his head at the aircraft's rear.
Mack wasted no time "pulling power" to determine the truth and was rewarded with level flight, which verified the intercom call. He now had options, but the helicopter soon began shaking and the controls fought the pilot, making them feel "heavy" in Mack's hands. He knew he needed to get the helo on the ground immediately.
He turned north, the direction from which they'd come, looking for a place to set down, when the call came from the rear that they'd lost a man and he was somewhere on the HLZ. Fuck. "Are you sure?" he asked. By this time Madden had dragged his crewmate into the helicopter, and both responded on the intercom simultaneously with "Yes!"
Mack was determined. "We're going back to get him," he announced over the intercom. Every crewman agreed with the decision, but the gunners reminded him they had no weapons. Mack asked for a test fire, but the guns were dead.
He began a right-hand turn anyway to come around and head back into the one-sided onslaught and firefight that surely awaited them. But as he did, the controls continued fighting back. Then the collective stick went dead and no amount of wrestling could move it. His helicopter, stricken and blind, was coming apart around him and falling from the sky. Returning to the HLZ was impossible. There was little hope for Roberts as the Night Stalker limped off the mountain and into the blackness beyond.
In the rear, Chapman held tight to his cargo net seat as it lurched and shook like the inside of a VW Beetle in a hurricane, powerless at that moment to affect Roberts's fate or his own. He had no idea what awaited Roberts alone on the mountain now seen receding into the night through the cargo ramp opening. Within minutes the HLZ was lost among the dozens of nondescript peaks surrounding the Shahi Khot Valley. It is impossible to say if Chapman understood his SEAL teammate's future at the hands of dozens of hardened Chechen and Uzbek fighters. He certainly had no inkling that in another two hours he and Roberts would face exactly the same situation, their destinies separated by a half dozen steps, each a lone man fighting against many.
If there was one among the seven-man team who could possibly survive alone in hostile territory against insurmountable enemy numbers, it would be Chapman, the lone Combat Controller—the only man with the overwhelming firepower of America's entire fleet of aircraft and death at his fingertips, and the expertise to wield them as either a precision strike on an individual or a crushing tsunami of tens of thousands of pounds of bombs over any mountain or massed force.
John did not know in that moment, in the rear of the darkened helicopter, that he was destined to soon save the lives of the remaining members of his SEAL team and another eighteen men who would ultimately commit their lives to rescuing John and the SEALs. How John came to be that man and hero on the frozen summit of Takur Ghar mountain is a remarkable and unique story about a force so unknown in American military history as to be invisible: US Air Force Combat Control. John would not be the only Combat Controller on Takur Ghar or the mountains surrounding it. Indeed, hidden in the folds of the US and allied special operations forces who were prosecuting Operation Anaconda, which was designed to push the Taliban to the brink of extinction and of which John's team was but a small part, were more than a dozen of these unknown warriors.
In the history of human warfare, no single individual warrior has ever possessed so much precision power over life and death. This is the story of John Chapman and his brothers, the deadliest fighters ever to have walked the fields of battle.
Part I
# Evolution
Chapter 1
July 1966
The flight of four fighters screamed over the mountain peaks toward their intended target, shadows streaking across the intervening valleys. One of the pilots, Lieutenant Ed Rasimus, knew troops were in trouble because his flight—call sign Whiplash Bravo—had been scrambled to provide close air support to a forward air control Combat Controller. From his cockpit, Ed could tell it was going to be a tough airstrike. Whiplash Bravo was flying deep into "Indian territory" and knew it. Below him, the local religion was not Islam but animism with a strong dose of the Buddha. It was the summer of 1966 and all Ed could see was the lush jungle of Laos in every direction, the oppressive heat and humidity creating their own clouds, clinging to the landscape like gray quilts and further masking terrain and potential enemy antiaircraft positions. It was not a good place to be.
One of Ed's wingmen tried the Controller (call sign Butterfly-44), a disembodied voice that would direct their airstrikes. Nothing. They were closing in fast, just forty miles from the contact point, when a weak and out-of-breath transmission floated across the airwaves: "Hello, Whiplash. This is Butterfly Forty-Four, do you copy?"
_Finally._ "Roger, Butterfly. We've got four nickels [F-105s] for you with twenty-four cans of nape and twenty mike-mike [20mm cannons]. We'll play for about twenty minutes and we're now about forty miles out."
Combat Controller Jim Stanford, Butterfly-44, wasn't airborne. The twenty-nine-year-old eleven-year Air Force veteran continued breathlessly, "Thanks, Whiplash, copy your numbers. I'm on the ground now refueling. I'm standing on the wing pumping gas in the airplane, but I should be airborne in about three more minutes. The target isn't very far away."
In his F-105 cockpit, Ed had to process this information. Butterfly-44 is _on the ground_? _Refueling his own airplane? In enemy territory?_ While out of breath, the disembodied voice didn't sound overly concerned. The 105s established an orbit and awaited instructions.
"Whiplash, Butterfly Forty-Four's on the roll. Be with you in a minute. Are you ready for a briefing?" asked Stanford as his tiny unarmed and unarmored Pilatus Porter single-engine airplane took off from the dirt strip where he and his pilot had been forced to land alone and refuel their plane. It was a little after 1600 hours, and for Jim and his pilot, a CIA employee flying under the cover of Air America, landing on a short dirt space in the jungle was just another day in America's secret and illegal war in Laos, across the Mekong River from Thailand. And these were not even their first strikes of the day.
"Roger, Butterfly, go ahead." Ed, who had assumed the Controller would have come from Thailand like himself by sneaking across the border, assessed the man behind the voice. _If_ **_I'm_** _stealing hubcaps by sneaking into Laos illegally_ , he thought, _this guy is a full-fledged car thief_. It was going to be a difficult strike with the thick puffy clouds obscuring much of the ground.
"Okay, Whiplash. We've got a valley three miles north of my [location] with an estimated fifteen hundred Pathet Lao regulars [Laotians fighting against South Vietnam and the US]. I've got about two hundred Royal Laotians on the hilltops to the south. I need you to put your napalm in the valley and we'll try and spread it around. Can you give me multiple passes dropping [in] pairs?"
"We'll be happy to do that, Butterfly." Ed revised his estimate of Butterfly-44. _He's not stealing cars_ **_or_** _hubcaps. He's apparently running an entire mafia._
"Whiplash, Butterfly Forty-Four has you in sight. If you check your ten o'clock low, you should be able to pick me up. I've got a white Pilatus Porter, and I'm level at six thousand feet in a left-hand orbit. Defenses in this area are small arms and automatic weapons with reported twenty-three and thirty-seven millimeter coming out of the valley earlier today. I'd like you to work the valley from east to west and come off south. The friendlies are on the hilltops to the south. Call visual on me."
"Okay, Butterfly. Whiplash lead has you in sight."
"Whiplash, I'm afraid I can't mark for you. The ROEs [rules of engagement] don't allow me to carry ordnance. But if you've got me in sight, I'll point out the target area with my left wingtip."
Ed Rasimus watched from 14,000 feet as the tiny white plane, so obvious and exposed against the green jungle, dipped its wingtip to indicate an area of trees.
The lead F-105 confirmed the target and called, "In from the east."
"Cleared hot, Whiplash. I'm holding off to the north."
Rasimus recalled the lead aircraft clearly. "I can see the shiny aluminum napalm cans leave his airplane. The fins keep them aerodynamically straight so they don't tumble and smear, but the fireball in the jungle is still impressive."
From his slow-moving, glaring target of an airplane, Stanford called, "Nice hit, lead. Two, put yours just west of lead's smoke. Three, step it further west, and four, finish off the end of the valley. Two's cleared hot."
The F-105s continued to napalm the Pathet Lao until they ran out of "nape," then requested permission to conduct gun runs with their 20mm cannons. When the fighters finally went "bingo"—out of fuel—and departed the little valley near the Plaine des Jarres, Stanford sent them off with gratitude. "Thanks a lot, guys. I'll forward some BDA [battle damage assessment] when our guys walk through there tomorrow, but right now all I can say is thank you. You've saved the fort again for another night."
As Rasimus headed for the border and safety of Thailand, he thought, _I can't imagine his situation_. _I can't conceive being in the jungle with a tiny airplane and a hugely outnumbered ground force. I can't believe that he lives there and controls an air war in which he isn't allowed to shoot back. As I cruise back to my safe airbase with my air-conditioned room, white sheets, hot shower, and a cold beer at the officers' club, I wonder what kind of man is this. I hope Butterfly-44 has a good night. I hope he has many good nights. He earns them._
Stanford and his pilot also turned for home: the most secret airbase in the world, known as Lima Site 36 alternate. Referred to by them simply as "Alternate," it's a dirt airstrip built and operated by the CIA in the middle of the jungle. For Jim, most days ended around 1730 after a full day of airstrikes, rescue coordination, and other support to the Lao indigenous forces commanded by the legendary General Vang Pao. "When the sun went down, our day in the air was done. We would meet with General Vang Pao and then go up to the Air America porch, sit around and talk, have a few drinks, play with the dogs or the caged bears."
The talk usually focused on which Air America pilots would fly the Combat Controller the next day, a nightly decision with potentially grave consequences. Two CCT had already been shot down with their pilots and, though both men were designated as missing in action, were presumed dead. Never more than four in-country at a time, the CCT in Laos of 1965–67 ran the entire air war's targeting, and no one had ever even heard of them.
* * *
As Stanford enjoyed his well-deserved beer in Laos, on the far side of the globe in Windsor Locks, Connecticut, and a world away from America's latest war, Gene and Terry Chapman were busy rearing their third child, John Allan Chapman, born 14 July 1965. The town itself is something of a Norman Rockwell throwback, stereotypically New England. Mature hardwood trees—elm, oak, and maple—thrive along its narrow streets, offering shade on hot summer days and creating canopies bursting with the colors of fire when the brisk days of fall arrive. Windsor Locks was a community where you really did ask your neighbor for a cup of sugar, the neighborhood kids played outside together, and adults looked out for _all_ kids, not just their own. John came from humble beginnings, and it was an ideal world for the newest family member.
As John explored Windsor Locks through the eyes of childhood and his youth, no one in the Chapman home could possibly imagine the direct line that would lead from America's secret war in Laos to their son becoming one of the most elite warriors in history.
* * *
Before Vietnam became a household word in the American lexicon, Combat Control Teams had existed for over a decade, and to fully understand them it's necessary to return to the global inferno of World War II, where they were originally formed to spearhead invasions on the heels of the disasters that marked the early attempts at airborne operations.
The first real use of American paratroopers was during Operation Husky, the invasion of Sicily in July of 1943. The ill-planned and poorly executed operation saw some forces dropped as much as fifty miles from their objectives. Paranoid naval forces and conventional army troops landing on the beaches considered anything in the air to be hostile so, of the 144 transport planes slated to drop paratroopers, 23 were destroyed and 37 badly damaged by friendly fire. One pilot summed up the mission thusly: "Evidently, the safest place for us tonight while over Sicily would have been over enemy territory." Yet the major failure remained guiding Allied aircraft to the appropriate release point and marking them for drops.
For the D-Day invasion of June 1944, the US and the British had formed pathfinder teams to address those challenges, though they delivered limited success, as airborne troops were still scattered across the Norman countryside. Yet at least one unintended benefit resulted—numerous reports of such wide dispersal of Allied troops left the Germans unsure of where to rush their panzer divisions and reserve SS troops.
On 24 March 1945, the US and the British conducted Operation Varsity, an Allied assault across the Rhine and the last major airborne operation of the war. In a final attempt to stave off initial assault confusion, the plan included two "Troop Carrier Glider Combat Control Teams" equipped with the latest in navigational beacons. The operation's eight five-man teams were the first use of the term "Combat Controller." Each team was to insert by glider, mark the approach and departure end of landing zones (LZs), and then control air traffic over the two-day period of major force insertion. Although their equipment and tactics were only partially successful, this still represented a step forward. However, with the end of the war only months away, the capability and the requirement receded in priority, until, after the war, it was forgotten completely.
The creation of a separate Air Force (along with a newly minted and independently funded Central Intelligence Agency) by the National Security Act of 1947 resurrected the necessity of drop-zone and landing-zone operations and spawned an interservice rivalry between the Army and USAF over whose mission it was. The Army argued that troops going into combat required Army control to ensure best placement. The Air Force, recalling the low priority afforded its pilots and aircraft during such operations as Husky, argued that control belonged with them until the Army forces were introduced into battle. By 1953, the Air Force had won the fight by refusing to drop _anything_ for Army pathfinder teams without the presence of a Combat Control Team, the first of which had formed that very year.
Much of the Air Force's stance in establishing CCT, however, was its belief that navigational aids and capabilities would eventually eliminate Combat Control Teams entirely. The Air Force was a reluctant mission partner and didn't prioritize recruiting, equipping, and training its Controllers any more than the Army did, perhaps even less so. Given that attitude, the teams, all of them stuffed into Air Force aerial port squadrons (whose responsibilities were to marshal and move materials), were ill-equipped and often poorly led. The interservice competition and Air Force's low prioritization of the mission would have far-reaching consequences as America approached the end of the twentieth century.
Despite the neglect, in the years following the wars in Laos and Vietnam, Combat Control continued to transform. A series of operations and the creation of tailored organizations, better suited to fight America's new limited conflicts and counter the rise of modern terrorism, would shape the force. Five years after the conflict in Southeast Asia ended, the biggest change to hit CCT took place in an unlikely alliance between an overlooked Air Force major and a colorful Army colonel with a storied career in the recent war.
In the late summer of 1979, Combat Controller Mike Lampe and his Vietnamese wife, Thuy, were stationed in the Philippines, when chance introduced him to a twice-passed-over Air Force major named John Carney—known simply as "Coach" or sometimes "the Coach" from his time coaching the Air Force Academy's football program. He was looking for standout Combat Controllers for an initiative known as Project Requisition. The effort began in 1978, at the same time that Army colonel Charlie Beckwith was standing up what would eventually become the greatest counterterrorist unit in the world—Delta Force. Coach was building a bullpen of exceptionally talented and hard-core men to support Beckwith as he began conducting "Blue Light" operations, the precursor to Delta.
"Coach wanted to tighten his shot group," says Lampe of the time, "to put teams together to support Beckwith's nascent force." Lampe encountered Coach when he and a few other combat scuba-dive certified members of the Philippines team put Coach and a handful of his preselected men through scuba training in Key Largo, Florida.
The Coach was impressed by Lampe's professionalism and asked him to join the team, which at the time worked out of the back of a hangar at Charleston Air Force Base, South Carolina. Lampe, who'd survived multiple tours in Laos and Southeast Asia, had finally settled into a happy domestic and postwar work life and was preparing for another move with his young family. As he recalls, "I told the Coach thanks, but I've got orders for Rhein-Main Air Base in Germany to support the Seventh Special Forces Group. Maybe next time."
As fall approached, Mike, Thuy, and their young son were preparing for their move to Germany, a well-deserved and intriguing new adventure. They had already checked out of their quarters on Clark Air Base and were residing in temporary lodging. "We were literally getting ready for our flight when CBPO [the base personnel office] called me and said, 'You better come down here.'
"When I showed up and asked, 'What's up?' they said, 'Your orders have been changed.' To which I replied, 'That's not possible. I've got my orders to Germany right here.' 'Do you know a Major Carney at Twenty-First Air Force? He's had your orders changed to the Four-Thirty-Seventh Military Airlift Wing in Charleston.'" The order left no doubt: Charleston was in and Germany was out.
Lampe's forced assignment to the 437th Military Airlift Wing was used as a cover by Coach to hide the team's activities as they supported the newly formed Delta Force. Lacking a formal name and hiding behind the 437th, the men called themselves (for lack of more imaginative alternatives) "Brand X." The existing CCT at the 437th had a legitimate mission to run airdrop and austere airfield training missions for the wing's cargo haulers. On paper, Coach was the officer in charge, responsible for the training mission, but in practice he completely neglected the conventional operations, focusing on Beckwith and Delta and leaving training to one of his noncommissioned officers (NCOs).
Mike Lampe reported to Charleston on 1 November 1979. On 4 November, the US Embassy in Tehran fell to the Iranian Revolution and fifty-two Americans were taken hostage—an event that sent relations between the two countries into a spiral from which they've never recovered. Lampe was trying to settle his pregnant wife and young son into a house in Charleston when the cataclysmic event unfolded, setting in motion the subsequent actions and tragedies that would create the world's largest special operations command. But neither Lampe nor Coach's Combat Controllers could possibly have predicted it at the time.
"I don't remember if I was home for Thanksgiving or not. It was all a blur. The handful of us, maybe six or seven guys at the time, were scattered to all points of the compass." There were four units involved in potential rescue planning by that time: Delta, as the lead; C Company, 1st Battalion of the 75th Ranger Regiment, who were tasked with supporting Delta with security and a rapid response of firepower; the 1st Special Operations Wing from the Air Force at Hurlburt Field, Florida, owners of the MC-130 "Combat Talons," the only special operations insertion C-130s in the world; and finally, Coach Carney's handful of Controllers, who weren't even a real unit yet.
* * *
By 1979, and six states north, John Chapman had established himself as a young man possessed of an innate ability to tune into the feelings of others that transcended the attitudes of the times and ran counter to the instincts of most teenagers. Some of his unconventional friendships in high school weren't looked upon with approval by other members of John's "jock squad," the student athletes and cool kids. As a standout athlete, he blended easily with the "in" crowd; however, accepting those with disabilities was not part of their social program. Those with special needs were put into separate classes and shunned and harassed in the hallways, as often happens with teens.
Cara was one such girl who knew John because he always took the time to say hello and ask how she was doing. One day, kids jostling her in the hall gave her a particularly cruel hazing. She escaped around a corner as John was approaching from the other direction. When he saw her, he gave his usual jovial "Hi!" She was so rattled by the bullying that she lashed out, "Fuck you, Johnny Chapman! Fuck you!" and stormed down the corridor. In the hallway, kids laughed or looked away in embarrassment, but John pursued her, matching her almost-run. She tried to make him go away, but he wouldn't. Instead, he calmed and comforted the distraught girl, sitting with her till after the bell rang and her tormentors had gone.
John's high school friend Lynn Noyes has never forgotten his actions. "We didn't do such a good job of tolerating and promoting others who were different. I wasn't mean, but I wouldn't go out of my way to do something nice for someone everyone else shunned. But that's the way John was. He was just so...out of a different time in the way he could rough it up on the soccer field but have the gentlest heart of anybody, not caring who saw." Lynn ended with, "I haven't been back to a reunion, because the only reason I would go back would be to see John and he's not going to be there, so..."
Chapter 2
Mid-April 1980
As had become his norm, Coach was back east at the Pentagon and White House doing what Lampe calls "big-guy stuff and planning." He'd participated in only two training and scenario-development events. Also, he'd been gone for much of March to execute a clandestine insertion to survey a landing site in the remote Iranian desert. Accompanied only by his one-legged CIA pilot, Coach had spent the early morning hours of April Fools' Day walking and then burying covert, remotely controlled lights at a place called Dasht-e-Kavir for use as a staging point by Delta on its way farther into Iran. The site was designated Desert One.
In April of 1980, as John Chapman was nearing adulthood, and as the American hostage situation in Iran dragged on, Mike Lampe and Brand X were developing a potential infiltration method along with thirty members of Delta Force's B Squadron at Yuma Proving Ground, practicing desert overland driving movement using motorcycles and Mules, the four-wheeled Vietnam-era cargo-hauling buggies. They'd spent the entire night struggling with the vehicles in the sand and had discovered that the equipment of the day was not effective at moving men and materiel across adverse terrain, when they were recalled and flown back to North Carolina.
No one in Yuma knew what the recall meant exactly, but it was the first time they'd ever been pulled from training. They hustled back to base to find a lone C-141 waiting to take them home. When they arrived in Charleston they found Coach waiting for them. "It's a 'go.' Gear up, pack up, and get everything loaded on the C-141 we got outside."
With no time for additional consideration, Lampe and the other eight Combat Controllers who comprised Brand X loaded their lights, beacons, weapons, radios, and the motorcycle Delta had provided for use at Desert One, and left American soil without fanfare.
The first test of Brand X and Delta Force turned the nascent special operations force (SOF) on its head. In the remote darkness, problem after problem plagued the Americans. When the first plane landed, a busload of Iranians emerged unexpectedly from the night, leaving the Rangers no choice but to guard them. Then, the eight Marine RH-53 helicopters (not suited to the desert conditions) to be used in flying the assault force into Tehran suffered mechanical failure after failure during their insertion from their launch platform, the aircraft carrier USS _Nimitz_.
Lampe and the CCT were establishing the lakebed runways when the next crisis literally exploded. An illicit-fuel smuggler traveling the dirt road came upon the Rangers assigned to keep the airfield's perimeter secured. When the smuggler wouldn't stop, they fired a LAW anti-tank rocket and the truck's fuel load exploded, lighting up the night with a hundred-foot fireball.
Slowly Marine helicopters began to straggle in. "We're waiting on helicopters, when finally number six limps in and lands. On landing, the bird is inoperative; it's lost hydraulics. And we get word that it's the last bird. So we're on the deck, we still have the fuel smuggler's tanker burning on the horizon and fifty confused Iranians at gunpoint, the conditions are complete brownout, and we only have five helicopters. Everyone knows our absolute minimum is six." Lampe paused a moment as he reflected on the significance. "Finally the decision comes. Pack it up. We're going home."
In order to evacuate the site, one of the MC-130s needed fuel from a tanker EC-130, forcing two helicopters to reposition. Lampe recalls what happened next: "I'm a hundred yards away when a helo picks up and the sandstorm returns, so I turn my face away from the sandblasting. Out of the corner of my eye I see it lose altitude and begin to drift. And then there was an explosion. There's still dust everywhere but I can see a huge fireball [as the helo hit the EC-130 refueler next to it]. The flight crew was cooked, done. It was already buttoned up with its fuel hoses, as well as Delta shooters. I recall people pouring out the right paratroop door."
In the midst of the catastrophe, Lampe and the others, along with Delta Force and aircrew members from the C-130s, managed to recover the victims and load everyone on the remaining MC-130s. As they flew to safety, Mike couldn't help but wonder, "Did we leave anyone behind? We left an aircrew behind for sure, our fellow warriors." It was an unfortunate end to America's first true counterterrorist mission, paid with the lives of eight Marines and airmen. For the men of Brand X, who'd overcome the challenges and successfully accomplished their airfield mission, it was a triumph over neglect by the Air Force, but a bittersweet milestone. Yet they were confident the unit's combat-demonstrated capabilities would allow it to continue to develop concurrently alongside their Delta counterparts.
* * *
Tom Allen was a soft-spoken and unassuming police officer in Windsor Locks when he volunteered to coach the Windsor Locks High School boys' diving team, starting with John's older brother Kevin in 1977. John was in the eighth grade and watched as Kevin learned how to nail dive after dive on the one-meter springboard. Kevin was very aggressive and that caught John's attention. He decided he wanted to join the high school kids in their diving practices and asked Coach Allen, who approached John's father to see what he thought. "He's the best athlete in the whole crew," replied the father in reference to his third child, so Tom allowed John to practice too. Consequently, when John joined the team in his freshman year, he had an edge over divers from competing schools, even varsity-level athletes.
In John's first year he became fast friends with sophomore teammate Michael DuPont. Over the next two years, John and Michael pushed each other to reach for bigger and better dives as they traded placing first and second during meets. As with all great coaches, Tom realized his two best divers required little guidance, because their competitiveness and camaraderie pushed them harder than he ever could. What Michael remembers most about his friend was "his competitive drive and the inspiration he gave me while we were diving together. My favorite part about our friendship was during my senior year when we kept trading places on setting new diving records. He broke the record first, then I would beat his record, and back and forth. I believe he still holds the record for high score."
John's four years of high school diving were spent getting progressively better. In his freshman year he placed fifth in the State Championships, and the next year, third. By his junior and senior years, he reached number one, making him the top-ranked diver in Connecticut and the first number-one state diver in Windsor Locks High School history.
John graduated in June of 1983 and immediately enrolled at the University of Connecticut—UConn—his life seemingly planned out. He selected engineering as a major and joined the UConn Men's Diving Team, already ranked number one in their division for the one-meter board and number three on the three-meter board. He thought he would compete throughout college, complete his degree, find the right woman, followed by the right job, and his life would fall into place.
* * *
On 20 October 1983, as John was immersed in his first engineering classes and in UConn's pool, Coach Carney was enjoying a beer and Thursday night football on television at his home in Fayetteville, North Carolina. Florida State was mopping the floor with Louisville when the phone rang; it was the operations floor of the Joint Special Operations Command at nearby Fort Bragg. Major General Dick Scholtes, the JSOC commander, needed Carney to come in. Leaving Louisville, who were already going down in flames at 51 to 7, he arrived at JSOC's tightly secured compound at 2200 hours to find the general and his staff poring over maps and satellite imagery of an insignificant island called Grenada.
* * *
Three years earlier, in the summer of 1980, in the immediate aftermath of Desert One, the Coach had testified before the Holloway Commission, and the outcome was the formation of the new Joint Special Operations Command, incorporating the already validated but wounded Delta Force. The command began to take shape as SEAL Team Six (the newest SEAL team, created specifically for JSOC) materialized, Task Force 160 (the Army's premier helicopter unit) joined, and Coach's Brand X became Detachment 1 MACOS—short for Military Airlift Command Operations Staff, an innocuous name for the new and now most classified organization in the Air Force. "Det 1" was to be the Air Force's contribution to the new command. No one involved could have imagined that it would transform into the most dynamic and diverse special operations unit in the Air Force.
At the time, the boys in Det 1 were living like vagabonds out of the hangar in Charleston Air Force Base, South Carolina. "I've got good news and bad news," the Coach announced one day shortly after they'd returned to the air base from planning a second Iranian hostage crisis rescue attempt that fall. "The good news is we're gonna form our own standalone unit."
"What's the bad news?" queried Mike Lampe.
"It's going to be at Fort Bragg so we can be next to Delta. We're moving to Fayettenam," he said, invoking the alternative and derisive soldiers' name for the nearby town of Fayetteville, North Carolina.
When the team moved to Pope Air Force Base on Fort Bragg in 1981, the men lived out of a derelict mobile trailer until things improved. "We got a second mobile home," said Lampe flatly of their "improved" digs. By October of 1983, when Coach was called to JSOC, Det 1 had grown to twenty-four men and they were better trained (though lacking in facilities), having built on three years of exercises with the Rangers and Delta.
On 13 October 1983, as Coach's Combat Controllers were hitting their stride in the States, the latest in a series of coups had replaced the Grenadian Marxist leader, Maurice Bishop, after he'd made overtures to the US and was placed under house arrest. On the seventeenth, Bishop was freed by supporters but assassinated three days later, and the tiny nation descended into twenty-four-hour shoot-on-sight martial law. In addition to a heavy Cuban presence and the extension of Soviet influence into America's sphere, there were concerns in Washington about several hundred American medical students and tourists under potential threat on the island. The US plan was for the Rangers and CCT to seize Grenada's Point Salines International Airport as an airhead in order to introduce the 82nd Airborne and other follow-on forces. Delta would rescue the medical students from their True Blue medical campus near Point Salines, while CCT established the airhead and then ran the international airport within thirty minutes of jumping onto the airfield, a metric that would become an advertised standard that remains to this day.
On the evening of 24 October, the mission was green-lighted. The Controllers had been working nonstop for days in the muggy Georgia climate alongside the men of the 1st Ranger Battalion, with very little rest. After they'd loaded the aircraft, despite the unknowns facing them, they gratefully took the opportunity to catch some desperately needed sleep.
In flight, the Rangers and Controllers began to don their parachutes for the five-hundred-foot paradrop when they were a few hours out. "Some guys put on reserves, others didn't." The drop was three hundred feet below the standard eight-hundred-foot combat altitude so as to fly under the antiaircraft guns positioned on hills ringing Point Salines. Because the guns could not depress their barrels below level, it was believed the invasion aircraft should be safe from the point-blank fire.
The entire force was invading with the dawn because the Marines had no nighttime capability and were seizing the island's other initial strategic object, Pearls Airport, at H-hour, as the start of the invasion was unimaginatively named. Failing to recognize (or possibly ignoring) the still painful lessons of Desert One, the Joint Staff pushed opportunities for each service to participate at the expense of operational applicability.
"I can see the coast and it looks _low_. Seems a lot lower than five hundred fucking feet, when we suddenly pop up. I remember seeing tracers from the triple A, but they're going over us. And then fuck, I don't have a reserve chute," recalls Lampe.
He said a little prayer for the rigger who packed his parachute and jumped out the left troop door. He exited the plane in the morning light, feeling completely naked as he waited for bullets to slam into his body and was yanked horizontally by the parachute's deployment as he dropped out the door.
On the airfield, with moments to spare, the CCT as air traffic control (ATC) cleared the first aircraft for landing and they were in business, as plane after plane was landed and guided to its designated parking spot. "The planes are dumping their cargo by doing combat offloads before making rapid departures. They'd drop the ramp, hit the throttle, and pallets of gear or gun jeeps would roll out the back." Combat Control ran the airfield for the duration of combat operations until civil control of the field could be returned to airport authorities, US forces had stabilized the island, containing Cuban forces, and the rescue of 233 American students at True Blue medical school was complete.
The CCT were spread among the Delta Force troops to take down other designated targets, their key job controlling airstrikes, particularly by the AC-130 gunships. Despite setbacks and interservice politics, the operation was a success for CCT as they ran the biggest contingency airport in US history and performed flawlessly with their Delta teammates. Grenada represented the maturation of Det 1 into the shape it would maintain for the next decade as it continued to grow alongside Delta and SEAL Team Six.
* * *
John Chapman watched the news of the invasion with the rest of America, mildly interested in the fact that it took place, but it didn't resonate with the freshman. He was too busy failing his classes. By the time the invasion was over and the semester ended, his grades were so poor he was ineligible to compete as a diver. He was certainly a smart young man, but as his sister Lori recalls John's own words, "Studying wasn't his 'thing'; _doing_ was his thing."
Like most young men disinterested in college, John returned home and, as he mulled over the Air Force, took a job as a mechanic and tow truck driver. Then, in the third week of August 1985, John enlisted in the Air Force. He promised his mother he'd try something "safe," selecting information systems specialist as a job. To Lori, he was more to the point: "I need to do something more than stay in Windsor Locks my whole life. I want to see the world; I can't stay here."
While at Lackland AFB, Texas, John attended a CCT recruiting briefing given to all male basic trainees. Even though he was contracted with the Air Force to attend information systems technician training, Combat Control is authorized to recruit from among all eligible candidates, and if interested, any qualified trainee can relinquish their Air Force Specialty Code and try out. If they meet the standards of a Flying Class II physical examination and pass the CCT physical ability and stamina test (PAST), they're in. Watching the video of Controllers jumping from planes, riding motorcycles, scuba diving, calling airstrikes, and conducting assault-zone landings hit John right where he desired most: challenge and excitement.
His promise to his mother remained steadfast, however, and he left the alternate Combat Control future unexplored. After completing basic and technical training at Keesler Air Force Base, Mississippi, John arrived for his first duty assignment at Lowry Air Force Base in Aurora, Colorado, in February 1986. He made the most of his new life and career, enjoying the Air Force, but soon the urge to do something "more" returned. Unfortunately, he was obligated to his job for a minimum of three years—chained to a keyboard and monitor. By late 1988 he'd decided that he was going to try and cross-train into CCT.
He'd loosely followed Combat Control, reading about what little was known from Grenada as well as Desert One and the wars in Laos and Vietnam, vowing to learn everything possible and preparing for the PAST test relentlessly. Feeling that he'd kept his promise to his mom by trying something safer first, when three years had passed he submitted his cross-training paperwork. All he wanted was a shot—just one—to prove he could do something so difficult it would elevate him to the top 1 percent of military men.
His approval arrived in the spring of 1989 and John returned to Lackland Air Force Base that summer to attend the Combat Control Indoctrination Course—known informally as indoc—the toughest school in the pipeline and where the vast majority of volunteers wash out. He knew that 90 percent of the candidates who tried out for CCT failed to make it through training. He didn't know what exactly a 10 percent success rate translated into for those who couldn't or didn't have the heart to make it, but clearly there were many hazards and unknowns ahead. Yet it was merely the first of ten Army, Navy, and Air Force courses he needed to navigate to become a qualified Combat Controller. It would be a _long_ year and a half.
* * *
Mike Lampe and Det 1 had changed much in the years between the Grenada invasion and the time of John Chapman's cross-training approval. By 1989, Lampe had been promoted to chief master sergeant and was the unit's senior enlisted manager (the most senior enlisted position in an Air Force squadron). The Coach had been promoted and had moved on, and the unit continued to go through a series of name changes to mask its identity and purpose. He and the new commander, Major Craig Brotchie, had also implemented a formal selection process that mirrored Delta Force's famous assessment, which culminates in "the long walk," but with one distinct difference: Delta Force was open to any member of the Army regardless of background, whereas the (now) 1724th Special Tactics Squadron—referred to obliquely as "the Hill" for its location on the JSOC compound above Pope Air Force Base—only considered volunteers who were current combat-deployable Combat Controllers with two years of operational experience and a recommendation from the individual's commander.
As Chapman arrived at "indoc" in the summer of 1989, another crisis developed. Manuel Noriega, the Panamanian dictator, had ignored the country's presidential election results, choosing to remain in power while also managing his lucrative cocaine shipping empire. By 15 December, Noriega, possibly under the influence of his own product, declared a state of war existed between his country and the US. The next day, Panamanian Defense Forces killed a US Marine and then accosted a Navy lieutenant and his wife, physically abusing the couple. On 17 December, President George H. W. Bush obliged the dictator's call for war by green-lighting "Operation Just Cause," the invasion of Panama.
Mike Lampe was home on 16 December when his beeper went off. His boys, seeing the news on television, attempted to keep their father from leaving, but he promised he'd be back in time to drive the family on its planned Christmas vacation to New Hampshire.
At the unit, he learned the operation they'd rehearsed seven times had the green light. Again, JSOC would be leading America's latest major overseas intervention (the nation had eschewed a declaration of war, something it hadn't done since World War II, preferring to conduct "named operations")—this one, the largest airborne invasion since the Second World War—and as was becoming tradition, CCT would enter the theater ahead of their JSOC counterparts.
On 20 December, just after midnight, the invasion arrived in thirty C-130s over Rio Hato and Omar Torrijos (Tocumen) airports. The CCT "bike chasers," the nickname given to the men who followed motorcycles dropped for use in clearing the runways of obstacles, were the first parachutists to jump from the lead aircraft, seizing the international airports, literally making them "First There," CCT's motto. Before any of the forces jumped, however, three CCT quietly infiltrated the Omar Torrijos airfield to establish and assess the airport and then to control the air invasion.
It was the largest employment of Combat Controllers in history at the time, and the CCT manpower requirements were so extreme that the 1724th was forced to augment its missions with men from the 1723rd Special Tactics Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Florida.
As advertised, within thirty minutes of jumping into the darkness, the Controllers were running both airfields, and the number of aircraft under their control for landing, moving to take down multiple targets throughout the country, and close airstrikes was staggering—171 different special operations airplanes and a near-equal number of helicopters were moving in the nighttime airspace over the tiny Central American country. Almost all of them were under the direction or guidance of CCT. The twenty-by-twenty-mile airspace was roughly equivalent to the area inside the Washington, DC, beltway. Despite no radar usage or prepublished air plans, every single flight maintained safe separation. Not only were there no air-to-air mishaps, there wasn't a single ground incident or a near miss. The only aircraft lost during the invasion either crashed or were shot down.
As for Mike Lampe, he'd managed to join a Ranger platoon as they raided Noriega's beachfront hideaway near Rio Hato the day after the invasion began. During the search for potential intelligence as to Noriega's whereabouts, the Rangers rifled through the dictator's office. They'd missed him by a mere fifteen minutes but didn't come away empty-handed. In Noriega's desk were hundreds of 14-karat gold paper clips. A Ranger gave one to Lampe who, upon returning home long after Christmas was over, gave it to his wife as a Christmas present. Her gift to him was a beautifully wrapped shoebox stuffed with civilian "Help Wanted" employment advertisements.
Chapter 3
July 1989
Six months before the Panama invasion, Sergeant John Chapman returned to Lackland Air Force Base, only this time his purpose had crystallized. He was starting a journey of self-discipline and performance like nothing before. High school diving was based on one's own competitive desire to win. For all who dared, the CCT pipeline was a standard by which they measured themselves, yet it was far beyond anything John had ever experienced. If he could make it through the next year plus, his life would be forever differentiated from the masses, _he knew that_ , but what was it that crushed hardy men and drove scores of them to quit in the first weeks of training? Whatever it was, he thought, as he emerged from the taxi in front of his first home on this new journey, he'd see for himself soon enough.
Operating Location-H—OL-H for short—occupied a pair of Vietnam-era two-story barracks in the "low-rent district" of Lackland AFB. The buildings were tired: Even the bland tan and dark brown trim advertised neglect. Referred to by the young men there to test themselves as "the oh-el" or "indoc," it stood as the gatekeeper for each man's ticket to ride the remainder of the pipe. In front of the building was a symbol of a bygone era, an H-model Huey helicopter mounted on a pole, appearing to swoop toward those who walked the sidewalk as if it were setting up a gun run on the unsuspecting. Across the concrete pad in front of the building, John was greeted by a fifty-by-twenty-foot wood-bordered dirt patch, home to a set of dip bars and pull-up bars, and two thirty-foot ropes that hung from a wooden arch. Between the ropes, hanging from the crossbeam at the top, was a shiny brass bell. At the door was a sign: OL-H MACOS, with the motto QUALITY NOT QUANTITY stenciled across the center. On each side were two military flashes, modern versions of European coats of arms. One displayed an angel, wings spread above her head, two arms stretched around a globe as if embracing it, and the motto THAT OTHERS MAY LIVE below the name USAF Pararescue. The second was bordered by a wreath, leaves pointing to the top, the center a globe with latitude and longitude lines. A yellow lightning bolt stretched diagonally from upper right to lower left; below the bolt in the lower-right corner was an eight-pointed compass rose, and opposite was a parachute. Across the bottom was written "U.S.A.F. Combat Control." Between the tips of the wreath at the top, a motto: FIRST THERE.
More than 120 men were set to start John's class in a few weeks. OL-H, as the sign in front announced, was for Pararescue (PJ) trainees and potential Combat Controllers alike. The Air Force's undisputed toughest jobs had much in common, including sharing two-thirds of the pipeline training, so they started together. Most of the initial 120 men trying out were there to become PJs, the better advertised and better known of the two careers. Roughly fifty of the men were there to become CCT.
Arriving around the same time as Chapman, Joe Maynor was the absolute embodiment of a Tennessee country boy. His hometown of Athens was little more than a village sixty miles north of the "big city," Chattanooga. At basic he'd attended the recruiting brief and thought, _Let's see where this takes us_. He survived the PAST test and flight physical examination and, upon graduation from basic, was met by another indoc candidate to be taken to the OL-H. Candidates were not allowed to walk anywhere, they ran...to lunch, to training, to the base exchange, to check-in. And so, along with a few other hardy (or foolhardy) souls, Joe double-timed it to his new destination wondering if perhaps he'd made a mistake, dragging his duffel bag and all his worldly possessions as he ran through the Texas summer heat, dripping sweat before he'd even checked in.
Joe and John were processed along with many other nameless men. Arriving candidates were treated with disdain or indifference, largely because many of them would not survive the waiting period to even start class. The first thing they learned was they were in "casual status," meaning not formally in training or on orders for an assignment, and were referred to as such. "Hey, casual" was a common summons to those unworthy of a name; instructors didn't bother learning names until candidates were well into the class. The second thing they learned was that casual status was anything _but_ casual. Each morning was spent in calisthenics sessions, runs, and pool training to prepare them for the upcoming seven-week trial. During this period, the young men faced the reality of their choice—CCT training was not about parachutes, exotic locations, and motorcycles. It was about pain and never being fast enough, strong enough, or aquatic enough. Those who realized their mistake early suffered less. To quit, one merely had to utter the words. Instructors—seasoned PJs and Controllers, specially selected for the assignment—were notorious for spotting weak moments or individuals and singling them out for attention. Sometimes, to cull the herd, they tortured the entire batch of casuals with sessions in the mud pit until someone quit.
By the first day of class in early September, the instructor cadre had whittled the number of candidates down to a manageable seventy, Joe and John among them.
The OL-H course spanned seven weeks of physical conditioning and testing, coupled with basic academics in such subjects as scuba diving physics, which mostly served to occupy the candidates for an hour or two each day and allow for physical recovery. Each week got progressively harder, faster, longer.
Grueling calisthenics sessions ruled each morning, followed by a run, usually between three and six miles, or sprints on the nearby track. But the worst was pool training. Each day after lunch, the men learned firsthand the value of oxygen to the human body. Pool sessions consisted of a series of different events, all designed to strengthen the mind and the body—and to separate the very strongest from all others. There is no more compelling drive in the human body than the need for oxygen; it overcomes all thought, instinctive in an absolute sense. To push oneself past the physiological need to breathe is to master oneself. And the OL-H had devised surefire ways to test the hypothesis.
The first oxygen debt exercises they were exposed to were "underwaters"—swimming the length of the Olympic-size training pool submerged, then touching the far wall and sprinting back across the surface using freestyle stroke. This was repeated eight times, with decreasing intervals to resupply oxygen to the body and never long enough to completely replenish. Breaking the surface even once during any iteration was failure—and immediate removal from the course. Another instructor favorite was drownproofing, where the student's hands are tied behind his back before he is pushed into the pool. He must use the bottom of the twelve-foot deep end to push off, undulate to the surface, and catch a single breath, repeating for five minutes—more art than science. Struggling to stay afloat without use of the hands and arms is impossible, and those attempting to flounder at the surface are failed in any case.
Then there were the crossovers. The word instills gut fear in everyone who's ever done them. They start during the third week, after students have been conditioned to oxygen deprivation through various other exercises. Of all the brutal water tortures, crossovers were undeniably the worst and were a requirement to pass for graduation. Each student donned a set of twin eighty-cubic-foot galvanized-steel scuba diving tanks. The tanks had no regulators for breathing; indeed, they weren't for that purpose at all. Each student would also don mask and fins. Finally, each fastened a sixteen-pound weight belt around his waist.
They would drop into the deep end of the pool along the long side, wedged together with one arm holding them to the security of the wall, lined "nut to butt." They were then given the preparatory command, "Prepare to cross over." That was the signal to take one final huge lungful of air. "Cross over!" would come a moment later. All the students would sink straight to the bottom and, upon reaching it, fin as hard as they could to the other side as a similar group from the far side also finned simultaneously. The groups met in the middle, one designated to go "high," that is crawl over the "low" group, both then continuing on their way to the other wall. Only when they reached the far wall were they allowed to push off the bottom and rise for the precious and distant air that awaited them.
Gasping men, crawling past each other, clawing for air, sputtered to the surface on each side. This would be repeated eight times, with reduced intervals from forty-five to thirty seconds between crossovers. To add to the excitement, instructors were in the pool with them, for safety in the event of a near drowning but also to harass the students, sometimes pulling masks from their faces to induce panic. Other times, they would stand on a particular student's back, holding on to the tank's manifold, and "surf" the student for a few feet, creating an incredible amount of extra drag, forcing the student to crawl for his life.
As the next batch of students stood freezing in the cold water at the shallow end, waiting their turn, instructors offered words of "encouragement" to the men gasping for air. "Come on, you know you want to quit." "It's all over, and there's a great Air Force job waiting for you. Just quit." Occasionally, when they sensed someone was close to the edge, or was particularly whiny, they'd converge as a pack on the frightened student: "Say the words! Say it!"
"I quit."
At these words, sometimes uttered meekly, other times shouted back in a form of final defiance, the instructor's face would change. Gone was the fierce anger, the challenge to the individual; in its place, a calm and reasonable human would appear, with a simple instruction: "Move to the shallow end of the pool. Take off your gear and report to admin."
John, as student leader, watched as other young men, almost all of them younger than he, would skip lunch. Burning through thousands of calories a day, they needed every carb they could get, but "the pool" held them in its liquid grip. Others, trying to take in needed nourishment, would instead vomit from anxiety in the barracks before the pool session. Occasionally, some would get out of the pool to vomit or just vomit over the side.
In the pool, some men pushed themselves past the point of no return, blacking out in the water and having to be pulled to the surface by instructors and resuscitated. When they came around, they would be given a choice: "Get back in the pool or go to the lockers." After the daily pool sessions, which included underwater knot tying (a series of knots to be completed on one breath) and buddy breathing (students shared a single snorkel, passed back and forth for air, while instructors harassed them to prevent them from breathing and tried to pull them apart, which meant failure if they could), the pool day was concluded with a swim, either freestyle or with fins, of between 1,500 and 4,000 meters.
On land, things were little better. Mud-pit torture sessions, thousands of extra push-ups and pull-ups, or "motivation" runs were common. No-notice room inspections, where instructors would turn out the entire class for any infraction or contraband, always loomed. During all of these, John and the other NCOs were expected not only to perform to standard but to demonstrate leadership and selflessness. Joe recalls the first time he and John bonded. "We got in trouble for nothing"—a typical student observation. One of the fiercest instructors, Sergeant Rodman, called them all onto the front concrete pad and had the men, now down to less than thirty, mount the dip bars. These were four feet off the ground and ran in parallel. Gripping them like gymnasts, the men would support themselves with straight arms and then dip down till their shoulders were level with the bars, before thrusting up again. This constituted one dip.
"Rodman had us do a set of fifty," he remembers. "But in between each dip we had to hold ourselves up for a minute." Those who reached muscle failure were relegated to the mud pit, where two other instructors were inflicting even worse torture. "John and I were the only ones to make it all the way to the end."
The young Tennessean was about to comprehend what they all were doing there. As their reward for completion, both John and Joe were excused from further torture; they could shower, get something to eat, and relax (as much as anyone could at the OL). Joe, realizing reprieve was upon him, started for the barracks door. But John ran, not walked, to the pit. "Where do you think you're going, Chapman?" shouted Rodman.
"The pit, Sergeant, to join my team."
"You're off. Get out of here."
Chapman didn't move. One of the guys in the class threw mud at him, hitting him in the head. Rodman, not needing much incentive to encourage teamwork, stated, "Well, you're muddy now, you might as well join your team."
Joe had watched the entire exchange and, seeing his desperately needed decompression evaporate, jumped into the pit with his team leader. "John and I bonded over that moment. I'll never forget it. It was the first time I realized what we were doing was about more than just me. It was the team."
* * *
Of the 120 men who signed up for OL-H class number 89-005, scheduled to begin on 18 September (the Air Force's birthday), and the seventy men who survived to start the class, only seven would graduate—five PJs and just two CCT, John Chapman and Joe Maynor. The two men, representing 4 percent of the Combat Control candidates, had their pipeline tickets to ride. The next gut check came immediately: the US Army Special Forces combat diver qualification school in Key West, Florida.
Arguably one of the toughest Army schools, SF CDQ, as it is known, fails between 25 and 35 percent of all who attend. However, for Joe and John, it was the course they'd spent months and months of pain and preparation for. Forty men started the class in mid-November; fewer than thirty graduated. Dive after dive, nighttime, infiltration, LAR-V Draeger rebreathers (a system that uses 100 percent oxygen and recycles breath so as not to leave an air-bubble trail), and of course, PT: long runs and cal sessions. For the Army soldiers, the pool sessions with their crossovers and harassment were the worst. To the OL grads, it was just another week.
After Key West, the relentless pace continued. More water work awaited them at the Air Force water survival school in Homestead, Florida, south of Miami, in the form of a three-day course in how to survive a crash and recovery at sea. In contrast to the first two schools, it was an "easy" and mostly academic course.
As 1990 arrived, the two potential Combat Controllers found themselves at their second Army course, Airborne School at Fort Benning, Georgia, universally known among CCT as "Air Force appreciation." For John, jumping was exciting and something he took a liking to. He talked to Joe about taking skydiving lessons while they were still in the pipeline and before they attended HALO school, the military high-altitude/low-opening freefall course.
After making the five jumps required to graduate, they hopped on a plane to the next stop, Air Force aircrew survival school on Fairchild Air Force Base, Washington. The two-week course was designed to expose Air Force members to survival in the woods, covering such things as basic land navigation, hiding and evading, and procuring food. In addition, it provided resistance training for interrogations in the event of capture.
By then the two men were inseparable and well on their way. In February they arrived at Keesler Air Force Base to attend air traffic control (ATC) school, one of the most academically demanding courses in the Air Force. Many who couldn't hack the pressures were reassigned to other jobs, and potential Combat Controllers were no different. If you couldn't control air traffic, you couldn't be CCT.
John had flown home from survival school to retrieve his car, a piss-gold-colored four-door Ford LTD yacht, from his dad. "It had worn vacuum hoses," recalls Joe. "So the headlights would dim until you hit the gas, then as the pressure built, the headlights would brighten. At stop signs, they'd go dead. It was a real piece of shit." Still, the car equaled freedom, and they used it to explore the Gulf Coast and release the pressures of ATC training.
There remained one last hurdle to becoming Controllers—Combat Control School at Pope Air Force Base, North Carolina. The base was encompassed by Fort Bragg, home of the 82nd Airborne, Delta Force, and the 24 STS.
Combat Control School incorporated everything the men had learned to that point on their journey, and then built on that foundation to give them the basics of being a Controller. It was the last school before they earned their berets, but by no means was it the final school; they still had to complete HALO and achieve their joint terminal attack controller certifications, among many others. For John and Joe, "We thought we'd made it already and didn't realize that's not how the instructors saw us till we started class."
Morning PT sessions were grueling (again) and were followed by a daily in-ranks inspection to check each student's ability to pay attention to detail. Infractions for a string on the uniform, a poor shave, or scuffed boots incurred push-up penalties. Then it was on to the classroom to learn radio and navigational equipment capabilities, how to establish assault zones, advanced land navigation, and small-unit tactics (patrolling, ambushes, and assaults), in addition to advanced weapons training, including grenades and demolitions. The academics of the classroom were complemented by field training, the euphemism for being in the woods of Fort Bragg under the watchful eye of the CCT instructors. Unlike at previous schools, mistakes "in the field" were rewarded not just with calisthenics but with CS (chemical smoke), the military term for tear gas. Instructors used it to induce stress, since shooting at students was not something one could do to simulate combat conditions. The sweating men would don their gas masks to protect their eyes and lungs, but there was no escape from the burning, particularly in their crotches and armpits, where the searing doubled when coupled with raw moist skin.
The students frequently parachuted into training to acclimate them to jumping. Joe recalls the nighttime jump the team made into one of Fort Bragg's drop zones named Normandy. They were to land at Normandy and navigate to their next target, Sicily DZ, to establish a C-130 dirt assault strip, and then control and land an actual plane. In the plane waiting to jump into the dark, John was next in the stick to jump behind Joe and leaned forward to shout in his ear over the roar of the plane's engines and the wind rushing past the open jump door. "I'm going to piggyback you. I'll be right on your ass!" Joe, no fan of jumping, merely nodded, _Yeah, right_.
When Joe cleared the door and the round chute fully inflated above his head, he looked up to see imprints of feet sinking into the billowed fabric and making their way across to the edge of the canopy. The next thing he knew, John's body dropped into sight next to him. John had jumped so close to his friend their parachutes opened atop one another and John had to walk across Joe's. When he got to the side, Joe's canopy had stolen his air, dropping the older student down to his level. "We were level, side by side. And John was giggling with adrenaline." The boy from Tennessee, however, was far from elated.
As the weeks turned into months, the team prepared for their final field training exercise, FTX, held at nearby Camp Mackall. There the men were tested on their ability to insert into a hostile country, patrol to various targets, conduct assault-zone and other operations, and suffer. Food and water were never withheld, but sleep was a luxury. And of course, to help keep them motivated, there was the dreaded CS gas.
The last event of the FTX was for the men to hump their rucks and weapons the fifteen miles back to the Combat Control School (CCS) building. Like everything else the students did, it was a timed and competitive event. Tired, but driven by the knowledge a mere fifteen miles separated them from their goal, every member of their seven-man CCS class finished. On a sweltering July night in 1990, John and Joe, the only two survivors from OL-H class 89-005, walked across the stage of the Pope NCO club, donned their red berets, and bloused their black leather paratrooper jump boots for the first time.
The Air Force's newest Combat Controllers, now more brothers than friends, both received orders to the 21st Special Tactics Squadron, a move that took them directly across the street from the Combat Control School. Whatever challenges and adventures were to come, they planned to face them together.
Chapter 4
July 1990
John had finally achieved his dream of being "something more," something only a select few had ever accomplished, only to discover along his pipeline journey that qualifying as a Combat Controller was only half the measurement of success in his new world. The other, greater, metric could be realized only in actual combat. He couldn't have known it, but in late July 1990, his first opportunity was only weeks away.
One of John's other local buddies was Joe Puricelli, an Army 82nd Airborne paratrooper he'd met at Airborne School. On 2 August, a Thursday, Joe invited John to travel back to his hometown of Windber, Pennsylvania, to hang out for the weekend. John thought, _Sure, why not?_
The same day, half a world away, another man executed some travel plans. Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait at midnight on 2 August, bombing the capital and the tiny emirate's paper military, seizing key facilities using helicopter-borne commandos. Within twelve hours it was all but over; Kuwait's military was either wiped out or had fled, along with the royal family.
The news made a global splash as the US mulled what to do about this realignment of 65 percent of the world's oil sourcing, yet it was barely a blip on John Chapman's radar. John and Joe stopped at a gas station as they rolled into the rural borough and ran into Valerie Novak, one of Joe's best friends from high school, who was completing her last year of nursing school. Valerie had long brown, wavy hair, blue eyes that shone with a mischievous twinkle, and a raucous laugh. Her tiny five-foot-four-inch frame belied her vivacious personality, which she enthusiastically demonstrated when she gave Joe a big hug and said, "Hey! You're home! Let's go out tonight!" Joe smiled and said, "Well, I have a friend here with me," and introduced her to John. Valerie responded with a hearty, "Cool!" and they were off, spending the night hanging out at one of Windber's bars. During the evening, and long into the night, as Valerie remembers, "We went dancing and drinking...We drank _lots_ of tequila." For John, the weekend passed way too quickly, and immediately after he returned to Pope AFB, John and Val started calling each other and writing letters and cards. As often as he could, he drove the eight-hour stretch to Windber so he could spend time with Valerie. Almost as often, she would come off a twelve-hour shift, jump in her car, and drive the eight hours to see him at the condo he'd purchased in Fayetteville. Somehow, they made the long-distance relationship work, and by fall the two were inseparable.
While John was falling for the petite brunette, the US and Kuwait had called an emergency UN Security Council meeting, which dutifully passed Resolution 660 condemning the invasion and demanding Iraq's immediate withdrawal. For the next few months, Iraqi overtures and negotiations were met with repeated rejections by President Bush and a militant British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher.
In November, while the Iraqi situation deteriorated, John and Val joined his father for Thanksgiving in northern Michigan. During a horseback ride, John was thrown and landed hard and in an awkward position, but he got up, "rubbed some dirt on it," and continued riding.
In the wee hours of the morning, John woke Valerie, telling her he was in incredible pain. Valerie remembers, "I checked him, and his stomach was enlarged. I immediately knew we needed to get him to the hospital." When the ER doctor examined John, he shook his head and said, "You're one lucky dude. If you had waited _any_ longer, you'd be dead." John had ruptured his spleen. Though surgery wasn't necessary, he was ordered sidelined for six months.
Relegated to nonphysical duties, such as working drop-zone and assault-zone training across Fort Bragg, he watched as the rest of his squadron trained up for war and deployed. Christmas was depressing for the new and untried Combat Controller. His only solace was the time spent with Valerie, who'd traveled down so they could spend Christmas together. By January, his squadron, the 21st STS, was a skeleton crew of nondeployable and stay-behind airmen.
* * *
For CCT, the war proved to be a watershed moment. Across Iraq and Saudi Arabia, Controllers from different squadrons established and ran airports and airfields, conducted beacon bombing (using beacons to determine known points for accuracy) missions with US and coalition aircraft, and liberated allied embassies with British Special Air Service (SAS) and Special Boat Service (SBS) troops. Hunting Scud missile launchers in the western deserts of Iraq with Delta Force to keep Israel on the sidelines and hold George Bush's coalition together was the 24's sole purpose. Overall, their efforts dropped Scud launches into Israel to virtually nil. One CCT, Bruce Barry, supported by a Delta troop, managed to destroy an estimated twenty-seven missile launchers alone. When the war ended, General Norman Schwarzkopf, the US commander, flew to Delta and the 24's operations base in Arar, Saudi Arabia, near the Iraqi border, to congratulate them.
"So this is the guy who kept Israel out of the war," said the hero of America's Desert Storm campaign as he regarded Bruce Barry, the other, unknown, hero of the coalition when they were introduced. It was a proud moment in the 24's continued transformation into the most distinctive and versatile unit in special operations.
* * *
In North Carolina in the spring of 1991, as the troops were coming home from Desert Storm, John Chapman watched as his brother Combat Controllers returned to a hero's welcome, offered by a nation taking pride in a victory that scrubbed away the stains of the national protest and social divisions that marked the Vietnam conflict. He'd missed the entire war due to his injury and subsequent sidelining, and now, it seemed, there'd be no opportunity for another in a stable new world order led by the sole remaining superpower, America.
With his work life stable, if a bit unexciting, John picked a June weekend nearly a year after his chance meeting with Valerie to drive to Windber and propose. She knew what John's job entailed, and she knew she would have to move from her hometown to destinations unknown. His one solace at missing the entire war with his brothers was the other piece he'd been missing in his life; and here she was, in the form of a vivacious swirl of energy who'd agreed to be his wife.
In November of 1992, they packed their belongings and shipped out to Japan for John's next assignment with the 320th Special Tactics Squadron. Overseas military assignments tend to bring service members and their families closer to their fellow Americans, and John and Valerie were no exception. While she worked at the hospital, John and the other Controllers trained: more dive operations; HALO parachuting; small-boat, drop-zone, and assault-zone operations. Conducting NEOs, or noncombatant evacuation operations, was a prime focus of the unit. Because of the 320th's central location in the Pacific theater, theirs was the go-to unit when disaster struck. Evacuating embassies, airlifting out American citizens or disaster victims...These were important missions to rehearse, and the unit had a proud humanitarian legacy that seemed, in a peaceful world, like it might be John's best chance at using the skills he'd been developing for years.
* * *
While John toiled in the Pacific, the 24 added to its legacy and mystique on the remote coast of Africa in another country most Americans had never heard of: Somalia. In an operation that came to be known as Black Hawk Down, one Combat Controller, Jeff Bray, kept the besieged force of Delta operators, Rangers, and fellow CCT and PJs alive during the fiercest portion of the historic eighteen-hour gun battle, using his unequalled airstrike expertise. The operation and, more specifically, the firefight that took place on 3 October 1993, shaped special operations and US foreign policy for the next eight years, until an Arab scion would declare war on Western civilization, and America in particular, and change the course of international history.
* * *
John learned of the Somalia operation in the same fashion as the rest of the world, through media reporting and grisly images from the streets of Mogadishu. But within the Combat Control community, word slowly spread of the heroics of the CCT involved. By then, John was well into the second year of a three-year tour in the Far East, gaining valuable experience and enjoying training missions in exotic countries like Thailand and Korea. But they were just that, training missions. As 1995 approached, he realized he wasn't satisfied, not completely. Something was missing, exacerbated by his having missed the First Gulf War.
There was only one place to gain combat experience, or at least execute highly dynamic operations with national implications. If he was to attain the experiences he desired and validate the years of training under his belt, he needed to go to this place. But to do so, he would need to be more physically fit, more proficient in his skills, and more mentally committed than he had ever been in his life, because the destination he had in mind took only the absolute best of an already elite group of men. That place was the 24th Special Tactics Squadron.
* * *
Assessment and selection for the 24 is singular, yet simultaneously similar to the process at the other most elite military units in the world, SEAL Team Six and Delta Force. Within Combat Control it is unique because, among all the operational Special Tactics squadrons, it is the only one that requires the individual to voluntarily submit a package and request assignment.
From Scud hunting in Iraq to man hunting in Mogadishu and every significant American counterterrorist operation from Desert One forward, the 24 has played a key role. No other "black" SOF unit (defined as a unit operating with restricted congressional oversight) has been involved in as many nationally prioritized and high-risk special operations. The 24 doubled in size from the time of Grenada to the First Gulf War, and then doubled again, occupying increasingly greater space within the JSOC compound at Fort Bragg.
In the spring of 1995, John Chapman looked to add his name to the best of the best in the world. It would be daunting. He was applying to one of the most demanding units in the history of America's armed forces. Of the men in Combat Control who applied, only half would succeed in the two-week selection and six-month Green Team training process. John knew little about the unit, mostly snippets from the few former members who circulated among the other Special Tactics squadrons (24 members rarely reentered the "white" SOF system). Yet if that's where the truly best of CCT went to demonstrate their excellence, then he'd go there too. And there was another calculus for the now ten-year veteran: He wanted the chance to prove himself in combat or combat-like operations and, at age thirty, he was rapidly approaching "old guy" status. Once in the unit, he could conceivably stay for the rest of his career—but getting in was the trick.
As with everything else John did since Val came into his life, his approach to this new opportunity incorporated her.
"I want to do this, but if you say no, I won't," he'd told her in early 1995. Two decades later, Valerie remains convinced that had she said no, the matter would have been dropped without resentment. "But I didn't want to look back at age eighty and realize I'd kept him from something he wanted so badly." And he did want it badly. He knew that wanting it was part of what it took to make it, just like the pipeline, only this time he was being measured against the other best of the best, with a metric only the 24 selection committee knew.
John attended selection in the summer of 1995 and successfully assessed for assignment. Much of what is known regarding Delta and SEAL Team Six selection is based on previously released books by former unit members. The 24 selection process, while similar in many ways to its Army and Navy counterparts, remains a closely guarded trial of the human spirit. He came home and announced the great news to Val, who was thrilled to return to North Carolina, where they still had friends at the 21st STS and would be closer to family. Then she added news of her own...They would be bringing home a small piece of Japan when they returned. She was pregnant.
By October, the expectant couple was back in Fayetteville, happy for the overseas experience so many service members enjoy, and even happier to be home again. They bought a house and settled in for what they believed would be the rest of John's career. Valerie even returned to her previous job as an in-home nursing care provider as she awaited the birth of their first child.
Two new adventures lay ahead for them: their first child and John's assignment as he waited for Green Team to begin. For John, the first six months would be a return to the grind of passing another pipeline, only this one had higher stakes and risks but also offered compensation by virtue of the unequalled caliber of the men he was training with on Green Team.
Green Team was set to start in late January, and the couple spent the holidays reconnecting with old friends and making new acquaintances. For John, one particular CCT stood out: Pat Elko. Thin and athletic, the six-foot-two-inch first-term enlistee had little by way of experience but put in a strong showing at selection and was accepted into the unit. John took an immediate older-brother liking to Pat.
The early morning hours of 18 January 1996 were frigid in North Carolina, in a bone-chilling way that only the humid weather of the South can produce. John and Val were snuggled tightly in bed when John's newly issued beeper went off on the nightstand at 0516 with coded instructions to report to the unit immediately. When the newest members of the 24 arrived, they learned Green Team started _NOW_.
What followed was every kid's dream of what the military is supposed to be but in reality was reserved for a very select few who rose to the top of their professions in special operations. They seized airfields with Rangers in Louisiana and Georgia. They trained day and night on cross-country motorcycles, with NVGs and full combat loads. They had their first orientations to Delta and SEAL Team Six, the latter involving exposure and operations on the Navy's HSAC (high-speed assault craft), the offshore racing boats the SEALs used for attacking targets in the ocean and for launching operations on land. These kidney-damaging/brain-pounding boats were a source of either excitement or misery, depending on how well one handled the seasickness and physiological impact of boat operations. For Chapman, a water natural, the boats were exhilarating.
Advanced shooting instruction was provided by the Green Team instructors (seasoned CCT and PJs from the 24, including Jeff Bray, one of the unit's heroes from Somalia), augmented by contract civilians at the legendary Thunder Ranch and Y.O. Ranch in Texas (where John's team managed to drink the facility out of beer in the first two days of training). When they weren't on the road, the team spent time utilizing others' facilities, such as Delta's obstacle courses, located conveniently down the road from the 24.
As their training progressed, the men began the process of gelling as a team, meeting each other's wives, kids, girlfriends, or dogs, as the case may be, sharing beers and meals, and of course coming to rely on one another completely. Early on, Pat was adopted by John and Val. Pat, now an FBI agent in Dallas, recalls, "I can only guess the number of nights I spent there. John and Val were kind of like my parents away from parents, except we drank a lot of Miller Lite."
The team's next stop was HALO and HAHO (high-altitude/low-opening and /high-opening) training. Parachuting is a critical skill, and much time was spent in the air at a classified facility in the western US, as well as on the drop zones of Fort Bragg, and included day and night jumps from as high as 25,000 feet. The parachute training culminated in what one of John's Green Team instructors refers to as "a full-benefit, night, oxygen, ruck, and weapons HAHO jump." The men, looking to push the boundaries, "plotted the GPS and drop calculations to the maximum" over the desert, covering twelve miles under canopy to land within seventy-five yards of one another, taking their place as members of the military's best combat parachutists.
Amid the demands and the steep learning curve of an intense training regimen, on 13 May 1996, John and Valerie welcomed their first child, Madison Elizabeth Chapman. Valerie recalls the moment the three became a family. "The first time he held Madison, the spark in his eye was like nothing I'd seen before. It was like a kid in a candy store, he was so excited." While sharing the moment with his wife and receiving hearty congratulations from his new teammates, there was little time to revel in or reflect upon the profound change Madison's arrival would produce on the Combat Controller. Training and missions went on despite the other facets of life, and nothing could replace the absoluteness of contingency preparation and execution at the 24, so after a week off, John returned to training and his team.
In Fort Walton Beach, Florida, the team practiced scuba and low-signature rebreather diving insertions through the ocean surf, navigating with compass boards in the dark and honing skills necessary to work alongside their SEAL counterparts. There, they also practiced air-dropping rescue RAMZ (rigging alternate method Zodiac) boats into the ocean. These approximately three-foot cubed packages contained a rolled-up raiding-craft boat and motor, including fuel, and rucksacks with weapons, all in a single container. In the water, the boat would be inflated with compressed gas, getting the team underway toward a target or water crash site in less than five minutes.
For the CCT, no training was more important than close air support. They traveled to Fort Campbell to work with the 160th's helicopter gunships, F-16s and F-15s in Gila Bend in Arizona, and A-10s at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri. Finally, on 29 July 1996, the men stood together and were welcomed into the most prestigious Air Force special operations unit as full-fledged brothers. Together, John and Pat went to Red Team (one of three colors, the others being Blue and Silver) to begin their new lives. In addition to their own specific training requirements—airstrikes, surveys of critical facilities and airfields—Red Team alternated training with Delta and SEAL Team Six.
Madison grew, and the family shared time when John was home. They settled into a rhythm revolving around his demanding job and travel schedule between exercises and training with the Army and Navy. By summer of 1997, Valerie was pregnant again. Nearly two years to the day after Madison was born, her younger sister arrived. Brianna Lynn Chapman was born 5 May 1998, completing the small family.
By the time Brianna turned one, John had turned another corner. The girls had come to be his life, and the allure of Delta Force and SEAL Team Six waned in the face of his new and true purpose. Recalls Val, "When he was home, he was home." He preferred bathing the girls and brushing their blond hair to beers and wrenching in the garage. "He could have killed five thousand people at work, and when he walked in the door, you'd never have known," reflects Valerie on how complete John's transformation was after the girls' arrival.
However, as he was psychologically moving in the opposite direction, John's first opportunity to execute a real mission appeared on the horizon of another frigid East Coast winter day in 1998 while working with SEAL Team Six. The Navy unit was deploying a force to the NATO-led stabilization force in Bosnia to hunt Yugoslavian war criminals, the latest incarnation of Delta's man hunting in Somalia five years earlier. Delta was also in the region, but this time the SEALs were getting their own shot at leading and executing a similar operation. John's SEAL element target was Goran Jelisić, a Bosnian Serb wanted for genocide and crimes against humanity. John's job was handling tactical communications for his entire team as it pursued its man on cobblestone streets in the small villages surrounding Tuzla, where Goran was believed to be housed. The SEALs and the Combat Controller arrived in the conflict-ravaged region in January, and while much of the detail of their operations remains classified, they captured the fugitive who'd vowed never to be taken alive and delivered him to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. There, at his trial, he was acquitted of genocide charges but not of crimes against humanity. He was sentenced to forty years in prison and remanded to the Italians to serve out his term. There were other hunts and captures, and by April, John and the SEALs redeployed. In keeping with the sensitive nature of the operations, John never told Val where he'd been or what he'd done.
When John returned home to his family, he'd arrived at a decision. The window for getting on operations and gaining combat experience was closing. It was time to spend more time at home with his girls. He didn't want to hold out for another opportunity to get into combat; the only missions on the horizon appeared to be more of the same and, while exciting at times, they were more of a letdown than a validation. He left Red Team behind and joined the 24's survey team. Survey, as it was simply known, focused on comprehensive surveys of locations the 24's "customers" (Delta and other units or organizations) valued around the world. In Survey, John built on the basic airfield and drop-zone survey skills common to all Combat Controllers, adding AutoCAD computer drafting to his expertise. John found he liked the work as much as he appreciated the more predictable schedule for his blossoming family. Though not high-octane like being on Red Team, the survey team had its share of intense situations, placing men, often working alone, in precarious situations around the globe.
Meanwhile, Madison was growing fast, Brianna hot on her heels, as the family entered the new millennium. John, now well settled into the drafting and computer skills of his survey job, came home in the evenings to little ones awaiting his nightly entry. Inside, and much to Val's dismay, he often grabbed the girls up, bundled inside a blanket, and would toss them into the air, brushing the ceiling, to catch them again, then toss them, tiny arms flailing, onto the couch.
* * *
By September of 2001, the couple had devised a plan. While John's new computer and survey skills sharpened, his core counterterrorist skills and proficiency dulled as he made peace with the fact that there'd be no war to validate his military career. He contemplated the future after Combat Control.
John and Val had agreed he was only going to do twenty years, then use his drafting and survey skills to increase his salary in preparation for the girls' later schooling. They were already attending a costly private academy, supported by the income from Val's in-home nursing career, and the proud parents intended to continue providing the best academic preparation. Secretly, though, John harbored a dream of opening his own custom auto shop where he could create and wrench vehicles like the Cobra kit car he was building in his spare time. On the night of 10 September, he stood in his garage with a beer, looking at the project and wondering when he might finally get the time to finish the vehicle, still barely a frame, with an engine, drivetrain, and various parts scattered across his workbench and garage. The world was peaceful, his relationship with Val was strong, his girls were growing, and he accepted a future that didn't involve proving himself in combat as he'd once hoped. As things stood, John was just fine with that.
Chapter 5
11 September 2001
The 23rd STS sits on the far side of Hurlburt Field's runway, across from Headquarters Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC). The base, itself home of the majority of AFSOC's forces, is actually an auxiliary field of the giant Eglin Air Force Base and test range, thereby reducing Hurlburt's status from "base" to "field." Older maps identify it as Auxiliary Field #9 and show only a smattering of buildings, not the sprawling amoeba of compounds it is today. At the time of the founding of the original Air Commandos for use in Laos and Vietnam, it was the perfect location, tucked anonymously away in the swamps of the Florida Panhandle, hidden from prying eyes. The famous 1970 Son Tay POW rescue attempt was planned and rehearsed there for that very reason.
On the morning of 11 September 2001, the 23rd was planning to hold a squadron-wide "monster mash" physical endurance training event consisting of a series of unusual physical challenges in which teams competed against one another. Pedaling his bike from home to the monster mash that clear summer morning was Calvin Markham, a sixteen-year master sergeant and CCT. Despite putting himself at an energy deficit disadvantage (monster mashes could go on as long as half a day, leaving participants depleted for several days, depending on which group of Combat Controllers planned them), he regularly rode in to work, regardless of the day's schedule.
A giant of a man with round features and a burly but friendly personality to match, Calvin kept a closely cropped haircut to deemphasize a high hairline. Parking his bike near the entrance to the unit's team rooms, he walked in to jarring images blaring from the television in the corner. The first twin tower of the World Trade Center in New York City was heavily damaged, smoke billowing out in waves from the initial plane strike. By the time the second plane struck, the men of the 23rd were already packing: precision microwave airfield landing systems, combat search and rescue gear, radios, laser markers, and weapons. They knew what was coming.
Three weeks later, Calvin and a fellow CCT, along with a Special Tactics officer, were running an airfield called Karshi-Khanabad—known to all as K2—in Uzbekistan, where the US would begin staging in preparation for its first operations in Afghanistan. The three men were literally "First There" in establishing and operating the airbase for the US.
By the first week of October, the 5th Special Forces Group had planned to insert two Operational Detachment Alphas (ODAs or A-teams) as the first teams to link up with the allies' newest partners, the loosely organized and fractious Northern Alliance (in actuality several groups of differing tribes and leaders, some of whom would rather fight each other for local dominance than the Taliban). The two ODAs, each made up of between ten and twelve Green Berets with different specialties—such as weapons, communications, or medicine—were numbered 595 and 555, the latter known by the moniker "Triple Nickel." The first would strike out for Mazar-e Sharif, the other for Bagram Airfield, the abandoned Soviet airbase just north of the capital, Kabul, in the hope that it could be secured and readied for when US operations moved within Afghanistan's borders.
Each ODA was commanded by an Army captain and seconded by a chief warrant officer. Their missions were to establish contact with the Northern Alliance, determine the battlefield dynamics, and crucially, employ airpower to destroy the Taliban and Al Qaeda forces in northern Afghanistan. The two ODAs were responsible for separate locations and took radically different approaches in their planning and execution, which would have significant consequences in the coming weeks. Both ODAs were offered CCT to coordinate and apply airpower. ODA 595 rebuffed the offer. In the words of Combat Controller Bart Decker, "They didn't want anything to do with CCT." ODA 595's decision to exclude CCT would provide the definitive case study showcasing the difference between forces that had a Controller and those that did not.
ODA 555, familiar with the expertise of Combat Control, recognized not only the value of a Controller but its necessity if they were to be successful in their third mission tasking. Green Berets are experts in aligning with, training, and fighting alongside indigenous forces, with a proud legacy founded in Southeast Asia. And while authorized to call in airstrikes, as indeed any soldier or sailor on the battlefield can, they were by no means experts, or even proficient.
ODA 555 was provided a list of available CCT and discussed the names internally. One name stood out—Calvin Markham. Calvin and one of the sergeants, Greg McCormick, had gone through the Special Forces combat diver course together as swim buddies and had remained in contact over the years. McCormick identified the Controller as "the guy," and the matter was settled. By the end of the first week of October, Calvin had moved into isolation with the team and began his own planning. ODA 555 was commanded by a captain, although the one actually in charge was the chief warrant officer, the most senior and experienced man on the team, David Diaz. Calvin had great respect for Diaz, stating, "He'd been in Afghanistan in the eighties, and he knew how the people thought. He was a great leader and was respected by all the guys."
Calvin's air plan, however, was hardly solid, which was a source of concern for the Controller. In the early days of the war, there were no Air Force air operations strike-planning cells. Instead, a few Controllers from the 23rd, the first Special Tactics squadron to arrive in-country, along with a handful of pilots and air planners, built the strike plan from scratch. Bart Decker and the others did their best to coordinate for the unknowns. Decker described it as merely "CAS [close air support] on call. There were no procedures. No one knew what was going to happen."
On 19 October, Calvin and ODA 555 were about to find out. After two attempts at clearing the 20,000-foot peaks of the Hindu Kush range in the midst of severe weather, the joint team finally skimmed the snow-covered terrain and passed into Afghanistan. His immediate boss, Special Tactics Officer Kurt Buller, had walked Calvin to the helicopter, telling him, "You're the first," adding, "I don't know if I envy you or I'm sending you to your death. This could very well be a suicide mission." Buller stayed on the helicopter as it taxied, to ensure there were no problems with the helo's movement, climbing off just before takeoff. The two men shook hands as Buller wished him happy hunting.
Because of the altitude, the men were piled into two separate special operations MH-47s that had been stripped of all armor and flew with the minimum fuel required to insert the team across the border. At their designated HLZs, both helos were offloaded without incident or enemy contact, then they left the men behind to pursue their perilous missions.
Calvin's team was met by a group from the Northern Alliance shortly thereafter and began the critical task of establishing mutual trust over tea and raisins offered by the Afghans. The entire group of several dozen mounted a convoy of old trucks and SUVs and headed into the Panjshir Valley. Even though the Taliban often attacked local villages, Calvin and the team made no enemy contact for the first two days. Instead, they focused their efforts on winning over the Northern Alliance leader, General Mohammad Qasim Fahim, a man whose distrust of the Americans and their reasons for being in his country ran deep. But there was one foolproof way they could demonstrate their commitment and value: airpower. Calvin recalls, "They were pretty skeptical of us. They'd been promised air before." The Afghan leaders had yet to see any of this mysteriously magical war-changing promise.
Calvin's chance to represent the entire might and commitment of the US came on 21 October, a bright and cold morning, when Chief Diaz sent a reconnaissance (recce) team to find the Northern Alliance front line. It was believed to be near the airfield at Bagram and under the command of an Afghan leader named Babajon, whose girth led to the natural Americanization of "General Papa John." The men clambered aboard a few trucks and drove south.
As the small recce team moved onto the north end of Bagram Airfield, the front turned out to be the airfield itself. They dismounted the vehicles and proceeded on foot. The Northern Alliance owned the former Soviet airbase only from midfield north; the Taliban held everything to the south. This World War I–style stalemate had existed for years despite fierce attempts by each party to dislodge the other. If Calvin could deliver airstrikes on the entrenched Taliban positions, he could single-handedly change the course of the stalemate, perhaps the war. As they moved cautiously across the flat terrain, dotted with leafless trees preparing for the coming winter, Diaz told Calvin, "Get where you can establish a good OP [observation post]. Hide in plain sight."
They crept close to the Taliban, and Calvin's observation post materialized before his eyes, the air traffic control tower. Who would expect the Americans to climb into the most obvious building on the airfield? Perfect! The men cautiously approached the structure and then cleared its rooms to ensure no Al Qaeda forces were waiting inside. By then it was late morning, the warmth of the sun a welcome respite from the cold. As Calvin and the team surveyed the airfield through binoculars and a spotting scope, he set about preparing the tools of the Combat Control trade. First were the SOFLAM laser target designator and rangefinder. Then he erected his SATCOM antenna and checked his communications link with the nascent Joint Special Operations Air Component. The JSOAC would be his source for air when he needed it. After he'd checked in, the Controller next began identifying targets he might be able to strike. With enemy lines blurred and only a few hundred meters from his location, the potential for fratricide was significant. The one thing he couldn't do: kill men from his own side. And apart from the few Green Berets with him (and their CIA interpreter, the only member of 555 who could communicate with the locals), he didn't know any of the friendlies or how to tell them apart from the Taliban. Everyone looked the same through binoculars or the spotting scope.
A short time later, the JSOAC called Calvin. "You've been approved for aircraft. Your first flight will arrive on station at noon." He checked his watch—less than an hour. Shit! Calvin hadn't even requested air yet, and now two F/A-18s launched from the USS _Theodore Roosevelt_ were already inbound. Sprinting the seven hundred miles from the aircraft carrier's location in the North Arabian Sea, they were flown by two pilots anxious to get close-range kills directed by someone on the ground.
Calvin set one Green Beret on the SOFLAM to designate targets, while another manned his SATCOM radio. Calvin got on his primary strike radio. He carried two and, as usual, his CCT ruck weighed more than anyone else's on the mission. He was ready. The tension in the air traffic control tower was building, everyone sensed something big was about to happen...except Papa John. Recalls Calvin, "He was pretty skeptical. Thought we were just there for show. Then the first aircraft arrived."
Diaz had the target in the crosshairs of their spotting scope and asked Calvin, "Is that the target?"
Taking the handset from his ear and looking through the scope, he confirmed, "That's it." Then he cleared the aircraft "hot." "Thirty seconds," he told everyone in the tower.
The heavyset general bent forward and looked through the offered scope, but not before giving everyone in the room a final doubtful look. Seconds after he put his eye to the scope, the bunker Calvin had ID'd for his first target disappeared in a direct hit from two 500-pound bombs. The tower shook and General Papa John stood upright to look out the windows, which had long since been shot out of the tower cab, as if the spotting scope was playing tricks on him. Before him, the former Taliban headquarters bunker was a blackened smoking heap of earth and rubble, the smoke of the bombs still rising in the air.
Calvin had no time to enjoy the view. His next planes, F-14s also from the _Roosevelt_ , were already checking in. Behind them, the first Air Force hunters, F-15 Strike Eagles and F-16 Falcons, were chomping at the bit, no doubt wishing their Navy brothers would clear out of the airspace.
The men in the tower watched the battle tone change across the airfield. Taliban positions were frantic. The CIA interpreter, now on the Taliban's frequency, passed himself off as one of their own, asking about damage. The response was immediate and alarmed: Their frontline leader had been killed. In the very first airstrike in the struggle for the Afghan capital, Calvin Markham, with the help of his team, had just killed the most important man in the battle. Papa John was elated at the prospect of so many dead Taliban and the ease with which it had happened.
Calvin "cleared hot" each plane in order, striking Taliban positions to within three hundred meters of their location, causing the men in the tower to take cover behind the flimsy walls of Soviet-quality construction as shrapnel and shock waves rocked the top floor. Not a single friendly fighter was injured during Calvin's first strikes of the war.
In a handful of strikes, these few Americans, led by the skill of one unique individual, broke a three-year Taliban stranglehold on the airfield. Papa John and the other leaders of the Northern Alliance were no longer skeptics. Calvin recalls, "The CIA guys couldn't get the CAS on target. When I got bombs on that first day, hitting C2 [command and control] and rocket sites, our credibility was immediate." And Calvin and the Triple Nickel were just warming up.
Their next mission was an eighteen-by-thirty-seven-mile target area in the Panjshir Valley, but a handful of fighter aircraft diverted at the last minute were not going to be enough to displace thousands of well-armed and armored Taliban. Calvin needed more air, and lots of it. To strike an entire valley, he needed bombers, but he'd also have to be close enough to differentiate friend from foe and adjust fire. Calvin and the Triple Nickel needed to be among the Northern Alliance fighters.
After pleading with the JSOAC for more air for a week, he finally got his wish. ODA 555 established three observation posts in the valley, and on 28 October, nine days after arriving in Afghanistan, Calvin received multiple B-1s and B-52s, fully laden with hundreds of 1,000- and 2,000-pound bombs. Throughout the first week of November, "We broke the back of the Taliban," recalls Calvin. So many bombing runs took place nonstop that he began coordinating them to hit while he slept. He knew the valley better than any training range he'd called air onto back in the States and began to share the "cleared hot" burden with his teammates, who by then were becoming proficient in the art themselves.
By this time, the men of 555 and the Northern Alliance shared a strong bond, sleeping in the same locations, sharing both the MRE rations of the Americans and the local Afghan food, including slaughtered goats and sheep. Calvin would call in resupply drops, normally delivered by C-130s, to keep the team in ammunition, food, and other necessities, the most critical being batteries for his radios and targeting equipment. Unfortunately, it didn't always work out well for Calvin and 555. "This dumbshit colonel in Germany who was in charge of rigging our resupply didn't want to use her precious (and expensive) chutes." Instead she sent disposable high-speed versions, which blew up on opening at the high altitudes. "They burned in, sometimes costing us our entire resupply." The men in America's first major conflict since the Gulf War, it seemed, were not immune to the vagaries of the military's logisticians and bean counters.
With no showers for more than two weeks, they'd begun to take on a most Northern Alliance ambience as well, but that didn't make them Afghans. The white Americans, using Northern Alliance vehicles to move about the country, were now being targeted by a reeling Taliban. To combat the possibility of assassination or ambush, Diaz began masking their intentions by coordinating vehicles for a certain destination and then changing it through their interpreter once they were rolling. But it would be only a matter of time before the Taliban countered the tactic and struck the men at one of their various camps.
The potential problem was solved by the Northern Alliance leaders, who were gaining confidence with each successful airstrike and were pushing to take Kabul. On 11 November, 555 was told the Afghan force was moving on the capital. The Triple Nickel wasn't prepared for, nor tasked with, such an audacious mission, but in the end there could be only one course of action. If the Afghans moved, they would too. "Higher [HQ] was so worried about us going into Kabul, but we really didn't have a choice. We were in [Northern Alliance] trucks, so where they went, we went," recalls Markham.
They weren't, in fact, the first Americans to approach Kabul. The CIA's Jawbreaker team, its first on the ground, was already on the edge of the capital and also armed with a 24 CCT. But the Triple Nickel _was_ the first to bring airpower. Calvin realized his requirements were going to be immense, and his faith in a sluggish JSOAC request system, never strong, was diminishing. "It was a bit comical; someone thousands of miles away with no idea of the situation [on the ground] was deciding how much air I needed or would get." As with the Northern Alliance's push, he had little choice but to request "everything they had, especially bombers," in the hope the JSOAC would grasp the gravity of a full-on assault on the Taliban and give him what he needed.
An all-out battle was at hand, two sides facing off with all available men and weapons. "It was like _Braveheart_ , with both sides lined up" as the battle formed, recalls Calvin. The two armies, no more than five hundred meters apart, prepped weapons, passed orders or encouragement for their men, and waited. Going into deliberate battle for the first time, 555 discarded their CIA-provided Afghan clothing and donned uniforms. They would not go into battle as anything but Americans. Calvin and a couple of 555 soldiers occupied a two-story building, repeating their Bagram strategy, and readied the Controller's equipment. Nearby, in another building, Diaz established a sniper's hide to provide protection for his men and the Combat Controller, enabling them to focus on turning the battle.
The Taliban, with no idea the ODA was there, were completely oblivious to the amount of destructive power inbound against them. At 0800 the morning after 555's arrival in Kabul, the Taliban opened fire on the Northern Alliance. In the hope of routing them, the Taliban fired everything they had prepped. "The exchange of fire was stunning. I'd never seen fire anything like it in my life," remembers the Combat Controller. The exchange went on for hours. Meanwhile, Calvin and his teammates were already calling in strikes as fast as they could. The aircraft arrived in droves, forcing the Controller to start stacking them in air traffic holding patterns at different altitudes, just as Bruce Barry had done a decade earlier in the remote desert of Iraq. Only this time, there was an entire battlefield surrounding the CCT, and the fates of thousands of men—friend and enemy alike—were in his hands.
At an insane pace, he scribbled call signs, payloads, and play times (the time a particular aircraft was available to remain on station). Bombers, fighters, Navy, Air Force, coalition—they kept coming as word of the significance of the battle spread. This forced the Combat Controller to employ innovative sequencing and use of aircraft. "I was putting B-52s in timed strike patterns. When they rolled in, my fighters were out and they could drop their bombs from thirty thousand feet. Once those bombs hit, my fighters were rolling in and putting bombs right on. It was like the B-52 was marking the target for them," he recalled in an interview.
After two hours of the most intense airstrikes of Calvin's life, the battle was still not turning in the Northern Alliance's favor. The Taliban, with superior numbers of men and equipment, now rolled on the friendlies with Soviet tanks and heavy antiaircraft weapons, aimed like rifles at allied positions, including the fire control building occupied by the Controller and his team. To protect the most valuable man on the battlefield, Northern Alliance troops were instructed to defend the American position. The battle was raging with hand-to-hand fighting at the base of the building, and Diaz's overwatch was insufficient to hold the enemy at bay.
"By the time of the [airfield] battle, whenever we were under threat, their mission was to keep us alive at all costs," Calvin recalls of their Afghan security force. While he continued focusing all his attention on receiving targets from his Green Beret spotters and laying down bomb strikes, below him, Northern Alliance soldiers were laying down their lives to protect his. Eighteen years after the battle, these nameless men remain close to his heart, their sacrifice not forgotten by the man whose job it was to liberate their comrades. "There's no greater respect in the world than someone who's willing to lay down their life for you in combat." Of the men who died for him he states simply, "They weren't the best equipped or trained. But they were men. I'll never forget them or the honorable way they died."
Despite the Afghan protection that allowed him to continue bringing airpower to bear, the tide was turning against the Northern Alliance. Thousands were already dead on both sides, but the Taliban's superior numbers were proving decisive. The Northern Alliance, including 555, for whom there would be no retreat without their selfless Afghan brothers-in-arms, was in danger of being overrun. Calvin could still see two thousand Taliban troops, supported by armored personnel carriers in addition to the tanks, staged for a final and massive push. Behind them, a second wave waited. He needed to take a game-changing gamble.
Overhead, he had another B-52 poised to strike, but this one was different. It was loaded with twenty-seven 2,000-pound bombs, which he intended to place within five hundred meters of his own position—from 30,000 feet. Unfortunately, none of the bombs were precision guided, but were merely "dumb" bombs, subject to winds and atmospheric disruptions through six miles of airspace without correction. Such a mission at home on the training ranges of Nellis AFB, Nevada, required a five-mile safety standoff distance.
With such a massive single delivery, if he was off with any of his multiple calculations (the coordinates, his position, the friendly locations—all derived from an inadequate and antiquated Soviet map), not only would the Northern Alliance lose the battle for Kabul but he and the rest of his team would be vaporized by his own hand.
The Combat Controller looked to his teammates. They looked back, poised behind their weapons and the targeting equipment, as a battle for survival was being waged one floor below them and across the fields to their front. Men were fighting and dying. The Americans stared for what felt like an hour but in reality was merely seconds, while everyone weighed the consequences. He asked his team, "Are you guys good with this? Are we going to do this?" To a man, all agreed.
He rechecked that his SST-181 radar beacon (the only device he had to mark their position for the bomber) was working, checked the strike coordinates a final time, and called in the airstrike.
After inputting the data at 30,000 feet, his aircraft traveling at nearly 500 mph toward the men's fate below, the pilot asked the Controller to confirm he wanted the strike placed immediately adjacent to their own position.
"I told him that if we didn't, we were going to be dead anyway."
Despite the desperation on the ground, the Controller waved the pilot off his first pass and sent the bomber around again, using the time to reconfirm every decimal.
When the plane reported inbound the second time, Calvin, gazing out upon the surreal scene before him, almost Hollywood in its drama, took another breath, keyed his black plastic handset, and stated clearly and calmly, "Cleared hot."
Seconds later came the pilot's reply: "Bombs away."
Bombs released at 30,000 feet take roughly one minute to fall to earth. Outside the strike building, thousands of warriors, committed to their opposing causes, continued to fight, oblivious to the gravity-delivered destruction headed their way. Through the Alliance lines, 555 sent the word, "Get down!"
Committed to a destiny of his own devising, Calvin looked up at the clear blue sky, so deceptively serene, and at the B-52 high overhead as it left four contrails from its eight turbofan jet engines, and thought of his family back home. He took a deep breath and hugged himself to the floor.
The strike was perfect: 54,000 pounds of explosive death detonated parallel to the remnants of the friendly line directly in front of them. Black smoke blossoms of dirt and fire, stretched out over a mile-long line, exploded into the air. Then the sound hit, concussion after concussion rocking everyone on the battlefield, stealing the breath from their lungs. Calvin's building buckled but stood. In slow motion, heavy pieces of armored carriers and tanks tumbled through the air, their landings silent as they were drowned out by the deafening roar of 2,000-pound bombs releasing their energy at an atomic 25,000 feet per second in every direction.
In the immediate silence that followed, itself strangely deafening, the line of huge craters, bordered by pieces of men and rifles and the hulks of armored equipment, revealed themselves to the stunned Taliban and Northern Alliance witnesses. Beyond the destruction, the Taliban's second wave could be seen racing south in retreat.
The road to central Kabul was suddenly open, and within an hour of his battle-ending airstrike, Calvin and 555 were again in the back of Northern Alliance vehicles, riding into the city in a scene reminiscent of a liberated French town from the Second World War. Pockets of resistance remained, but the capital fell, and Calvin Markham arrived in the city at 0800 on 13 November. It was his twenty-sixth day of combat. What Pentagon planners believed would take more than six months was accomplished in less than a month by the commitment of a sometimes-fractious Northern Alliance and one Special Forces ODA with a lone Combat Controller. During the handful of days immediately following the insertion of ODA 555 and the other A-teams with CCT, the Northern Alliance's control of the country went from less than 15 percent to 50 percent.
In his Silver Star citation, Calvin Markham, the first Combat Controller to direct airstrikes in America's response to 9/11, is credited with directing dozens of airstrikes "involving over 175 sorties of both strategic [heavy bombers] and attack aircraft resulting in the elimination of approximately 450 enemy vehicles and over 3,500 enemy troops. [This] led to the eventual surrender of hundreds of Al Qaeda and Taliban ground forces" during his first mission, lasting forty-two dangerous and often desperate days. They would not be his last days of danger.
After the big battle, among the rubble of the formerly besieged Afghan capital, two friends met, CCT from different squadrons. They were dirty and disheveled, both having gone nearly a month without bathing. Their clothes were stiff with crusted sweat and dried mud, and their beards and hair were grungy as they hugged each other in brotherly fashion. Calvin was wrapping up his first mission. The other, a man named Joe O'Keefe, was a 24 operator and member of its Advance Force Operations team. Joe was the CIA's Jawbreaker Combat Controller. Like Calvin, he'd snuck into the country weeks before, but with a four-man Agency team.
Calvin, having just delivered victory in the first major battle of the war but with severe frustrations over the way commanders and planners in the rear delivered everything from batteries to bombs, shared his experiences. "We brainstormed. How can we do this better?" says the burly CCT. As much as they were fighting the enemy, they were also fighting an Air Force bureaucracy, coordinating its air support through a rigid process stretching back to the 1970s of Laos and Vietnam. "There was no procedure for what we were doing. We were writing the books," he recalls.
* * *
Stateside, John Chapman wasn't writing the book on new airstrike procedures. He was trapped in the survey shop writing survey assessments and generating products for others to use in contingencies or war. And as in the Gulf War, he found himself sidelined. Only this time it was by choice; he'd chosen to move to surveys, and now the newest war, striking the United States from a clear blue sky two months before, had the entire focus of the US military, except himself it seemed.
* * *
In Bagram, Joe O'Keefe and Calvin Markham went their separate ways, knowing they were at the beginning of a long war with a bureaucracy both antiquated and constipated and an enemy well established and fanatical. Calvin headed to a well-deserved R & R. Joe was about to embark on another Combat Control first, this one in a place neither friend knew existed—a mountain cave complex a hundred miles east of Kabul on the Pakistan border. A place called Tora Bora.
Chapter 6
11 September 2001
Combat Controller Joe O'Keefe was on his morning six-mile run around the flight line of Pope Air Force Base when a 24-STS four-wheeled Mule cargo buggy pulled up beside him. The driver shouted, "You better come back to the squadron. Now!" He hopped in and returned to the 24 inside the JSOC compound to find the first World Trade Center tower smoking on television, and he knew he was going—where, was difficult to say. Joe, an eighteen-year veteran CCT, was part of a pilot team of Controllers working with Delta Force on advanced force operations (known as AFO), in essence troops who would arrive before anyone else in sensitive or hostile areas. So wherever he was headed, Joe was guaranteed to be at the farthest edge of America's response.
A short time later, he was on his way to Uzbekistan with a fellow AFO team member by the name of Mario. The two men were to be CCT's forwardmost element, chopped to the CIA's Jawbreaker team (responsible for the Agency's response to 9/11 in Afghanistan). At a stopover in Germany, they and their Delta counterparts split into separate teams: The first, with Mario, went to Pakistan; Joe and his Delta teammate, a sergeant major named Dan, were joined by a CIA case officer and paramilitary contractor and deployed to Afghanistan as a four-man team, designated Jawbreaker Team Juliet.
From Uzbekistan the men, all wearing indigenous civilian clothing provided by the CIA, caught a flight to Tajikistan, where Joe was introduced to Gary Berntsen, the CIA's lead case officer for Afghanistan and its hunt for Osama bin Laden. The next stop was Kabul, where Calvin Markham and the Triple Nickel were already targeting and destroying Taliban forces. The team flew in a dilapidated Soviet-era Northern Alliance Mi-8 helicopter, skimming just over the Hindu Kush mountains already flush with snow on their 20,000-foot peaks. Below him, Joe watched the ghosts and relics of the Soviet invasion slip past the windows: rusted tank hulks and armored personnel carriers—here and there, artillery pieces and small villages. The steep lunar landscape and abandoned equipment shared an eerie resemblance to the secret test ranges on which he'd trained north of Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.
When they landed at Kabul, which had yet to fall to Calvin Markham and the Green Berets, they staged for their first mission: the rescue of eight Shelter Now International aid workers, two of whom were American. But at the last minute, the rescue was passed to another group. The situation in the capital was fluid and dangerous. As the only CCT attached to the CIA in Kabul, Joe was tasked with landing the first coalition plane at the former Soviet airbase, Bagram Airfield, in support of the Agency, even though it was still a no-man's-land. He drew on his eighteen years of experience to bring in aircraft. "Then I got orders to land an Iranian plane." The Iranian government wanted their embassy up and running as soon as possible to counter the American influence but refused to participate in multinational actions or assist the Afghans. As he worked his first days at the airfield, much was in motion but little was known. "There were a lot of things passing in the night," he recalls. At Bagram, Berntsen approached Joe one day and asked, "Can you help me out?" The CIA case officer, and now station chief for the newest CIA base, had two-foot aviator kit bags stuffed with cash and wanted Joe to manage them—millions of dollars that the Controller dutifully lugged around for weeks, doling out and recording hundreds of thousands of dollars in transactions. "Berntsen was great," he recalls of the legendary case officer. "He had complete faith in us, and we were fully included in all planning and intel, including cable traffic [the CIA's classified communiqués]."
By mid-November, the early gains in Kabul by Markham and the follow-on forces were coming apart as factions and nations staked out turf and foreign policy by force. Joe and Delta Dan helped to establish the CIA's base of operations in a Kabul hotel, where the Agency was holding its first captured Arab Al Qaeda fighters. Under interrogation, they revealed bin Laden was at Tora Bora. Joe recalls, "We're trying to figure it out. What's a Tora Bora?" No one had heard of it. Berntsen told Joe's team, "We're pushing forward to the Panjshir Valley," north of Kabul.
Before they departed the hotel, Joe met up with Markham. "It was invaluable. Calvin gave me the lay of the land, pointed out details of the Tora Bora region and Jalalabad." A CIA safe house at the latter was their next stop and became the staging base for operations to find bin Laden in Tora Bora. There, Joe met George, the CIA's forward station chief. Also working in the vicinity was a 5th Group ODA with a CCT friend of Joe's, Bill White. The CIA wanted the Special Forces with Bill to move into Tora Bora and conduct airstrikes to kill or flush out the Al Qaeda leader.
At Bagram, Berntsen spoke with 5th Group commander Colonel Mulholland and requested that he send the ODA and White forward. Mulholland asked if the CIA had detailed information on the situation in Jalalabad.
"It's bad," admitted the CIA agent. "Nobody's really in control, and large groups of armed Taliban and [Al Qaeda] fighters are still creating havoc."
"Do you have a fixed location where you're going to set up?"
"No, I don't," he said, adding, "I'm not prepared to wait for security to improve. I'm going now." Berntsen, knowing any lock on bin Laden would be fleeting, was not going to miss perhaps his only opportunity to kill the terrorist.
Mulholland, an experienced Special Forces soldier, was aware how fast things could change; his first two ODAs with Markham and another CCT named Matt Lienhard were lucky to be alive. Gambling another entire team on the CIA's assessment of an uncontrolled battlefield was not a solid bet in what was shaping up to be a long war, and he declined to commit the ODA.
With Mulholland's refusal to commit, the CIA was stuck. Upon receiving the news at the safe house in Jalalabad, George turned to Joe and Delta Dan. "Don't you guys do this?" he asked. When Joe answered that yes, he could coordinate and call in airstrikes from anywhere, George stated, "Okay. Be prepared to move out as soon as it gets dark."
Joe and Dan exchanged looks, knowing their decision, while fully within their capabilities to execute, had committed them to a mission they knew little about. Joe quickly drew up a fire support plan. "I forwarded it up the food chain, and just like that, we were in. We four Americans were the first to arrive at Tora Bora." The date was 3 December.
But getting in wasn't just half the challenge, it was almost the fatal half. The four Americans were placed in the back of a covered truck and had cargo stacked on top of them to facilitate being smuggled into enemy territory. Bouncing through the night, they felt the truck stop at a checkpoint. Beyond their claustrophobic confines, an argument broke out between the ten or so Afghans ferrying them and the unknown checkpoint guards. It occurred to Joe at that moment that their lives were in the hands of CIA-purchased Afghans belonging to a warlord named Babrak. "We had AKs [AK-47s] and Afghan garb and hats, but we're, you know, _white_." If they were discovered, there'd be no doubt the four men were Americans. Luck, however, was on their side, as the situation calmed, and the team felt the truck finally lurch forward and continue on its way, eventually stopping where they unloaded. From there, they proceeded on foot alongside mules packed by their Afghan guides.
After walking several miles in the dark, they were introduced to a village chieftain, who was their next link forward but who was concerned the Americans would bring more of the bombs that had already decimated other villages. "I assured him we were there to ensure _no_ bombs hit villages," states Joe.
The team told him they needed to move farther, but the chieftain was under orders not to let anything happen to the Americans, not so much for _their_ well-being but because, as the Afghan currently responsible for their security and moving them forward, Babrak feared that if he lost "his" Americans, the CIA cash he was receiving would stop. So he refused to take them deeper into the White Mountains, where the locals knew bin Laden and hundreds of Al Qaeda had established a redoubt. The Americans insisted, however, and continued higher and deeper into the snow-covered slopes. They were deep inside Al Qaeda's lines, topping 11,000 feet in elevation but with no idea exactly where the concentrations of enemy forces were, or of bin Laden's location.
Joe recalls, "We're underequipped, not prepared to engage anyone. I've got an AK with three magazines. My gear space is taken up with my SOFLAM, laser rangefinder, and batteries." Though they were all overloaded, like virtually every CCT, Joe was carrying more weight than anyone else on his team.
After more punishing miles and some understandable paranoia, they arrived at a suitable observation point, facing the highest mountain peaks, and got their first good look at the enemy and what they were up against. Joe set up the SOFLAM and put Dan and one of the CIA agents in charge of turning it on and lasing the targets he'd call in. The other CIA agent, a former Delta Force member, surveyed the enemy positions in front of them and determined their first target while Joe set out his radios and laser rangefinder, checked the equipment, reviewed his procedures, and made his first call to an AWACS, an airborne battlefield platform expressly designed to coordinate complex air situations. The AWACS aircraft circled above the battle space as Joe told them where he was and that he needed strike aircraft. There was no higher headquarters or clearance for the small team; they'd been empowered, not by the military but the Central Intelligence Agency, to execute their mission at their own discretion. It may have been a CIA mission, but Joe was now in charge.
The AWACS sent his first aircraft, a two-ship formation of F-14s with GBU-10s (laser-guided 2,000-pound bombs). "My heart was pounding. I can see the AQ [Al Qaeda] guys right out in front of us." Joe waited for the planes to arrive, and because the F-14s can self-lase, there was no need for the team to turn on the SOFLAM on the first strike. When the Navy fighters reported in, "I cleared them hot and the bomb dropped right in the position."
As two thousand pounds of mixed TNT and aluminum powder (a heat impulse enhancer) tritonal explosive obliterated an unaware enemy bunker, and the roiling smoke and telltale mushroom of the explosion and its shock wave reverberated throughout the confined valley in front of them, the four men looked at each other and nodded. Joe O'Keefe had just opened the personal war on Osama bin Laden (within the military he was known by the acronym UBL). He reattacked immediately with additional AWACS-provided fighters, and the team, working together with Dan on the SOFLAM, cleared the immediate vicinity surrounding their first target, creating a one-kilometer clear free-fire zone from which they could operate.
Their CIA lead agent called back to George, who was working from a location between the team and their safe house in Jalalabad, and reported their intent to bound forward into the airpower-cleared space.
George, himself former military, was elated and told the men, "Great news. Listen, this is being briefed at the White House and they're really interested in this. I want you to keep moving forward."
However, not only were the men and their Afghan guides not armed for a gunfight, they weren't equipped to operate unsupported in the frozen mountains. Of their supplies, Joe recalls, "I had a one-quart Nalgene water bottle, one MRE, and only a couple spare batteries. We were only supposed to be out for one night. But okay, we're doing it." The men continued their 11,000-foot march through the frigid mountains, aware that each ridgeline they crossed could hold dozens, if not hundreds, of Al Qaeda. Each step was one snowy footfall from death.
At their next OP, as they set up their position, Joe had the other men sketch targets and work up the data to support airstrikes while he drew up a terrain map of the mountains and enemy in front of them. They'd managed to take the high ground and were looking down on a hornet's nest of activity. When one of the Agency guys passed him a sketch and coordinates to their own location, Joe was confronted with a reality about his situation as the lone CCT. "I realized I couldn't go to bed. I couldn't leave them alone to call strikes unsupervised." It was his responsibility to ensure no friendly-fire incidents occurred and that their own position was safe. Should he fail in this single task, the burden of failure wouldn't rest on any other man's conscience. Joe stayed awake for the next forty-five hours, without break, calling every airstrike while the team around him fed him coordinates and battlefield information.
Joe and the team didn't know that the first fratricide of the war had just taken place, and an immediate halt to precision JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition, the ubiquitous laser-guided bomb) employment had been directed, with one exception: call sign VB2, Joe O'Keefe. As a result, every aircraft loaded with weapons in Afghanistan or on its way was now being pushed to the Combat Controller.
It is in this type of situation that a Combat Controller and all others certified to call airstrikes diverge. Joe explains: "I had so many aircraft thrown at me, I started stacking them in two-thousand-foot increments using standard non-radar air traffic control procedures. All of them dissimilar. I had B-1s, B-52s, F-16s, F-15s, F/A-18 Hornets. It was endless, really." The planes would check in with the AWACS, who forwarded all of them to Joe. As it had with Calvin Markham, and as it would over and over again throughout the new war, it was the expertise of a Combat Controller that drove the mission's success.
The situation was incredibly complex—he had his headset on, listening to the AWACS in one ear and controlling airstrikes and managing an international coalition airport above his head in the other, keying the mikes on his two radios, one after the other. His map border and notepads filled up with call signs, aircraft types, and bomb loads. He became the most popular man with every pilot in-country. As each plane checked in with the AWACS, Joe could hear them requesting, "I want to go to Victor Bravo Two," because they knew they'd get to strike right at the heart of Al Qaeda, even if they weren't aware that Joe was trying to kill bin Laden himself.
That's when things really got exciting and exhausting for the Controller. He began a nonstop, around-the-clock bombing campaign that went on for days. Without sleep, through the below-freezing nights, without food, Joe bombed Al Qaeda. Two days into the onslaught, his Agency team leader called back to Berntsen and stated, "We're going to shut down now and catch some sleep."
The relentless CIA officer, who viewed himself as the long arm of American retribution, was incredulous. "What? What the hell do you want to sleep for? You're killing the enemy!"
"Chief, I'm sorry. But we've been doing this for fifty-six hours straight. Before that, we had to hump up here. We're wiped out." The men had bounded forward four times, deeper into Al Qaeda–held territory than any American force. Yet they were still only four men.
From the comfort of CIA station Kabul, Berntsen realized he couldn't appreciate the pressures or conditions the men were facing. "I'm sorry. Get some rest. Help's on the way. We'll have an SF [Special Forces] team there in less than forty-eight hours."
"That's great news. We'll be back up on the air in six hours. Juliet Forward out." The team was so played out they were unaware of the approach of the village chieftain they'd met days earlier. Their security, provided by Babrak, had quit two days prior, leaving the Americans entirely alone. The chieftain, clad in sandals and Afghan "man jammies" (the ubiquitous outfit worn by Afghan and Arab males that to Westerners resembles a calf-length dress), walked up on their position in the snow without warning. His purpose? Having watched the utter destruction of the mountainous valley during a continuous inferno of smoke and earth-shaking explosions, one after another, he had traveled to thank the Americans for killing the Arabs. "If he'd been Al Qaeda, we'd all have been dead," recalls Joe, adding, "If [Al Qaeda] had even sent out patrols to find out how the Americans were targeting them, we'd have been wiped out." But Al Qaeda never caught on to how the new game was being played.
The other team was the ODA provided by Colonel Mulholland, with CCT Bill White attached, now in position on a ridge on the opposite side of the valley from Joe. After a single six-hour break, Joe and the team stayed up sixty-five of the next seventy-two hours, moving ever closer toward the most hardened Al Qaeda fighters and their leader. When Bill showed up with the Green Berets and occupied a location across the valley from Joe, the two Controllers began coordinating from their different OPs, dividing the terrain and aircraft to keep the pressure on. Because Al Qaeda was communicating on open radio frequencies, CIA SIGINT collectors were getting real-time intelligence on the impact the airstrikes were having. "We're getting B-52s dropping forty-five Mk-82 [500-pound unguided] bombs in a single pass. All this within a couple kilometer square. It was unbelievable."
From 3 to 8 December, Joe O'Keefe, a single CCT, controlled and cleared 688,000 pounds of bombs in the Milawa Valley of the White Mountains, a record that still stands for tonnage dropped by a single CCT, or anyone else, during an engagement in the history of airborne warfare. The exhausted men, out of food, out of batteries, were exfilled by the CIA on the eighth and returned to the Jalalabad safe house, knowing they'd killed hundreds of hardened fighters, but not having destroyed bin Laden. The CIA had pinpointed the Al Qaeda leader's transmitter only 1.8 kilometers in front of VB2, but that was as close as the ill-equipped team got. "I was spent. No food, no water. But it was adrenaline city," recalled the first CCT to directly target UBL. He would not be the last.
More help was at hand. Delta Force had been forwarded by JSOC commander Dell Dailey to enter the fight and kill bin Laden. Forty Delta operators, led by a young officer by the name of Tom Greer and accompanied by Mike Stockdale, a 24 CCT and teammate of O'Keefe's, arrived as the Jawbreaker team pulled out.
Mike Stockdale was relatively junior at the 24 in the fall of 2001. A Denver native, he'd graduated from the 24's Green Team in 1998. Unlike O'Keefe, he'd been in Hungary on a JSOC exercise at the time of 9/11. After returning home with the majority of the command's staff and operational units, he'd quick-turned and found himself on strip alert as part of a CSAR (combat search and rescue) package in Turkey, where nothing exciting happened. He got his break when Delta's A Squadron needed another CCT and he found himself on an MC-130 Talon to Bagram, where he met up with A Squadron's sergeant major, Ironhead, and his new immediate commander, Tom Greer, known by all as Redfly.
Tall, thin, with weathered eyes, brown hair, and an easy disposition, Mike already had a reputation as unflappable inside Delta, but this was his first opportunity to go to war with them. He was met by another CCT, Sean Gleffe, who outranked him, but when Greer pushed farther north to Jalalabad with his forty-man contingent, and from there to George's forward-staged Jawbreaker position, Gleffe gave the mission to Stockdale, telling him, "We got Al Qaeda and UBL up there. Get airpower on it."
As Stockdale arrived in the vicinity of Tora Bora, he watched the drop of a BLU-82 15,000-pound bomb, affectionately called the Daisy Cutter. The size of a VW van and of similar shape, the bomb was dropped by an MC-130 Talon, extracted by a parachute that gently delivers it to its target. The resulting mushroom cloud resembled an atomic bomb's. Along with the Delta operators, friendly "muhj" forces (the term Delta used for friendly Afghan forces), and Al Qaeda fighters in Tora Bora, he was stopped—stunned—by the immense, singular display of firepower. The bomb was a parting gift to bin Laden from Joe O'Keefe.
George, still running the overall battle for the American side, was pushing local warlord General Hazrat Ali to get his forces into the fight and planned to use Delta as the catalyst. Redfly and Ironhead had prepped their shooters and CCT as the sun set and the temperature dropped. They were to move out for a mission, planned to last several days, beginning in the wee hours of the coming morning.
With a hundred-pound rucksack full of radios and batteries, his SOFLAM and laser rangefinder prepped for the mission, Stockdale finally lay down, hoping to get a few hours' sleep before they departed, ready for what was to come: his first battle. He'd just nodded off when a Delta operator shook him awake. "They need you." He found his immediate boss, a Delta sniper and recce team leader called Hopper, who told him, "The muhj are saying they've got momentum to break through the AQ lines, but they're stalled out on the mountainside. They need air support."
Stockdale nodded. "Got it."
"We're gonna go fast, go light, and go now."
"Got it," repeated the Combat Controller. In his corner of the CIA's forwardmost safe house, an abandoned schoolhouse, he stripped his "go" ruck (a mini backpack) from his hundred-pound recce ruck. He stuffed in a radio, a few batteries, his IZLID IR pointer, and some water. They were only going to be out for a short time. He rolled up his SOFLAM, too big for the "go" ruck, inside a threadbare wool blanket and carried it by hand. Their team would be Hopper, Stockdale, an Afghan driver for the Toyota Hilux pickup, and Khan, one of George's CIA men, a former Afghan national and Marine who had been forwarded to Berntsen and George by another government agency.
Stockdale's instructions were simple: (1) Make sense of the battlefield, and (2) support the assault to break through enemy lines with air support.
The four men climbed into one of the beat-up-looking Hiluxes. (Appearances were deceptive; in actuality, they were specially engineered trucks equipped with beefy suspensions and winches and were tuned for high altitude. They were intentionally made to look beat-up to avoid attention.) As they drove up into the mountains, it quickly became clear that the front lines were close. On the ridgelines above them, they saw muhj recoilless-rifle positions. As they wound their way up the single-track road toward the Milawa Valley, they started to receive sporadic Al Qaeda mortar fire, which didn't seem too bad until they rounded a corner and were confronted by a stuck Russian truck with a twin-barreled 27mm antiaircraft cannon mounted in the rear. In front of it was an ancient faded Soviet T-55 tank, attempting to pull it out. Hopper, the most experienced operator in the vehicle, immediately recognized the peril and wasted no time. "Let's get out of this truck and into some defilade. Now!" he shouted as the men scrambled into an adjacent deep-channeled ravine.
No sooner had they dropped behind some rocks than an 82mm mortar round landed right beside the Hilux, sending shrapnel shrieking over their heads and peppering the pickup. A group of muhj was squatting nearby when another round dropped among them, center mass, killing them all. When the Russian truck was pulled clear, "We jumped back in and were on our way, rounds still coming in, targeting us as we drove," recalls Stockdale.
At the next intersection, half a kilometer upslope, they found another disabled T-55, this one with two muhj cowering underneath. They skirted the tank and drove to where the road petered out. Their driver, motioning up a ridgeline, stayed in the cab. Clearly it would be by foot from this point. For Stockdale, it turned into a bit of a circus as they scrambled up a rock scree field in the dark, NVGs their only advantage, allowing them to make the climb. Above them, "We'd encounter one group of muhj, then be passed to another, all of them sort of taking possession of us. It was major confusion."
When they finally arrived at the military crest of a ridgeline—the name for the terrain just below summit, which allows for travel without fear of being silhouetted against the sky—and found some vantage over the fighting, he was stunned. The mountainsides and valley in front of him were strewn with the detritus of battle, uprooted trees, splintered and mangled. Joe O'Keefe had done his work well.
From their position, Stockdale could see three separate Al Qaeda DShK pits chewing up the muhj fighters. He and Hopper prepped his gear so he could get airstrikes onto the closest DShK. Within minutes, "the Admiral" had a pair of F-18s inbound from the USS _Carl Vinson_. With steep terrain and no ability to put a laser right on the DShK, it was going to have to be an old-school talk-on to the target, Laos style—the art of Combat Control. It was also Stockdale's first in combat. With the impossibly steep terrain and well-masked positions, any miscommunication or misinterpretation would result in a potentially catastrophic miss. Meanwhile, the evil green arc of DShK tracers continued to track and destroy the Afghan forces. Hopper watched Stockdale at work as he calmly talked the planes on and destroyed the first DShK position. "When the first DShK went down, it completely changed the dynamic, because it was really chewing up the forces."
The three men and their newest muhj "handlers" used the destruction to move farther forward onto the battlefield, against the desires of the Afghans, as Stockdale continued to call strikes. Into the day the battle raged. Stockdale recalls, "Those first planes are the only ones I remember," as strike after strike blurred together. Finally, night began to fall and he received great news: "I'm getting an AC-130. Now it's going to be 'game on.'" They were now among the muhj fighting positions, and the Afghans were launching RPGs wildly. "It was ringing the shit out of your bell. [Hopper] was doing his team leader thing, keeping down the chaos and the muhj under control so I could do my job." He had his SOFLAM set up and his IZLID pointer ready for the AC-130.
"It was the perfect situation," he recalls. "The gunship is going to be rolling in, Saxon [a British AWACS] is vectoring more air my way." His next set of strike aircraft were B-1s. But before they or the lumbering four-engine angel of death could establish themselves overhead, clouds descended rapidly in the high mountains, rolling down the mountainsides like avalanches. A storm was coming. "The pressure changes were so extreme my ears were popping," he remembers. With the storm inbound, gunship and B-1s were lost, and the men were forced to sit out the freezing weather.
The next day broke with new promise and renewed effort. Planes began pouring in and Stockdale was ready, calling strike after strike in the confined few kilometers of the most contested space in Afghanistan. The battle hit fever pitch. To the Delta operators, "The Admiral is one smooth talker on the radio," stated Greer in his book _Kill Bin Laden_. "Most important in this business was his willingness to risk everything for his fellow man, an unhealthy but common trait among Air Force Combat Controllers."
By that time, Stockdale, Hopper, and Khan had moved into the middle of the battle space, stunning the muhj fighters, protecting themselves as best they could behind the wall and destroyed structure of a shepherd's hut.
At George's schoolhouse, he received an eight-digit grid coordinate on bin Laden's location, putting the terrorist within a ten-meter spot on the earth, the first real fix on the world's most wanted man since the late 1990s, and he gave the information to Redfly (Greer). It was the opportunity all had been waiting for. Across the battlefield, as the other Delta forces tried to maneuver, they "listened to the Admiral steadily bringing in the bombers while the distinct sound of gunfire muffled some of his calls. Just listening raised goose bumps on Jester's [another Delta team leader] arms," reported Greer.
The Admiral had just emptied nine F-18s and a B-1. "He had no idea that he was likely the primary reason that bin Laden, the most wanted man in the world, was on the run." His own position was under extreme enemy counterfire, forcing him to make his calls with his head pressed into the battle-mulched earth. An intercept from the enemy confirmed that "Father [bin Laden] is trying to break through the siege line." Listening in with Ironhead, Greer knew the three-man team was in a perilous position.
Hopper told Stockdale and Khan they'd done all they could and needed to move back. The enemy had a bead on the exposed American team, and the three battle-formed friends suddenly realized their muhj handlers were missing. They'd abandoned Stockdale, Hopper, and Khan. Only three muhj had remained, and the six of them were trapped, pinned down. In their exposed and lone position in front of the friendly lines, Hopper knew their situation was untenable. They couldn't fight on their own, and to stay would be to wait for death. In the fluid dynamics of a pitched battle, they were no longer forward of the friendly lines, but deep inside Al Qaeda territory. They were going to have to escape and evade (E&E) death, or even worse, capture. Stockdale, wrapping his SOFLAM back into his hobo blanket, ever the calm voice, made the radio call announcing friendlies were on the run for their lives. "Warpath. Warpath. Warpath."
As the three began winding their way through no-man's-land, friendly fire stretching out over their heads at Al Qaeda positions, and the enemy returning it, the bombs stopped while Stockdale was off the radio. There was still another CCT, Bill White, in the mountains with the Special Forces, but since no one knew where the three men were, restarting airstrikes was out of the question. Greer and Ironhead were left with a choice: Continue to pound a fleeing bin Laden or throw every man they had at recovering the E&Eing men. Greer's orders had been clear: "Kill bin Laden" and bring back proof. If the risks and costs of such a task were low, it wouldn't be a Delta mission, but the choice was not made lightly. As Greer pondered his options, Ironhead stated, "Your call, sir, but whatever we do, I don't think we should leave here until we have our boys back."
Greer certainly agreed they must eventually recover the men, but UBL just might be killed within the next few hours. He pondered an eternity of a minute before saying, "We need to concentrate on recovering our boys first. If things change between now and then, we'll go for bin Laden too." He would recall that the decision was simultaneously the hardest and easiest of his career.
The full force of all available Delta operators, along with Controller Sean Gleffe, tried to wind its way through the mortars of Al Qaeda. There was a very real chance that Al Qaeda, with hundreds of well-armed and mortar- and rocket-supported men, could mount a serious counterattack, especially given that their leader was still somewhere in the caves and cliffs of Tora Bora.
Stockdale, Hopper, and Khan, crawling and evading across bomb-cratered earth, managed to make it through two kilometers of enemy-held territory over the next two hours, gratefully arriving at the abandoned friendly T-55 tank...only to find it was no longer quite so friendly. The muhj of General Ali they'd been supporting and risking their lives for, some of the very men who'd abandoned them, were now managing it as a checkpoint and wanted payment for the Americans to pass through. A furious Khan held back his anger and promised Ali would pay them later. The tribal custom of bribery was common, but a pissed-off Khan neglected to tell Ali that any money was owed. While Khan was negotiating their "safe" passage, Stockdale took the opportunity to get on the radio and contact Greer, who was elated to learn he hadn't lost any men in the battle, yet.
Safely back at the schoolhouse, Stockdale and Hopper rearmed and refitted. This time, Delta was going out in force. Augmented by British SBS troopers, the new plan was Delta on each flank, with their CCT on the high ground for airstrikes, and SBS up the middle. But a cease-fire was under negotiation between Ali and the other warlords and Al Qaeda, bringing offensive operations to a temporary halt. Greer was under strict orders not to spearhead any assaults on bin Laden's position, only to facilitate muhj advances and remain close behind. The lone exception was airstrikes. Combat Control would remain Delta's only direct shot at killing the terrorist.
When operations were resumed, a wily bin Laden had already safely escaped. Airstrikes and Delta patrols went on for days, with both Stockdale and Gleffe on the radio, but UBL was gone. Of Stockdale's performance, Ironhead would recall, "During the Battle of Tora Bora he proved his mettle. He and [Hopper] were separated from the rest of the squadron behind enemy lines. Stockdale took the entire episode in stride and got right back in the fight."
Ironhead's sentiments are representative of the strong relationship between CCT and the other best units within black SOF, particularly Delta and SEAL Team Six. To men like Greer and Ironhead (who would go on to become the sergeant major of the entire Ranger Regiment before retirement), their Combat Controllers weren't some "attachment," some "other," but respected members of the Unit (as members refer to Delta) with expert skill sets of their own. In _Kill Bin Laden_ , both Stockdale and Gleffe are simply listed as part of "The Boys of Delta" in the book's list of key characters.
Stockdale's view of the events was summarized humbly as, "I basically jumped out of the back of a truck, running from Afghan to Afghan, trying to figure out where the war was." But he discovered that the war went where he did, and wherever that was, he had the power to change the course of history through the handset of his radio.
Chapter 7
October 2001
For the 24 STS, 9/11 created a shared sense of purpose and destiny unlike any in the unit's history. The Combat Controllers knew there were going to be opportunities to kill terrorists, some they'd been tracking for years and others, the perpetrators of the assault on their homeland, no doubt unknowns, who were in the offing for the first time. The unit was the sharpest point of the special operations blade, and anticipation of what was to come coursed through the hallways of the building like surges of adrenaline.
For John Chapman, the weeks immediately following the attacks were the antithesis of adrenaline fueled. Being on the survey team was interesting and intellectually stimulating, but it came at an opportunity cost. John was no longer trained and poised for no-notice contingency operations with the most elite Army and Navy units in the military. The trade-off had been worth it—more predictable travel schedules, time with Val and the girls—until now. He watched from his computer station as his teammates packed, planned, and then left with the first waves. Some snuck into country even before ODAs 555 and 595. Others, into Pakistan to conduct the first combat HALO parachute infiltration since the Vietnam War. And there he sat, on the sidelines. Again.
He was torn between the plans he and Val had for their family's postmilitary future and his primal urge to avenge the thousands of deaths on American soil. The decision came to him. The unit had largely emptied out with the first wave, and due to needing to keep a portion of the unit on alert in the event of a crisis elsewhere in the world, those not assigned to Delta or SEAL Team Six were at least getting their chance to be on deck. Still, it wasn't the war.
By October, John was in Virginia Beach and attached to SEAL Team Six's Red Team sniper element, a team he liked, having worked with them before as part of the alert force. The element was led by a humble and wiry SEAL named Britt Slabinski, known as Slab. He was topped by a thatch of sandy brown hair and had a quiet competence that belied a fierce drive to prosecute his mission. John quickly reintegrated into the team and settled into the alert routine—PT in the mornings, afternoons on the rifle range, or executing more complex scenarios at night—yet it was still mostly a Monday-through-Friday affair, punctuated by reports filtering back from the front lines as the war unfolded.
Tora Bora held everyone's attention, and the SEALs were envious that Delta might get UBL until word came back he'd slipped away. Perhaps Six would finally get their chance at the terrorist leader later and possibly dispel a bit of the second-class-citizen legacy that haunted the unit when compared to Delta Force. Then came word—John, along with Slab's team, would be deploying to Afghanistan in January. What he'd suffered and trained for was at hand, yet it still gave him pause. He wanted so much for his girls—to prepare for life after the military, only a few years away—but he also hadn't lost his desire to join his brothers and finally validate himself in the crucible of combat. In the end, the choice wasn't his; the 24 needed him to go, and he was going. Christmas came and went as John enjoyed what time he could with the girls, who'd come to stay with him in his temporary rented Virginia Beach apartment. Their time together was all too short.
Then, with the New Year came news that John's paternal grandmother had passed away suddenly on 4 January. John was faced with another choice: Deploy, or travel to Michigan to support his family, particularly his dad, Gene. It wasn't a difficult choice; family came first, and if you could help, that's what you did. It would put the 24 in a bind—someone would have to replace him at the Beach, and they were stretched to the breaking point already—but he told his team leader he needed to go back to Bragg. They'd have to send another Controller north.
Combat Controller Mike Lamonica was dispatched to deliver John's replacement and his gear to Virginia Beach and bring John back to Bragg so he could process emergency leave paperwork before catching a flight to Grand Rapids, the closest city to Gene's home. He recalls the drive back, just the two of them, friends but not close, as if it were yesterday. It was a clear but cold and windy four-hour drive, and John did most of the talking, centered on the one thing foremost on his mind...not his grandmother, not even the war, but his own family. For Lamonica it was an intimate and largely one-sided conversation.
"He had a lot on his mind, and I mostly listened," as "Chappy" (his nickname from high school and throughout CCT) recalled his time with Val at Kadena Air Base, where they lived on a quiet cul-de-sac, sitting with other parents, watching their children play. He spoke of how he and Val approached raising the girls as a team. John contrasted his approach with that of many other Combat Controllers, who viewed family as something that came second to missions or career, and how it wasn't until Madison and Brianna were born that he recognized the error of that approach.
"My job now is to serve my country, but there's a greater thing than that. When this war is over, I'm going to dedicate myself to my family," John declared.
"You could see the profoundness of the words he was sharing," Lamonica remembers. "It was intensely personal to him, and it was clear that he and Val loved each other deeply and had discussed those plans as partners."
When asked his opinion on John, Lamonica adds, "He was rebellious against authority, but that doesn't make him unique in CCT. What really stood out was his humanity and the way he approached family." He paused in thought. "It was the last time I ever saw him."
After his grandmother's funeral, John returned to Fort Bragg and the 24, and learned that Slab's team hadn't deployed after all—not yet—but the Combat Control position now rightfully belonged to his replacement. John felt like history was repeating itself, and his opportunity to get into the war was somehow slipping away.
* * *
There was one man who could return John to Slab's team so he could join the war. Lieutenant Colonel Ken Rodriguez was the commander of the 24 and had deployed with the first waves in October, spending the next three months in theater with his forces. Recalling the early days of the war, he said, "It was groundbreaking and historic for all...but especially the Special Tactics community: airfield seizures, multiple static-line and HALO missions, daring assaults. [But] back home, the guys were fit to be tied and itching to join the fray."
In January of 2002 he was back at the unit and plowing through the backlog of never-ending paperwork that awaited every commander who dared leave the office, when John knocked on his door. They knew each other from their assignments to the 21st STS together, and Rodriguez, happy for the excuse to break from performance reports, ushered him in.
As John sat in the chair opposite Rodriguez, he leveled a look at his boss and cut right to the chase. "Colonel, I need to know how soon I can deploy."
Rodriguez leaned back in his chair, considering the NCO and the situation. He knew the war wouldn't end anytime soon but could see the agitation on John's face. Attempting to placate, he replied, "Don't worry, you'll get your opportunity. This is not going to be a short war." John only became more frustrated. "For John, if you knew him, that was a flushed face and a certain intensity in the eyes," recalls Rodriguez. It wasn't the answer the Combat Controller wanted.
"RZ," he led off strongly, using Rodriguez's operating initials, "with all due respect, I should have gone last September. It's now been more than three months since this war began, and I'm still here with my thumb up my ass. I need to get over there _now_."
Rodriguez had never seen the normally calm and reserved Controller like this. "I don't think we were about to throw down," recalls Rodriguez, but the urgency and strain in Chapman were obvious. As he left Rodriguez's office, his determination was clear; the Controller was going back to the Beach, and to the war.
* * *
At the same time, halfway around the world, one of John's 24 teammates was having no problems getting into the war. Combat Controller Andy Martin was in Oman, the staging base for most of the operations going into Afghanistan. A native of San Diego, he was stocky, with a slight swarthiness to his complexion, rapidly receding dark hair, and a direct personality that was sometimes off-putting to those unfamiliar with him. He'd started his military career in a reserve Special Forces unit but joined the Air Force in 1988 expressly to become a Combat Controller, eventually finding his way to the 24. By December, Andy had already racked up two combat jumps: one with the 24 as they inserted by HALO to survey and run a nighttime desert landing strip (the first since the Iranian rescue attempt at Desert One decades earlier), and another with SEAL Team Six. He had two more missions planned with other units when one of the 24 squadron operations officers informed him, "You're going to come back and link up with the [SEAL Team Six] Red Team snipers."
To Andy Martin, a man who wanted to hunt down and kill terrorists, "it's what I'd waited my entire life for, because I knew the Red Team snipers really well, and those guys were going to get it on." His early missions in the war were good, but he'd yet to kill a terrorist. The First Gulf War was fun, but there was no killing, and to Andy Martin, that was one thing he wanted to do before he died, and he knew the SEALs would see it the same way. Little did he know how apropos the axiom "Be careful what you wish for" would be to his desires. After a long flight home, and a short Christmas with his family, he headed to Virginia Beach to meet up with the SEALs and Chapman.
* * *
In Fayetteville, John was home after receiving confirmation that he was to join up with Andy and the two of them would deploy with Slab's team. He had only days left to spend with the three ladies in his life, so between preparing for war at work and packing at home, he made the most of them. John and Val treated his deployment as "nothing new." "I knew he was going on a mission," Valerie recalls matter-of-factly, "but he didn't give me any details. We were both used to it."
On his final morning at home, as he kissed Madison and Brianna goodbye, he spotted two of their pink hair ties. He picked them up, gently rubbing them between his calloused fingers, and tucked them into his breast pocket—tiny mementos to remind him of his little loves. Valerie drove him to the JSOC compound, dropping him at the gate. With a quick kiss and an "I'm out," he smiled and waved as he walked past JSOC's tight security. Her in-home nursing assignments were waiting, so she turned the car around and drove off. They were so used to him coming and going, and the hazards of CCT at the 24. "It was just business as usual for us. I didn't realize it was the last time I was going to see him."
* * *
At SEAL Team Six in the Red Team sniper section, it was anything _but_ business as usual. Most of the men had yet to deploy, none having tasted battle in the manner they desired: to kill the terrorists responsible for 9/11 and their supporters, particularly the Taliban. The two CCT completed the team, giving them an even dozen men for the deployment.
For John, his desire to join the mission was tempered by the rust that had formed on his counterterrorist skill sets. He'd been on the survey team for two years, with only periodic combat training. Compounding the issue was his age; he was older (now approaching thirty-seven) than almost every other "shooter" on the team and was worried about his ability to keep up. It concerned him enough that he confided in Slab, who reassured him, "Don't worry, you'll do fine." But he also was conflicted by something else—as much as he needed this mission to validate his career, having two little girls at home who adored him had changed his perspective. Life was not about killing—except at the 24 and SEAL Team Six when you're getting ready to go to war.
The day finally came in late January. All their gear had been staged and transported to Naval Air Station Oceana to meet their waiting C-17s. Like Viking longboats of a thousand years before, these aircrafts' purpose was to ferry them across the Atlantic to a savage land and battle.
The men gathered behind the sniper shop inside SEAL Team Six's compound. They were waiting, all of them dressed in anonymous gray Air Force flight suits, with small backpacks for the long flight. The late afternoon was cool but not cold enough for jackets, and there was only small talk among the team. As the blue Navy buses pulled up to take them to the plane, Slab gathered his men around him. "Look," he said, and all eyes turned to him, sensing he had something more than flight movement schedules on his mind. "Things are going to happen on this trip. Number one—every one of you is going to kill somebody. Number two—you're all coming back alive."
For Andy Martin, anxious to get his first kill, it was the pregame speech he'd waited for. _Fuck yeah!_ was his only thought. He scanned the men around him, some nodding, others wearing stoic looks, but all were in agreement, _Fuck yeah!_...until his eyes fell on John, his expression a cross between realization and dismay. "I think it was the first time the gravity of the situation hit him," he recalls. "To be told something like that by somebody you respect as a leader isn't to be taken lightly." Adds Andy, "When you're out of the game for a while, there's a cognitive dissonance of how things are. What we do. It's not that he wasn't capable. I just think it hit him pretty hard in the respect that it was 'game on.'"
The two men let the moment pass and never spoke of it. The bus doors opened, and the team climbed aboard, leaving America for their war.
Chapter 8
February 2002
When the SEALs and the two Controllers landed in Afghanistan, along with an entire SEAL Team Six command and control force structure, it was clear Bagram Airfield was no longer the battleground it had been just two months before. Transformed by the relentless might of the US military's logistical magicians, with what to the impoverished Afghans seemed like endless supplies and equipment, not to mention ceaseless airplanes, it now resembled a major commercial airport of the developed world.
The only real signs one was in Afghanistan were the desolate snowcapped mountains that surrounded the base, the bland low-slung architecture of the city, and the February winds rushing down from the Hindu Kush, slicing through heavy clothing and singeing exposed skin, promising frigid combat for the men offloading the C-17s fresh from Virginia Beach.
Operations were still ramping up in-country, and SEAL Team Six wasted no time getting in on the action. The snipers, along with Andy and John, moved into a tent city made of heavy vinyl with large heating and air-conditioning units plugged into the sides to combat the extreme temperatures. John stayed with Slab, while Andy was assigned to the number-two enlisted sniper leader, a SEAL known as Goody. Inside, the men made the most of their personal space: a cot and crates for storing kits or, for some lucky ones, unfinished pine shelves crafted from crates. Tent city living was old hat to the SEALs and Controllers, and little note was made about the living quarters. They were there to hunt men.
They soon planned their first safari: for the elusive Taliban founder, Mullah Omar (code name Objective Bear), a one-eyed former mujahideen and the de facto head of Afghanistan from the time of the Taliban's rise in the mid-'90s until the American invasion displaced him. He was rumored to be in the remote mountains of the Bamyan Province, northwest of Kabul, home of the giant cliff-carved Buddhas that would eventually be destroyed by Taliban forces. Intelligence from the CIA indicated he was holed up in a village, moving from one secure location to another.
The planned mission was to catch him in transit between his safe houses, using an eighty-man local partisan force for security and guidance through the mountainous terrain. For the operation, a six-man British Special Boat Service unit was to accompany the SEALs and CCT. The mission's call sign was Mako-30—Red sniper's standard. On 15 February, the nineteen Americans and Brits climbed aboard three 160th MH-47s for the hundred-mile flight to Bamyan. Slab and John, with a handful of SEALs, were on Chalk 1 (the first helicopter), the Brits Chalk 2, and Andy and Goody on the last chalk. A Special Tactics combat search and rescue (CSAR, pronounced "sea-sar") team was aboard Andy's helicopter. Led by a PJ named Keary Miller, it had CCT Gabe Brown as its airstrike and coordination wizard. The CSAR was not part of the mission; they were only there in the unlikely event of an aircraft crash or a call for medevac by other SOFs operating that evening. Keary Miller and Gabe Brown could not have known their destinies would converge with John Chapman again on a mountain summit the name of which none of them had yet heard uttered—Takur Ghar.
On the LZ in the dark, the men quickly unloaded and stepped onto an anonymous valley floor high in the mountains next to a small mud-hut village. When the helicopters had departed, Slab and the SBS leader met with the local partisan leaders and discussed the situation. One thing was certain, the Afghans were not going to lead the Americans anywhere in the dark. "We ended up in a defensive posture, staying in a goat pen, waiting for sunrise so we could wrangle the partisan force," recalls Andy.
The sunrise brought a surprise. The Afghan partisans had brought donkeys to carry supplies and the Americans' rucksacks, because they were going to walk twenty-two kilometers to a position above the village where they claimed Omar was coordinating the Taliban's campaign. Andy and John looked dubiously at the donkeys. According to Andy, "They looked like German shepherds, they were that small. And we were laughing because we're thinking, 'Yeah right, these things are going to die under the loads we've got.'" Duly loaded by the expert Afghan mule wranglers, the hundred-man and donkey force set off for the distant target, trudging higher into the mountains on a narrow single-track footpath. Continues Andy, "Well, within about half an hour, those little donkey bastards were out of sight ahead of us." The men watched with varying degrees of dismay as they lost control and sight of their ammo, survival gear, and batteries.
The long day led into night as the force moved into assault position on ridgelines towering above another nondescript and nameless village—Omar's purported redoubt. Unfortunately the weather had moved back in, closing down visibility as darkness descended upon them. "The weather drops to zero-zero visibility, absolute dogshit for airplanes," remembers Andy. The partisans were telling Slab and the Brit leader that Omar was definitely in the village, but in the freezing mountain storm, the Afghans weren't willing to move forward, and the allies agreed to retreat to another nearby village and wait out the inclement weather.
Through their interpreter and the partisans, each of the Mako-30 elements was lodged with a separate local family—involuntarily. John and Slab went to one with a handful of SEALs, the Brits a second, and Andy with more SEALs to a third. "They'd never seen a Westerner before, and the only other foreigners they'd seen were Soviet troops. They were terrified," recalls Andy. Who could blame them? The Americans, vigilant to the very real possibility of an ambush, and suspicious of their reluctant "hosts," sent the men of the families out but kept watch on them. The partisans saw an opportunity and tried to push the women and children out as well, in order to stay inside where there was warmth. The heat source was minimal—no bigger than a coffee can—but heat nonetheless. When John saw what was happening, he stepped in. "No way. We are _not_ putting women and children out in the cold. They stay. You go," he directed through the interpreter.
Pashtun hospitality demanded they feed and care for the dangerous-looking and heavily armed outsiders, so the family slaughtered goats and chickens, feeding the Americans significant portions of their winter stores. In return, Goody, Andy's SEAL team leader, tried to pay them in US dollars, but the family refused to accept the cash, even though they understood the value of American currency. The villagers slowly came to realize that the men were no threat and cautiously accepted them, in large part because of John's good nature. Slab would later state, "John's demeanor put them at ease, and I fully believe that helped keep us safe."
In John and Slab's house, the parents had two young boys and a tiny one-year-old daughter, a sun-darkened beauty with huge chocolate-colored eyes, darkly arched eyebrows, and a disarming smile. As Slab got on his Toughbook laptop to communicate with SEAL Team Six HQ in Bagram, John was reminded of his own daughters, Madison and Brianna, who weren't that much older, and formed an instant connection. Cognizant of how much they were putting these modest people out, John was as respectful and helpful as he could be; not that the others weren't, but John was purposeful about it. On one of the nights, while they were waiting for the storm to pass, the little girl's mother showed how much John had won her over when she placed her daughter in his lap. Realizing the significance of the moment, a rarity given the culture in which no male outside of the family is allowed to touch a female, he asked Slab to retrieve his disposable camera and snap a shot. The resulting black-and-white photo captures the juxtaposition of the warrior and the man—a kind soul in a foreign land, there to do a rough job but whose love of family and children transcended fear and hostility—to freeze-frame a poignant moment when two humans silently bonded across language and culture. John's kind eyes, gazing directly into the camera, belie the warrior beneath.
For two days the team remained ensconced in Afghan hospitality while the partisan force held the possibility of ambush at bay. Finally, the force moved silently into position above the suspected Mullah Omar refuge. The partisans wanted the Americans to take the village down, yet something seemed off. Slab and Goody conferred, and as Andy observed, "We needed to rethink this." In the village below, there were mostly women and children going about their day. "No combat power whatsoever." And no sign of Omar.
Slab turned to his Combat Controllers. "Can you order up a show of force?" He wanted something that would shake the village and possibly the truth out of the situation they and the locals found themselves in. Andy got on the net and contacted Kmart, the combined forces air component commander (CFACC, in charge of airpower in theater), and explained what he wanted. Kmart (so named for convenient one-stop shopping) had just the item, a B-1 bomber, coming off another mission and heading home. "Perfect," declared the Controller.
"He called me fifty miles out and inbound at high Mach down through the valley," recalls the Controller. Andy gave the pilot an entry and exit point above the unsuspecting village and cleared him for the very high-speed pass. "He comes down through the valley, maybe seven hundred feet above the ground, and he's got this air cone coming off of him that you only see in pictures," he recalls of the plane. As it passed, it pulled up and was already firing back to altitude like a bullet, "when the shock wave hit us; it sounded and felt like ten JDAMs going off all at once."
Unsurprisingly, the town's residents poured from their huts, stunned by the display, and sent two representatives to meet with the Americans and Brits. Through the interpreter, Slab—overall in command of the mission—realized that what they'd walked into _wasn't_ the potential hiding place of the number-one Taliban target, but a village-on-village Afghan-style Hatfields-versus-McCoys feud. Omar had been there, some parties claimed, but had long since departed. The partisan force provided to Mako-30 saw the opportunity to settle a decade-long dispute. During discussions, which took hours to sort out, Andy continued his show of force with more aircraft passes, until Slab finally called a halt to the ear-shattering displays.
With no Omar, nor even any real indication that he was ever actually there, "We left after the show of force. A dry hole," Andy recalls of the wasted mission. John called back for exfil, and a lone MH-47 returned to retrieve them. Recognizing the burden they'd placed on the small village, he added a request to accompany the extraction helicopter. As the helo hovered into position on the steep mountainside, its nose and blades hanging out over precipitous space and its ramp dropped to retrieve the men, a cargo pallet was dragged onto the mountain by the team. Strapped securely to the top of the plywood was cooking oil, coal, stoves, and dry goods such as peanut butter and sugar for the village who'd taken them in. John, on his own initiative, had requested the provisions as a token for the family and the little girl who'd stolen his heart. It was a small gesture in a large war. Perhaps it made no real difference in a country shattered by decades of conflict, but it mattered to the Combat Controller.
With nothing to show for their efforts but potential misuse of American and British military might and a bit of goodwill, the men clambered aboard and disappeared into the dark. The CCT aspects of the mission, driven primarily by Andy, had also been a bust for John. He hoped his next mission would provide greater opportunity to demonstrate his value and capabilities.
Part II
# Anaconda
Chapter 9
16 January 2002
Pete Blaber took in his surroundings as he sat back in a worn, overstuffed chair in an upstairs meeting room inside a hotel in downtown Kabul. The hotel was an Afghan government–owned enterprise but had not conducted business as a publicly available lodging in many years. Prior to the American invasion, it was used by the Taliban for troop R & R, and during the Soviet campaign, the Russians had utilized it for similar purposes. Having rented the entire facility, the CIA was now sole proprietor of the square plug of a building that was surrounded by a ten-foot wall topped with concertina wire. The Agency used it to hold sway over most US activities taking place in-country at this stage of the war.
Blaber, a six-foot-two Delta Force lieutenant colonel with a passing resemblance to Kevin Costner, sported thick black hair and preferred a well-trimmed goatee to the standard "operator beard." Outfitted in cargo pants, long-sleeve shirt, and Afghan scarf, he blended comfortably into CIA space. He'd conducted previous clandestine operations in the Balkans in close collaboration with the Agency and was already on his second tour in Afghanistan.
The dusty room was furnished with large, threadbare chairs, a couch, and traditional, locally made rugs of muted greens and reds. The curtains were drawn, save a slim ray of light illuminating the interior, giving it the appearance of a nineteenth-century British gentlemen's club that had seen better days. Inside, representatives from the special operations community gathered around the CIA's deputy chief of station, a man named John who organized the daily select brain trust. Blaber and his operations officer, Jimmy Reese, were the only Delta Force leaders present. The other key leader in the room was Lieutenant Colonel Chris Haas, a giant man with a jovial disposition who was the Special Forces battalion commander for all of eastern Afghanistan. The day's meeting was focused on a shared problem: what to do next.
The Taliban's abandonment of the capital in November of the previous year allowed the Agency and SOF to occupy Kabul without a fight, a seemingly significant and early victory for the Americans. But the Taliban and their often-imperious purse-string-holding Arabian overseers hadn't truly been defeated, merely displaced. Even Tora Bora, Delta and Combat Control's shining opportunity to dispatch bin Laden, was another example of squeezing the enemy like a balloon, only to have it effuse to either side of the American fist. So the question remained—Where the hell were they?
The gathering was more a brainstorming session than a structured briefing, with the three principals (Blaber, Haas, and John) agreeing to informal information sharing and collaboration. No generals or formal chains of command were involved, only key leaders on the front lines. Blaber described the fusion: "The CIA provided the ability to produce and process intelligence, the Special Forces teams would train and equip the Afghans, and [Blaber's men] would operationalize the entire effort by conducting on-the-ground reconnaissance to find and destroy the enemy." The meeting broke up when Haas announced he had an obligation at his own compound. After he departed, the men stood, and John, whom Blaber described as sporting a "Jesus hairdo and beard," held the Delta operator back.
The spy walked to the curtains and drew them fully closed. "We're getting a lot of reports that Al Qaeda forces are regrouping in an area in the mountains between Gardez and Khowst," he said, leveling an even gaze at Blaber.
"What's it called?"
"Shahi Khot."
The name didn't register with the Delta operator but, given that John had whispered the word, even inside his own secure space, Blaber gave it the appropriate gravity and whispered back, "Can you spell that?"
"S-H-A-H-I-K-H-O-T," he said quietly as they parted. Blaber grabbed Jimmy, and the two stepped into a driving blizzard outside the compound as the former contemplated the implications of John's revelation.
Pete Blaber was a non-parochial and seasoned veteran of Delta Force. After serving as a Ranger, he'd joined the Unit (always referred to with a capital _U_ by its members) in 1991 and, since then, had climbed the very narrow pyramid that existed for officers to command Delta's B Squadron. Along the way, he'd conducted manhunts in the Balkans and executed clandestine operations in a handful of other countries. After B Squadron, he had commanded a smaller element inside Delta focused exclusively on clandestine and low-visibility capabilities, so when it came time for Task Force 11 to select a leader for fusing the CIA and Special Forces, he was the natural, if reluctant, choice. Task Force 11 (TF-11) was the higher headquarters for an agglomeration of all "black" special operations in-country, including Delta, SEAL Team Six, and a few others. For Major General Dell Dailey and Brigadier General Greg Trebon, the commanders of TF-11, Blaber presented an opportunity as well as a challenge. His credentials weren't in question, it was his personality. In addition to his well-known disdain for rigid military hierarchy, structure, and planning methodology, his forceful personality conflicted with Dailey's equally strong character. Still, in the weeks leading up to the 16 January meeting, he'd been given his orders, delivered by none other than General Tommy Franks, commander in chief of US Central Command and, therefore, all forces in Afghanistan. "Get some men out into the frontier to figure out what's going on." Simple enough, and that had led to the station meetings with Haas and the CIA. Yet what really mattered to Blaber was the coup de grâce to any conventional military thinking that might get in the way of the final directive Franks provided him: "Find the enemy, then kill or capture 'em."
He needed no further guidance and used his charter as a means to construct his much-preferred tactic: a joint team of the best operators in the world. To Pete, this meant Delta Force, SEAL Team Six, and, as events would later prove out, most critically for a campaign he had yet to wage or fully envision, Combat Control.
* * *
Two weeks later, Blaber and his growing composite force were living in a CIA safe-house compound in the eastern Afghanistan town of Gardez, a Pashtun population center of 70,000 people and the capital of Paktia Province. At 7,500 feet above sea level, surrounded by the southwest terminus of the Hindu Kush, Gardez enjoys an alpine atmosphere. Summers are hot and dry, and the little moisture it receives falls mainly in the winter and early spring in the form of snow. It is here that Afghanistan's legacy of conflict is made manifest. Now in ruins and resting above Gardez, foundations and crumbled walls can still be found marking Alexander the Great's easternmost outposts in his bid to conquer the known world. In the fourth century BC, against these same Hindu Kush mountains, Alexander was turned back, to be followed by so many others in the millennia to come.
Like Alexander, AFO needed to position itself at the edge of the latest empire to sweep into Afghanistan. By the time of Blaber's arrival, the safe house had been running for some time, the cost underwritten by the CIA. As Blaber put it, "They were the only ones with money in-country at the time." The Army's Green Berets were already on-site as well, training a four-hundred-man Afghan tribal force referred to as the ATF. The ATF were the first installment of great hope for America's Afghanistan strategy, shouldering the burden of defeating the enemy in combat (under American direction and with American munitions) and establishing a Jeffersonian democracy in which girls could be educated and a viable, non-opium-based economy founded.
The late arrival of Blaber's team relegated them to tent living in the compound's courtyard. That suited Blaber just fine; he preferred the Spartan arrangement. The safe house itself was more fortress than dwelling, sporting a dirt floor, colored thirty-foot-high solid walls, and tile-roofed watchtowers that dominated its four corners. The masonry consisted of mud blocks that measured in feet not inches, creating the appearance of the base of an Egyptian pyramid. The building was elaborate enough in its construction that each watchtower was adorned with what appeared to be ruddy, reddish-brown cedar-tree designs instead of the usual undecorated mud-colored facing.
With no place left but the center of the 200-by-200-foot courtyard, Blaber and his men erected several Army standard GP (general purpose) medium tents capable of holding up to twenty men. The remainder of the open ground was consumed by vehicles and their maintenance, generators, and supplies. Massive hundred-foot G-11 cargo parachutes that sometimes draped over the walls were evidence of the weekly Air Force C-130 resupply airdrops of ammo, water, and other supplies. Stacked and tumbled everywhere in the compound's dirt interior were wooden crates of olive-drab green or unfinished pine filled with ammunition, grenades, mines, rockets, and mortars. Linked .50-cal and 7.62mm machine-gun ammo was strewn among the crates, evidence of men arming vehicles for heavy combat. Here and there were other signs American special ops were in town: the ubiquitous gym equipment, and sandbag stepping-stones leading from tents to interior corridors and rooms for when dirt turned to mud.
Inside the walls, the former residence took on its new identity as well. The CIA occupied the best digs, and Chris Haas's Green Berets took up the remaining space. The fused efforts of AFO, SF, and CIA could be seen in the tactical operations center, referred to as the TOC. Its unfinished mud walls were adorned with maps, charts, and imagery. Radios and laptops were powered by compound generators that, like the men, ran 24/7. At the TOC's heart, ostensibly running the show, but in reality one leg of a triad, was the CIA's lead, a man named Greg but whom everyone called Spider.
Spider's nickname stemmed from his appearance—six foot, thin and wiry. He and Blaber knew each other well. They'd worked together in Bosnia, hunting UN war criminals. Pete referred to him simply as "the best combat leader in the CIA. Spider was a living, breathing example of how good the CIA could be when they had their best leaders on the ground," and the respect was reciprocated. Spider was well aware of Delta's capability to hunt men. But the fight shaping up in the Shahi Khot Valley would differ from anything Delta and AFO had encountered before. This time, killing the enemy wasn't going to happen by means of a bullet from a Delta sniper's gun, but through the handset of a radio. And that handset would be gripped by a Combat Controller.
After setting up camp, Blaber's first order of business was to procure troops. The combined total of Americans in Gardez numbered about fifty, but most were divided between the CIA, with their role of obtaining intel, and the SF, whose job it was to train and equip the ATF. The Green Berets, centered on the efforts of ODA 510 (the Special Forces detachment responsible), were already training the Afghan militia, who were led by a warlord named Zia. The Agency had been there the longest and had already established a reliable intelligence network. What Blaber needed now was a special operator with a specific skill set if he was to fulfill his mission with regard to the enemy: corner and kill.
Blaber knew there was only one place to go to get the men he needed—B Squadron. Having been their former commander didn't negate his need for approval to bring them from the States, so he went to TF-11 and Brigadier General Trebon, who gave the green light for twelve men from the squadron's reconnaissance element. It took one call to Fort Bragg and Blaber was on the line with one of the best recce leaders in the business, Delta master sergeant Kris K. After he absorbed the information, Kris agreed to have his team ready to deploy to Afghanistan as quickly as possible. They loaded out with virtually everything their team had: SR-25s, M4s, M203 grenade launchers, winter gear, and multiple uniforms. However, they were missing one critical component that, under normal circumstances, they would have had: They didn't have a Combat Controller with them, and it would take time for one to arrive in-country.
Already inside AFO were operators from Delta's Navy counterpart, SEAL Team Six. Two SEALs, Hans and Nelson, were in Gardez and already working for Blaber. Hans, who led the SEAL contingent, had made it clear the Navy was "definitely not interested" in conducting the operations in the Shahi Khot that Blaber had in mind, so much so that heated exchanges took place among various parties.
Attached to the SEALs was a CCT by the name of Jay Hill. Hill was a thirty-one-year-old career airman. At six foot three and with a powerful physique, he had the requisite "operator" beard and long brown hair with sun-bleached bangs that swept across his face, like a surfer just out of the water from a morning set. He could easily be the poster image for Combat Control recruiting. Even his disposition struck many who knew him as "laid-back surfer," as if combat were nothing to get riled about. He'd joined the Air Force in 1989 for the college education it afforded and originally worked on aviation life support equipment at his first assignment at Pope AFB. While there, he began to run into Controllers playing volleyball, working out, and generally enjoying themselves. What struck him most was how fit and confident they were. Eventually he met a few, including an intense young CCT named Billy White (the very same Controller from Tora Bora). The interactions left him thinking that perhaps he was missing something and that, in his words, CCT "looked like a great job. Jumping, diving, everyone's in good shape. I was twenty-one and it seemed the manly thing to do. I need to do what those guys are doing." In the summer of 1992, he cross-trained and, after successfully navigating the brutal training pipe, returned to Pope in 1993, this time assigned to the 21st STS. A few years later, he set his sights on the 24.
Now he stood among the best of all the services. His attachment to Team Six was not a new experience, and like Blaber, he was on his second tour in Afghanistan. On 19 October 2001, he participated in the first combat jump of the war, Objective Rhino. Following that, he'd traversed southern Afghanistan with Delta's B Squadron, "looking for bad guys to kill." After a rotation home for a brief Christmas celebration, he returned to Bagram and embedded with the SEALs of Red Team (the assaulters led by Hans, not the sniper element led by Slab). It was a series of decisions, assignments, and tricks of fate that led Jay, like Blaber and everyone else at AFO, to Gardez.
When he saw the downward direction of relations between the SEALs and Blaber, he made a decision. Even if the SEALs couldn't see the value in the opportunity being presented (and they didn't), _he_ most certainly could. He approached Blaber, intent on changing teams. To an outsider, it might appear extreme to suddenly switch over, but Controllers move so fluidly between forces like Delta, SEAL Team Six, and the SAS that he didn't give it a second thought. He also had a history with B Squadron and relished the chance to get outside the wire. As he recalls, "At the time, the SEALs had a pretty bad attitude about AFO. And I realized I didn't want to miss out on the chance to do some real damage to Al Qaeda." And just like that, after their short exchange, he was back with the Army, as soon as they could get there. Blaber couldn't have been happier. Though AFO was still a long way from hunting-safari ready, another key piece, CCT, had fallen into place.
Waiting to conduct recce missions didn't necessarily translate into idleness for the Combat Controller. Occasionally in the evenings, and especially during inclement weather, the safe house was subject to shelling by local militias not aligned with Zia and the Americans. Chris Haas, as the most senior Special Forces officer—and the officer with the strongest relations with the Afghans—asked Jay, "Can you do something about that?" Jay replied, "Yeah, man, sounds good." The exchange and plan were "very nonchalant," as he recalls, but in the end he wound up with the authority to conduct strikes. _Game on_ , he thought.
For the Combat Controller it was easy. "I'd climb up on the roof at night with a couple of beacons, usually my microponder and an SST-181." There he'd work out where the tubes the Taliban set up were, using the beacons for his location, then provide the aircraft with a distance and direction along the lines of "eight hundred meters at zero eight six degrees," talking them onto the location starting with big descriptions for compounds or hilltops and then necking it down. "With the beacons, it worked well regardless of weather."
The Delta guys weren't even aware he was conducting strikes at night, saying things like, "What are you talking about? What beacon? That box with the little microponder?" "They'd say, 'Uh, dinner's at eight, can you come down from the roof?' They had no clue, it was quite funny. They're very smart, but they're not; they just don't have the expertise in these other areas of combat."
The hostile militias never expected it. There were no indications Americans were in the vicinity, because they weren't, and the weather was believed to provide security from American airstrikes, just as it had with the Soviets before them. The system worked well, eventually causing incoming fire to drop off completely. "It shut 'em up. They never expected that, what with the crappy weather we had all the time."
Chapter 10
The morning of 10 February was cold and clear. The frigid wind announced the proximity of the Hindu Kush as two dozen men from a handful of units and government agencies pulled out of the safe house in a convoy heading southeast of the city. The lead vehicle slowed to a stop on a barren stretch of the valley floor.
Kris K. and his fellow Delta recce teammates had departed the US on 9 February. While they were winging their way toward Afghanistan, another reminder of their purpose took place at the Gardez safe house. Shortly after 9/11, Delta's B Squadron had conducted a social exchange and patch trade with members of the New York Fire Department in Manhattan. A few returned with pieces of the World Trade Center as mementos. Inevitably some of these made their way to Afghanistan, their physical heft serving as raw energy to fuel the men in their pursuit of those responsible. A Delta operator named Kevin ferried one over with the intent of leaving this piece of America in the land that spawned the attacks.
Bundling themselves against the cold, the informal group assembled around the senior CIA officer in Gardez as two men dug a small hole and placed the World Trade Center remnant in the shallow grave. The CIA officer spoke a few words, followed by the senior NCO from 5th Special Forces. Their memorial is buried at approximate latitude 33°33′5.X″ N and longitude 69°15′8.X″ E. To Jay Hill, even though he was on his second tour, the ceremony brought back a sense of the surreal. "Afghanistan was the last place on earth you'd expect to be."
For Blaber, it was another example of their modus operandi. "Spider, Chris [Haas], and I, we had the time to set aside for this. It just sort of happened, another self-organizing activity. No one really set out a hierarchical structure. We just organized and executed; it was our distilled essence."
While Jay's SEALs wanted out, at least one other SEAL wanted in on Blaber's operations. Homer was a former member of SEAL Team Six, currently on a joint assignment, who arrived shortly after the Trade Center ceremony, and "like a lot of guys, he was looking to get in on the action," according to Blaber. He became Blaber's sidekick in his travels around Gardez. Essentially, Homer's job was to "make stuff happen. He could get anything by trade or trickery, and he was also a good sniper/recce advisor." His combat experience extended back at least a decade to Somalia, where he and a Combat Controller jointly saved the life of his sniper team partner during the operation that came to be known as Black Hawk Down.
The arrival of Kris and his team completed the AFO force. At the safe house, they separated into two elements, I Team and J Team (I and J were used interchangeably with their phonetic India and Juliet). Kris would lead J, while another sniper, nicknamed Speedy, would lead the other team. Jay Hill wasted no time plugging in to his new team, and Kris welcomed the Controller's expertise.
Planning began immediately, led by J Team. Their mission, as directed by Blaber, was threefold: Establish observation posts in enemy territory in the Shahi Khot Valley to confirm or deny the presence of senior Al Qaeda leaders; scout designated helicopter landing zones for a pending mission tentatively named Operation Anaconda; and finally, call in airstrikes on enemy positions when identified. With close collaboration between the CIA and Spider in place, this last objective was shaping up to have a significant impact on the American effort. US intelligence estimated enemy numbers at approximately two hundred in the Shahi Khot Valley in the mountainous region east of Gardez. Inside the Gardez TOC, between the CIA and AFO, it was believed the numbers were at least double that. As the teams began their in-depth analysis of the terrain and the enemy's historical tactics, they had no idea the actual force they were facing numbered between 1,000 and 1,500 in the valley, while an additional 700 staged in the valleys farther to the east toward Khowst.
The first question facing the teams heading into enemy territory was how to get there. As Americans, their obvious first choice was the ubiquitous helicopter. Thanks to the CIA, AFO had access to Russian-made Mi-17s, a common sight throughout Afghanistan that didn't raise eyebrows the same way US helicopters did. There was, however, a downside to employing any helo, even Russian birds: Weather and high altitudes were significant restrictors to their use. And if one _was_ used to successfully insert a team, there was no guarantee, given the same challenges, you could rely on it to get them out, forcing you to gamble lives on the odds. Additionally, Blaber stood in strong opposition to helicopters for lift. This mindset stemmed from the necessity of AFO masking their presence inside the Shahi Khot Valley but was rooted in a deeper understanding of the very nature of their use. The history surrounding mission failure in helicopter-borne operations stretched back to their inception in Vietnam, through Somalia, and up to "dry hole" raids conducted early on in Afghanistan. After Somalia, a personal experience for Delta Force and CCT, Blaber's assessment was that "every despot, drug kingpin, and dictator who had any reason to believe that the United States might be coming for him expected that when and if we actually came, we'd come in helicopters."
With the US default choice a nonstarter, the team turned to vehicle drop-off, known as VDO, as a means to get close enough to their objectives for them to hike or climb the remainder of the way. As a test of the VDO concept and to get a feel for the enemy situation, Kris, Jay, and two other Delta operators, Bill and Dave, set out for an abandoned town ten kilometers east of Gardez. It was called Dara and was a gateway to the team's early choice for an OP some twenty kilometers farther into the mountains. This was the first time Americans had traversed enemy terrain in the area. They used civilian Toyota Hilux pickups, a sort of low-grade version of a Tacoma, and they were accompanied by fifteen ATF fighters who piled into the open back of the pickups for use as security. Just as important, the Afghans could be used to gather information from locals and the environment. In this, the ATF were indispensable.
Clothed for the frigid February temperatures, their ATF escorts huddled in the back sporting brand-new CIA-supplied sage-green winter coats and AK-47s, the team set off for the mountains. They got as far as the ghost town before the deepening snow halted all progress, well short of the distance necessary for the team to haul their supplies and packs to their OP. Their mud-caked trucks could not get any farther through the snow and ice on the steep mountain slopes.
The reality of what they'd be facing in the coming weeks dropped on the men like a mountain avalanche. In front of them towered a massive 12,000-foot-high peak that would have been an expedition by itself. Even the terrain in front of the numerous summits left them "uncertain that we would even be able to get over some of the cliffs that were en route," according to one operator. Conferring in the snow, Jay and the Delta operators realized they wouldn't make it to their OP without getting resupplied, whether they encountered enemy forces or not. Furthermore, trucks were now no more an option than helicopters.
As the Delta operators continued to revise and shape their infiltration plan, Jay was experimenting with overhead air support. On the early missions, this usually took the form of a Navy P-3 Orion. Originally designed for antisubmarine warfare, the 1960s-era plane had four turboprop-driven engines and carried a suite of electronic tracking equipment designed expressly for finding subsurface signatures and, therefore, lacking the sophistication of other airborne systems coming online in newer platforms. SOF troops had been using them as a poor man's ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, the term referred to any overhead surveillance) for over a decade. Without sophisticated electronics and optics for ground terrain, they nevertheless provided a presence and coordination platform in the event of a crisis.
Better still were the armed MQ-1 Predators beginning to roam the Afghan-Pakistan frontier. These had been purpose-built for the CIA and US Air Force a few years earlier as a low-cost, remotely piloted surveillance platform and were available in armed and unarmed versions, with the former eventually comprising the majority of the fielded fleet.
In the early days of the war, the potential for fratricide was an ever-present danger to unconventional forces. Driving civilian trucks stuffed with Afghans in the back and similar to Al Qaeda's, the AFO shunned US fatigues, and separating them from the enemy was an elusive task even on the best coordinated of missions. Pilots simply weren't used to identifying American forces not in uniform, especially when they were riding in nonmilitary vehicles.
The responsibility fell to Jay, as the lone CCT on the team, to manage and direct any aircraft. The eastern Afghan frontier remained the Wild West, even in the skies overhead. Controlling that air traffic with its multinational composition—diverse and often fragmented by competing missions—and the pilots' limited understanding of conditions on the contested turf kept the Combat Controller on high alert whenever the team traveled. Jay's reality, with hundreds of sorties per day spanning the country (any one of which could find itself overhead on short notice), made it equally impossible for him to maintain a complete air picture. It was critical, though, that he take control of the airspace directly overhead in the event they came into contact with the enemy or were ambushed.
On the next recce test foray, a drive between Gardez and Khowst, an armed Predator began tracking them as hostiles. Even though he succeeded in establishing contact, the team was nearly fired upon by their own country because they were traveling in a suspect convoy. It was becoming painfully clear that getting to their objective, as challenging as it was proving to be, was only a fraction of their problems.
* * *
The two original AFO SEALs, Hans and Nelson, had participated in some of the recce trips, but tensions between them and the Delta operators came to a head on one mission when the Delta team leader pushed the four-man Army/Navy patrol mercilessly, to determine their ability to move in steep, high-altitude terrain. Broadcasting his displeasure, Hans stated: "This is bullshit." After they returned to Gardez, more discussions took place directly addressing the disparity of approach to missions and attitudes, which Delta felt was unsatisfactory on the part of the Navy. In the end, Blaber let them know, "Hey, guys, it's not working out." So he chopped them to Chris Haas's Green Berets, where "they were happy to go on to something else." This cemented the decision and effectively cut the two SEALs from the AFO mission.
Even as his two former SEAL teammates were exiting the scene, Homer understood the potential of the unfolding operations. One night, while he and Blaber were checking on the safe-house guards and perimeter, he mentioned that recce SEALs from ST6 were restless in Bagram. They felt imprisoned by the constraints of TF-11 targeting and planning. "They're chomping at the bit to get out of their barracks and into the hunt."
Blaber was in a quandary. He needed more troops, as he'd known even before they launched their first mission. But his relationship with the TF-11 commander was becoming more strained as he continued to form a force and operations extracurricular to TF-11's core mission of targeting high-value individuals. These were personified most publicly in the form of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, the number-two Al Qaeda leader. But Blaber believed that was not AFO's only purpose. He recognized the disproportionate and decisive impact a handful of the world's best operators, well positioned and hidden among the enemy, would have on the coming battle. Some in the TF-11 operations center had taken to referring to Blaber as "Peter the Great" or "Colonel Kurtz," in reference to the movie _Apocalypse Now_ , for his obvious "gone native" immersion. But Blaber saw "skepticism and sarcasm as net positives," because "it was far better to be doubted than micromanaged." It was clear any request for additional Delta Force troops would be unsuccessful, yet there was another option, especially for a non-parochial opportunist such as he. Just because the previous SEALs in AFO weren't interested, it didn't necessarily translate to the rest of SEAL Team Six. There were SEALs already in-country, largely locked up inside their Bagram base due to TF-11's mentality. That group included a frustrated Slab and his CCT, John Chapman.
Blaber recalls, "The SEALs weren't interested in doing AFO at the time. They thought it was a waste of manpower. At one point I had a sixty-minute VTC with [TF-11 commander] General Dailey and he was not interested in what we were doing. Not interested in giving more manpower. But I persisted. Basically, with a minute to go on the VTC, he said, 'Fine, I'll give you some SEALs,' and then signed off." Those SEALs were from Team Six and therefore belonged to the unit's commander, Captain Joe Kernan.
Kernan tasked the only SEAL snipers under his command based in Bagram, which meant Slab's men from Red Team, along with John Chapman and Andy Martin. But the tasking didn't clarify who would be moving a hundred miles south to Gardez and who would stay in the hope of killing HVTs (high-value targets) with TF-11. Kernan only agreed to send half a dozen men with one Controller.
Slab was of the opinion that TF-11's Bagram mission construct was more likely to produce confirmed kills. He had a dozen men, including the two CCT, broken into two elements. Slab himself led the first element, designated Mako-30. The second element, designated Mako-31, was led by the operator called Goody. As Controllers, Chapman and Martin took their call signs from their respective assigned elements but used an additional designation. CCT on the battlefield and in published communication matrices were almost always identified by a _C_ suffix, pronounced phonetically in transmissions as "Charlie." This distinct designation allowed leaders, gunships, helicopters, and other CCT to readily identify them as Controllers. In practice, the designation expedited close airstrikes because fighters, bombers, and gunships knew any "Charlie" call sign would belong to an experienced and expert strike director. When the two Controllers on Slab's team separated, Chapman's call sign, working for Slab, was always Mako Three Zero Charlie and Martin, working for Goody, was Mako Three One Charlie.
The decision on who to send was Slab's to make as team leader, and he elected to send Goody's four SEALs and Andy Martin, choosing to hold the HVT mission for himself. With orders given to relocate, Andy and his SEALs began to pack and prepare for extended mountain operations, some of them grumbling about relegation to the "B-team" mission.
Having seen the value and action in his previous non-HVT missions, Andy took the opposite position. "I was motivated."
Goody, taking the decision in stride and in keeping with his reputation as easygoing, went about prepping his men without complaint, but asked the Controller, "You ready for this?"
Not prone to statements of ambiguity, Martin replied, "Fuck yeah!"
Chapter 11
23 February
Back in Gardez, Jay Hill and J Team continued to experiment with insertion methods. This sometimes took on humorous facets as the men considered all options. In the vicinity of Gardez, there were large numbers of jackasses, so the men brought a few inside the compound and tried variations of pack configurations. The animals proved to be so unruly and difficult to manage that the option was quickly abandoned, and they returned to vehicles as the most viable insertion means.
Their next test reconnaissance took the men closer to a large humpback mountain named Tergul Ghar but universally referred to by American forces as "the Whale" for its rounded humpback shape. They traveled the main road south out of Gardez, this time with a larger ATF contingent wedged in the back of their trucks due to the increased Al Qaeda numbers believed to be in the area. Their destination was another valley, called Peanut, to the east of the Whale, near a mountain called Takur Ghar.
As they neared the entrance to Peanut valley, their interpreter, an Afghan they called Engineer because he'd been trained as one before the latest war to tear his country apart, announced that there were "two AQ bases up the valley and the AQ were watching them at that time." To the Americans, the ATF's ability to determine Al Qaeda at a distance and by location was sometimes uncanny. When Kris asked Engineer how he could distinguish local Afghans from foreigners like Al Qaeda, he said, "It's easy, and I can tell from one kilometer away by the way they act, look, and walk." This ability was proved time and again, and once saved a 5th Group Special Forces patrol when Engineer correctly identified, specifically, Chechens and Uzbeks at a distance and prevented the ODA from being ambushed.
On the journey, Jay had a Predator overhead and ensured the surrounding terrain was under surveillance. As they considered Peanut, the Predator "picked up seven vehicles and twenty pax [personnel] moving three kilometers east of Takur Ghar mountain." The team discussed their options, still hoping to penetrate the valley for a better view of the mountains closer to their intended OPs. They conferred with Engineer, asking what they'd need to go any farther. The answer: a hundred men, and aircraft dropping bombs in front of them. They turned for Gardez without incident, but their eyes followed the mountains receding in the distance, with the challenges and unknown enemy numbers still masked by the snowy summits.
Jay's team made one more excursion to test their methods and abilities only forty-eight hours before Operation Anaconda was to begin. This time, again in the mountains east of Gardez, they were dropped off and hiked in on foot, assessing the steep terrain for its ability to support the use of all-terrain vehicles (ATVs). "We went in, looked, listened, absorbed atmospherics, and froze our butts off up in the mountains...It was snowing, raining, freezing cold." They equipped themselves with the best gear available: large mountaineering packs (spray-painted by the men in individual patterns of khaki and tan) to better distribute loads; desert camo Gore-Tex to blend in and also to protect from the elements; and even more critically, they brought Afghan scarves and blankets to mask their American appearance from a distance. They left body armor behind because it was physically impossible to add the extra weight (upwards of twenty pounds in early 2002). They brought one sleeping bag among the entire team, solely as a lifesaving measure should someone go hypothermic. Otherwise, they had "Norwegians," a thin and lightweight insulation layer they combined with a Gore-Tex shell for the few hours they could attempt to sleep. These two items, when separated, served a more important purpose than semi-warmth for sleep: They could be molded to pad and sound-dampen equipment like radios and batteries, the bulk of their load.
Several key realizations came from the trip. The first was that tents were an absolute necessity at 10,000 feet in the snow and low temperatures if they were to stay out for any duration. Also paramount was the diminished life expectancy of batteries, which they quickly discovered was half the normal battery life in the subfreezing temperatures. This information was critical to Jay if he was to keep them adequately in communication with HQ and aircraft. The most important of these batteries were the BA-5590s that powered the PRC-117, their primary SATCOM and CAS radio. Each battery added two and a quarter pounds of dead weight to the operator, but also a critical handful of hours of operating time, which could save countless lives in combat.
With 120-plus pounds of gear each, they learned the team could move only two to three kilometers a night. To understand the sheer physical and psychological stress on Jay and the other AFO forces, imagine standing at the base of a towering 10,000-foot mountain on a frigid winter night, the temperature already below freezing and beginning its nightly plummet to near zero degrees Fahrenheit. Heave two fifty-pound sacks of concrete onto your back while your chest and arms are loaded down with a weapon, batteries, radios, GPS, knife, and an emergency medical pouch. Step forward with your right foot and immediately posthole into the snow, each step a strain on your back and body, your lungs searing as they gasp for oxygen in the thin atmosphere and you know there will be no sleep tonight or possibly even tomorrow. Top it all off with an uncomfortable head harness or helmet for your NVGs, which will be squeezing your cranium for the fourteen hours of darkness that lie ahead, during which you will attempt to scale two miles of snowy rocky mountain. Furthermore, there are only four of you and, should you encounter an enemy force of any significance, your limited numbers and ammunition and all your superior expertise will not hold out for long. For Jay Hill, besides the immense physical load and discomfort, there is the added burden of being the lone warrior who can change the outcome of the battle using his expertise to bring American airpower to bear, saving everyone or, if he fails, carrying that failure for life. So as a rule he carried as many batteries as he physically could.
* * *
As the AFO men recovered to the safe house, affectionately proclaimed to be HOTEL GARDYEZ by a sign posted adjacent to the main entrance to the TOC, Andy Martin and Mako-31 were loading out vehicles for the daylong drive. They arrived late in the afternoon under a fading, steel-gray sky in mid-February, the first time the entire Delta, SEAL, and CCT force of AFO joined under Blaber. The men, most of them familiar with each other, shook hands and hugged in greeting and took stock of one another and what lay ahead. For Jay and Andy, it was a joyous reunion. The two friends had worked together for years and shared a passion for practical jokes, usually at each other's expense.
With all his forces assembled, Blaber prepared for what was to come. Operation Anaconda was shaping up to be the largest operation of the war, a classic "hammer and anvil." Staging from the safe house, the hammer would consist of four hundred of General Zia's ATF and additional Afghan units, augmented by Chris Haas's Green Berets, along with CCT Bill Sprake. This force would push south from Gardez around the Whale and focus on the center of the Shahi Khot Valley, driving the enemy toward the anvil.
The preponderance of US forces for Anaconda were commanded by Major General Franklin Hagenbeck, a combination of 10th Mountain and 101st Airborne Divisions. They would form the anvil against the mountains leading east toward Pakistan, their enemy's predicted escape route as they fled the might of heliborne troops and massed Afghan forces...Or so the US Army believed.
Blaber intended to put the three AFO teams now under his command—J, I, and Mako-31—in the field and positioned at well-chosen and concealed OPs to report enemy locations and movements. Once situated, his Combat Controllers could call in airstrikes to kill as many enemy as possible.
For Martin and the SEALs of Mako-31, it was instant mission immersion. Delta and Jay had conducted all the reconnaissance and analysis and enjoyed the advantage of a couple weeks' acclimatization. Mako-31 would have none of this, _and_ Blaber had a surprise in store for them: Of the three OPs going out, Mako-31's location was considered the most critical. Centered between the two Delta teams and proximal to Takur Ghar, it commanded the best view of the air corridor that the conventional forces would be using. With little advance notification and few details, Blaber's surprise came as a shock. According to Martin, they learned they could expect "to be walking between nine and twelve thousand feet, and don't expect medical exfil or any kind of fire support prior [to H-hour] if you guys get fired up. We'll try to help you as best we can, but we're not going to burn this mission." They would have the longest distance to infil in the least familiar terrain, because the AFO recces were simply unable to get close to their OP.
Goody absorbed this all calmly. As he and his team were conducting their mission preparations, Blaber asked his newest team leader, "So what do you think?"
"Sir, this is one hell of a mission. I really appreciate you bringing us out here to be part of it," said the SEAL, paying more attention to his gear than to the Delta officer.
Blaber nudged his shoulder to ensure he had the SEAL's attention. "Goody, the success or failure of your mission will predicate the success or failure of the entire operation. You have to make it to that OP before H-hour."
"Sir, I'll make it to my OP come hell or high water. If we're hurting on time, we'll drop our rucks. If we're still having problems, we'll keep dropping gear until five naked guys with guns are standing on the OP at H-hour."
Blaber remembers thinking clearly: _Where do we get such men?_ It was just what the AFO commander was looking for, and what he expected from the best.
* * *
In Bagram, two other Combat Controllers, John Wylie (call sign Jaguar-11) and Jim Hotaling (call sign Jaguar-12), had also received short-notice taskings from their own commander. In this case, it was to join the famed Australian Special Air Service Regiment (known by the acronym SAS or alternatively SASR) to serve below the Whale and Takur Ghar as safeguards against escape routes through the southern end of the valley. Two six-man teams (including their CCT) would be inserted by separate Mi-17s and establish independent OPs where they would report enemy movement and call airstrikes. Established under its own separate task force, designated TF-64, it was the Aussies' first opportunity to put its most elite force into action in any significant operation in the new war. For them, it was a chance to build on the legacy they'd started with America in Vietnam. TF-64 worked directly for the 10th Mountain Division and Major General Hagenbeck, and therefore had no direct connection to the AFO forces, with one exception—Combat Control.
* * *
Back at Gardez, with everything set for AFO to infil, the men of I Team, J Team, and Mako-31 spent their last night indoors, to a man thinking about the ground operations to come. There was one exception. Jay Hill was considering the three-dimensional battlefield picture, but it was incomplete. "You have to remember, Operation Anaconda was planned in a vacuum from [an AFO] standpoint. And air planning was an afterthought, as the whole thing was planned by the [conventional] Army. I should have flown to Bagram for more information, but we didn't know there wasn't a deliberate air plan."
The Combat Controllers of AFO were about to learn just how little the Army had considered their role or the need for airpower.
Chapter 12
28 February
DUSK
Jay Hill assessed his ATV, a Honda four-wheeler specially outfitted by Delta's mechanics with a beefier suspension, a winch for recoveries, infrared headlights, and most important, a "quiet run" exhaust to muffle the throaty sounds of the vehicle. There were only four ATVs for the five men on Juliet Team—three Delta operators (Kris, Bill, and Dave) and a signals intelligence operator named Jason, whose job it was to intercept enemy transmissions to identify targets for the team to destroy and also to relay the raw intelligence to the TOC. Jay was the fifth member, and even though he had more equipment and weight than anyone else, there was no way a Delta operator was going to have a signals guy riding "bitch," so it fell to Jay to haul Jason to their OP.
Looking at the rig, Jay decided it wasn't a pretty picture. He had his rucksack, jammed with a PRC-117 (the backbone of every Controller's close air support, the radio was the size of two heavy dictionaries lying spine to spine and weighed ten pounds without batteries), ten BA-5590 batteries, two handheld MBITR radios (another multispectrum radio but smaller and less capable than a PRC-117) as backups for the PRC-117 (with batteries), a Panasonic Toughbook laptop with batteries and cables, a portable DMC-120 satellite antenna, an SMP2000 microponder beacon (used for beacon bombing in inclement weather), infrared (IR) strobes for positive identification at night by other forces and aircraft, a laser rangefinder, two types of IZLID laser pointers for marking targets with infrared, and various additional marking devices. To this, he added two Nalgene quart plastic bottles for melting snow against his body when he slept (he had no stove) and a handful of MREs. With so much necessary gear, he ran out of room and was forced to leave most of his comfort items, such as additional clothing layers, behind. He had no sleeping bag, merely a bivvy shell, using his "puffy" Combs jacket for insulation. In the end, his gear was heavier and bulkier than anyone else's on the team and his creature comforts fewer.
Jay's other critical items were carried on his body: three GPS units (a small Garmin, a large—and heavy—PLGR military type, and a small wrist mount), his M4 and five magazines containing thirty rounds each, a conventional compass, an NVG compass, and a VS-17 panel for daylight marking. All of these items were carried in his Rhodesian vest in addition to a first aid kit and knife. He used a helmet, they all did, but they weren't ballistically significant—quite the opposite. The men used cut-down versions of the plastic Pro-Tec skate helmet, modified by hand to remove the over-ear portions. The operators then added pile Velcro to the shell to attach items such as IR strobe lights and glint tape (for AC-130 identification) and, most important, snaps for affixing NVGs.
Mounted on the front cargo rack of the ATV was an X-wing antenna (basically, a foot-high, three-inch-diameter mast with a four-blade radiator fan from an import economy car glued across the top) that allowed him to switch between satellite and line-of-sight (LOS) communications without changing antennas. This was critical if they made enemy contact while driving. There'd be no time to switch out equipment if he was both calling in airstrikes and driving the ATV. It was a massive load for the commercial ATV, and he hadn't even added his passenger on the back yet, but as an "Air Force guy," Jay was reluctant to pawn off weight on teammates lest they view him as weak. Every Controller was constantly on guard against this perception. In actuality, one of the second-order effects of this dynamic was a pressure to perform at the top of every competition and during every operation. It manifested itself in the respect most CCT earned in training and combat. The other effect, as in this case, was an inordinate burden, not only the weight of lone responsibility but gross weight itself. On the morning of 28 February 2002, the reality for Jay was clear: Some batteries would have to be distributed among the others.
Like the pounds he carried, Jay's duties as a Controller were largely invisible to Delta. To them, the Controller's actions were merely FM—fucking magic; things just happened, if they even realized they took place at all.
As he configured the maxed-out ATV, Jay was faced with his first challenge before even engaging the ignition: FalconView, a mapping software for laptops developed by Georgia Tech Research Institute tech geeks using C++ language for the Air National Guard in 1993. It allowed users to track identified targets (friend and foe) and themselves on a moving map. It also allowed users to switch between several types of maps, such as aeronautical charts, US Geological Survey topographic maps, and even satellite imagery. FalconView was still nascent in its development, and only the Air Force, which meant only CCT, had it on the battlefield.
Jay's challenge was how to configure his Toughbook so he could access the software while the team was en route. With Jason jammed behind him, he'd be pushed up against the gas tank between his legs, but that was the only place the laptop could be situated for ease of access. After trying various configurations, he settled on a combination of black Velcro strips glued to the tank and laptop and held in place against vibrations and potential rollovers by bungee cords as they ascended the treacherous slopes of the mountains framing the Shahi Khot Valley.
Unfortunately, FalconView was not compatible with NVGs. In order to view maps, Jay would have to stop his vehicle, kick Jason off the back, and open and fire up the Toughbook while Delta pulled security for him. He'd then have to yank his poncho "sleeping bag" from a cargo pocket and drape it over his head to guard against the bright screen compromising their position. To connect the laptop remotely, he had a small helmet-mounted hockey-puck-shaped antenna connected via Bluetooth. Nearly two decades later, it may seem commonplace or even simple, but shortly after the turn of the century, the configuration was cutting edge, particularly on the outer fringe of possibility under combat conditions.
In all, there was no more room on man or machine for additional weight or gear. Looking over the line of ATVs, Jay shook his head; gear hung everywhere, piled dangerously high on the vehicles, making them top-heavy and all the more dangerous on the mountain slopes. "We looked like gypsies. It was pretty comical."
As the day advanced, heavy skies loomed and rain began to turn to snow. Predictably, the temperature dropped accordingly. Kris, the Delta team leader of J Team, checked with the TOC while the others made their final preparations. "Just before leaving, a source reported to the CIA that the majority of the enemy was in the mountains and to the east of Sahi Kot [ _sic_ ]," he recalled later. More good news: Their route also took them past a dangerously hostile village called Menjawar, which was "still an AQ holdout" that they most assuredly would need to give a wide berth due to the latest news. Capping it off was the announcement by the 5th Group Green Berets training Zia's militia, who were known to have Al Qaeda sympathizers within their four-hundred-man ranks, that they hadn't told the Afghan commander about the mission until twelve hours earlier, fearing a leak. Nevertheless, Kris learned, "Shortly after notifying Zia, the AQ knew Sahi Kot [ _sic_ ] was going to be attacked." The news was met with shrugs. The teams were already going deep into enemy territory. Another confirmation of the enemy's awareness wouldn't change the tactics or dynamics of the operators.
The infil plan was conceived to get all three teams, J, I, and Mako-31, inserted in one movement. To do this, they were all prepped and staged together. J Team had the only ATV riders, and the other two teams would conduct their own vehicle drop-offs after J Team peeled off. Two Hilux pickups led the convoy, each with a MAG 58 7.62mm machine gun and a SAW, a lighter-weight 5.56mm weapon with a higher cyclic rate. These were manned by the infil insertion team, led by John B., a Delta captain well respected among the senior NCOs of the Unit. Three more Delta operators and the now-excluded SEAL, Hans, rounded out the infil insertion team. Fifteen ATF fighters jammed into the back of the trucks for security and additional firepower. The ATVs of J Team brought up the rear. In the event of contact, the trucks had the heaviest firepower.
Andy Martin had his gear prepped and staged with his SEAL teammates. A very type-A personality, he was ready to get on the mountain and kill Al Qaeda, certain that when the time came, the killing would be almost exclusively his domain. This would not turn out to be the case, but he had no way of knowing that Mako-31's mission would be the most difficult, dangerous, and decisive of the three.
At the rear of the convoy, Jay observed his Delta teammates and felt confident in his abilities and their plan, and remembers thinking, _These are the guys you want to do this with_. _This is why I'm in the 24 and why we did all those winter warfare training trips and ATV training._ But he knew this was no easy infil and the mission outcome was anything but certain, nor was it fully within their control. Still, Jay, who'd spent years preparing, thought, _This is what I was meant to do_. _We're going to put eyes on the valley and wreak havoc._ Recalling the moment, he states, "Everything came together as a Controller. It was literally a CCT mission."
Go time. They rolled out of the compound gate in the dark just after 1900 and traveled south along the Zurmat road, where the mountains' presence in the distance was more felt than seen. At the drop-off point, J Team bade their farewells, wishing the other teams luck, and turned east. On their own, they broke into pairs: Bill in the lead with Dave behind; Kris and Jay, with his human cargo Jason, bringing up the rear. Everyone was connected by interteam radio via headsets under their helmets.
For the Combat Controller, it was the start of days of nonstop communication and responsibility. The Delta operators were solely on their designated interteam radio net, whereas Jay had three separate nets coming through his Peltor headset. Peltors were green, dual-ear hearing aids and communications sets that doubled as ear protection from gunfire or eardrum-damaging explosions. They cut off all sound above a certain decibel and simultaneously enhanced ambient noise, allowing the men to enjoy a sort of "bionic man" hearing. Jay was on interteam like everyone else, in addition to being plugged in to their designated SATCOM frequency, or freq, to remain connected with Pete Blaber. He was also dialed in to an air-to-ground freq that he used to establish communication with a JSTARS aircraft overhead.
Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System was the full name for the Air Force's Boeing 707 conversion used for ground surveillance, battle management, and command and control. It had powerful radar systems, allowing it to track hundreds of targets, and could vector and manage dozens of fighters or bombers while assisting with on-the-ground pictures during combat.
The four-wheelers crept around their next threat, a village called Cine, and started up the slopes of a mountain named Wac Sakh Ghar. Their route was to take them over the top of Sakh Ghar's ridgelike summit via one of several passes they believed were accessible, which allowed them to bypass Menjawar, the village known to have as many as two hundred Al Qaeda fighters who'd moved into the region in anticipation of the fight. On the other side of Sakh Ghar, they would travel south toward the north end of Shahi Khot Valley to their OP.
As they ascended the lower slopes, however, they learned another hard truth regarding Afghan terrain and maps: 1:100,000 US maps had very little detail, Russian 1:50,000 topo maps were never as accurate or reliable as their US counterparts (which didn't exist for the region anyway), and satellite imagery was inadequate for the man on the ground. Even Jay's FalconView was only as good as the images loaded into the program. The trails and navigable terrain they'd planned around were proving impassable as the meters added up behind their vehicles.
"We continued to move south trying to find a way over the mountain, getting closer and closer to Menjawar."
Eventually, they stopped and discussed the situation, using Jay's FalconView under the poncho. It was clear their carefully planned route was now blocked. They had a choice to make. They could drop back down the mountain, travel south along the lower slopes of Sakh Ghar, and attempt to pass through an enemy-occupied town to make their OP, or they could turn back and notify Blaber they would be unable to reach their OP and, therefore, not accomplish their mission, compromising the upcoming operation involving more than a thousand US troops and personnel. Ultimately, there was no choice.
"It was now obvious that we were going to have to go through Menjawar to get to our OP."
They rolled to a stop before the village, tires crunching loudly over rocks and their exhausts advertising their presence, or so it felt to the men. They watched the silent village intently for obvious threats. When nothing revealed itself and their choice was made, "we slowly moved through the town with streets as wide as six feet and saw no one, only a lot of dogs barking." The dogs set the men on edge, their Peltors amplifying the potential threat that the barking would bring Taliban or Al Qaeda forces out into the night. They prayed the Delta-modified exhausts would mask their passing. The main thoroughfare was no more than an alley, darkly claustrophobic. Every low-slung mud building had weapons behind its walls; every blackened window masked a potential AK-47 barrel. "It was about 2200 hours, and it was a good thing that when it gets dark, the Afghanis appear to bed down for the night. The thing that worried us most was an unexpected checkpoint, but we never saw any." The men had their weapons slung in front of them for easy reach, fingers ready to grab pistol grips and return ambush fire—a no-win situation since their right hands were required to work the ATV throttles. If fired upon, they could return fire or flee, but not both.
"It was just above freezing, there's no snow on the ground but it's muddy, so you can see the tracks...You're not making that much noise but at the same time you're just waiting for somebody to appear over the top of the wall and go 'Aha! Here's our guys!' because they knew we were coming, that Americans were pouring into the Shahi Khot, that they were going to do some sort of major operation."
With their biggest threat to that point behind them, they finally found a route over the mountain to the east. Turning south, they began to feel their way in the right direction, until along the trail, "we eventually came across a bunch of rocks piled across the road with one big rock that had an X painted on it." This meant the road was mined. So, "we figured: (1) we were very lucky, (2) the road was mined with [anti-tank] mines and the ATVs were not heavy enough to set them off, (3) we moved in the center of the trail and the mines were on the tire paths only, or (4) the area was falsely marked as mined to scare people off." As is so often the case in life, and particularly in combat, luck and events moved in unpredictable and unknowable ways. Jay concludes, "So we were thinking it wasn't the smartest idea to go through the middle of Menjawar. And then we end up in a damn minefield because you can't really tell the difference on the rock colors on Nods (NVGs)." J Team had dodged their second bullet of a mission that was only six hours old.
* * *
Ten miles to the south, I Team and Mako-31 were winding their way toward their vehicle drop-offs along the route reconnoitered by I Team only a few days earlier. The going was little better than on J Team's travels. "Because of the rugged, broken terrain, which caused the trucks to bottom out frequently, [I Team and Mako-31] dismounted some 2.5 kilometers short of their intended drop-off."
John B. repeated his delayed departure procedure, watching the eight phantoms disappear single file into the night, each of them burdened by more than a hundred pounds, like lethal pack mules. When enough time had elapsed, he turned his pickups for Gardez.
I Team and Mako-31 trudged together through the night for four kilometers along the valley floor, heading east along a creek named Zawar Khwar, and then I Team turned north for their OP another seven kilometers distant, leaving Andy and the SEALs with a movement ahead of them that was more than twice as long.
Neither team had much to say when they parted; it was a serious night and all of them were now deep in enemy-controlled territory. For Mako-31 it was doubly daunting. Not only had they missed the hard-earned lessons learned on the recce missions, but there was also something to be said for the personal experience of having previously walked the terrain. What they lacked in local exposure, though, they made up for with skill, experience, and intent. Andy and Goody had no intention of failing to make their objective or an impact on the overall operation.
To ensure they arrived at their OP unobserved, they'd deliberately plotted a circuitous infiltration route nearly twenty-two kilometers long. Though the least acclimated, Mako-31 also had to double their movement rate, reducing the time and ability to identify the enemy before the enemy might identify them. It was a _huge_ risk. Still, they continued through snow that began to reach their knees, each step a posthole except where exposed rocky terrain provided some respite. Their painfully challenging progress was exacerbated by the snow that began to fall. Their misery did have one silver lining: No one in their right mind was out on a night such as this.
* * *
While Mako-31 slogged through the night, Bill, J Team's lead rider, was making a lifesaving leap from his ATV. The team had been climbing through increasingly deep snow on steepening slopes as they neared their OP. As the three others climbed the trail behind him, Bill's ATV suddenly stood upright under the heavy load and forty-five-degree slope and tipped backward. Bill flung himself off just as eight hundred pounds toppled. Dumped in the snow, he and the others watched helplessly as the rig and his equipment tumbled end over end "for over a hundred meters before it stopped." Gear was strewn down the slope. While his teammates collected the equipment, Bill righted his ATV, checked it over, and hit the starter. The engine quietly came to life. Once again, they were grateful for their specialized equipment and the superb skills of the vehicle crews.
When his rig was put back together, the men continued carefully across the steep terrain, eventually arriving at their primary OP site. But, as Kris recounted, "after conducting a recon, we decided it was not a good site. We would have to leave the ATVs out of site [ _sic_ ] with no good hiding place for them." They studied Jay's FalconView screen, then "loaded back on the ATVs and headed toward another site we had seen from the top of the mountain we were just on."
To reach their secondary OP, they were forced to travel down into the northern end of the Shahi Khot before cutting across the toes of some ridgelines and due east into another small valley that "was the one with the confirmed cave and reported ADA [air defense artillery] and artillery pieces." The team ended up closer than they'd anticipated, only "turning around about three hundred meters before the cave and moving back to the mouth of the valley," as Kris recalled. From there, they found a secure ATV hide site, which they masked with camo netting brought along expressly for that purpose. After nine intense and grueling hours, they finally stopped. Saddlesore but grateful, they removed their helmets and spent an hour doing a "look, listen, and smell" of their new base. On 1 March at 0447, J Team reported back to Pete Blaber that they were in position and open for business.
* * *
As Andy and his team continued their "heinous" route along a 9,400-foot ridgeline, AFO's approach to the enemy and their historic tactics and daily rhythm was proving well-thought-out. It was unlikely any Al Qaeda believed the soft-bellied Americans would be out in misery such as this or in terrain so forbidding and remote. Both served Mako-31 well and were critical since, as Andy observed, "the whole way in, based on the terrain, we always had at least ninety degrees, if not more, of masking where anybody could come up over the ridgeline, so [we were] really, really shit out of luck most of the time."
Despite their relentless march, the dawn beat them to their objective and they stopped as a steel-gray sky greeted the exhausted warriors. With no choice, they established a hide site a mere thousand meters from their objective.
* * *
In Bagram, John Chapman listened on the SATCOM net as his 24 teammates passed information or exchanged messages via Toughbook. He'd managed to get to the war, but his only mission had been a bust. Now he was sidelined, again, tantalizingly close but still a lifetime's distance from the operations going down.
Chapter 13
1 March
" _We will retreat to the mountains and begin a long guerrilla war to reclaim our pure land from infidels and free our country like we did against the Soviets. The Soviets were a brave enemy and their soldiers could withstand tough conditions. The Americans are creatures of comfort. They will not be able to sustain the harsh conditions that await them._ " So predicted Jalaluddin Haqqani on 29 October 2001. Haqqani was a Taliban mujahideen commander, and his forces were already in retreat as he spoke these words from a Pakistani hideout where he would remain for over a decade. His words reflected the beliefs of most of the combatants arrayed against the pending Operation Anaconda forces. He also had the distinction of having been a commander during the Soviet campaign, and more important, its effort in the Shahi Khot Valley.
Haqqani based his opinion on broad perceptions built up over the previous decade and reinforced by events in Somalia and Haiti, where it seemed Americans could be driven from one's lands by inflicting a few casualties. His assessment, though, was based on US foreign policy and not on the actual troops on the ground. Ironically, this "creatures of comfort" analyst was himself a creature of habit, and his forces now awaiting the Americans were repeating their tactics of more than a decade prior. Blaber's and AFO's study of the history and geography of their battlefield was about to determine whether "habit" or "comfort" would win the day.
Haqqani's understanding of where and when the first major confrontation was going to take place was solidified, thanks in part to the tip-off delivered by traitors within the American-allied ATF's ranks. But even before this confirmation of American intent, the Taliban and Al Qaeda had recognized the looming fight's location. From the enemy:
_Our early presence in it [Shahi Khot] gave us sufficient experience and much knowledge of it inside and out, its dangerous parts and the ways out of them, and allowed us to master their use—by the bounty of Allah the Most High—for our operations with the Americans when Allah caused them to encounter us in that area. Maulawi Jawad was Saif-ur-Rahman Mansoor's military commander for the duration of the previous phase of battles. He had been involved in preparing the bases and occupied with arranging and fixing ambushes. We planted land mines accurately in the main roads, which led to the village [Serkhankhel, in the center of the Shahi Khot Valley], and we set up heavy artillery on the surrounding mountain peaks._
_In the early days, we spent all our time preparing the area. Our numbers totaled 440 mujahideen in all, comprising 175 Afghan mujahideen from Saif-ur-Rahman Mansoor's group, 190 mujahideen from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan under the command of Qari Muhammad Tahir Jan (this was the largest group), and about 75 Arab mujahideen, the majority of whom had previous military knowledge and training._
By 1 March, more fighters had poured into the valley and were fortifying the surrounding mountains, preparing for jihad. J Team had already survived two of Maulawi Jawad's preparations: the forces housed and staged in Menjawar, and at least one minefield. As the men adapted to their new surroundings and improved their OP, the next threat came to them.
Satisfied the location was sound from a defensive consideration, with good lines of sight on the valley to their south and the surrounding mountains, they stashed the ATVs behind a ten-foot embankment situated below the OP in the riverbed they'd followed. According to Jay the OP itself was bifurcated: One position was the mission support site, known as an MSS, where they set up their lone tent so two men could rest or eat; and the second was the actual observation post, "a hundred meters straight up the side of a ledge," where the three others would conduct operations. The way they'd situated it, "one guy would watch the rear and the pair [of men] on the rest plan. One guy would watch the target area, and the other would do the reporting and pull security." The two positions maintained communications by way of MBITR.
At noon, the Taliban came, single file.
They appeared from the cave area the men had passed hours earlier, traveling down the valley J Team had left behind. They all appeared to be Afghans, not Arabs or Uzbeks, and "they all had weapons to include RPGs." They were following the ATV tracks and "stopped right where our tracks went up from the valley to our ATVs."
Kris and Jay, who were manning the OP, observed them intently. Were they tracking J Team? Was it merely a small patrol or the advance element of a much larger force? Kris had Bill and Dave take up positions, but neither could see the enemy, and further movement would only likely give away their position.
J Team's tracks were "all over the place," so following the team's trail would prove difficult unless they happened upon the ATVs and the two Delta snipers hidden nearby. Then the Taliban sniffed out the tracks leading toward the ATVs. When they closed to two hundred meters, Kris knew they were in trouble. "Some of the thought process going on at this time was: these five personnel could be a point element for a larger force. If we shoot them, we would now be on the run by foot; if we shoot them, the mission could be compromised; if we let them go, they might bring back a larger force; and all the ATV tracks might have confused them and they had no idea what was going on. As they continued to move inch-by-inch toward the ATVs, we got ready to engage them at the last possible minute."
Jay sighted through the ACOG (Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight) scope of his suppressed M4 as the men approached. The Taliban below had no idea they were in the crosshairs of some of the deadliest shots in the world. The Delta snipers and Jay held the shot. Triggers brushed with the contact of each shooter's finger, poised to squeeze. At less than two hundred meters, kills were foregone conclusions for the Americans. "You're watching this guy in your scope, thinking, 'I'm going to have to shoot this guy,' and if you do it's going to echo across the entire valley and then you're done." With Jay and Kris above and the other two below, Kris kept the team in check even as the enemy closed to within 150 feet of the ATVs. The prospects weighed heavily on Jay's mind. "With your scope you could see they were talking about it, 'Hey, what is this?' and pointing at [the tracks]. They'd walked away and then came back."
Kris, Jay, and the snipers below weren't sure if they were compromised or not, but it seemed likely. Jay got on the net and brought in ISR to scan the surrounding terrain and cover likely avenues of approach. For good measure, he coordinated for close air to be on standby in case the men were attacked. While Jay was working the airwaves, Kris called Blaber on the radio, using the whisper mode (which amplified the transmitter's voice so the receiver heard it clearly), and relayed the situation.
Blaber responded, "What's your recommendation?"
"Well, if we kill 'em now, the whole valley will know we're up here, and we'll lose the element of surprise. Let me see what they do next. I'll call you back."
Kris describes what happened next: "Just as we got ready to fire, they stopped and paused for a few seconds, then talked to one another and then just turned around and continued to walk out into the Sahi Kot [ _sic_ ] valley. One of them stayed back and went out of site [ _sic_ ] for about 5 minutes. We believe he walked back up toward the area from behind a rock that was in front of us but, because of the 10 ft embankment could not see anything. Finally we saw him walk back out and link up with the other 4 personnel."
Kris called Blaber back after the enemy departed, explaining, "We've plotted the grid for the cave entrance they walked out of and [Jay] will coordinate a bombing mission on it at H-hour."
The others broke down the tent and began hauling the remainder of the gear up to the OP. There would no longer be a lower position; all the men would remain on the higher ground. The sun rose but the weather closed as a gale-force snowstorm blew in. Nearly two feet of snow fell, allowing them to work their relocation (something they'd normally only accomplish in the dark) throughout a tense day.
By nightfall, fresh snow had covered all the ATV and Taliban tracks, providing additional anonymity and security for the team. Anyone moving about now would be exposed by fresh tracks in the snow. The team felt safe and, with the immediate threat diminished, continued to consider their location. Further scouting revealed a small draw farther upslope with superior views of Tergul Ghar, the Whale. So they repeated the process of relocation throughout the night of 1 March, electing to leave the extra gear from the ATVs at the temporary OP and putting more distance between them and the ATVs. As a security measure, Dave and Bill set a claymore mine booby trap with a trip wire to guard the downstream approach to the ATVs and to serve as an early warning from their rear, before leaving them behind for the duration of the mission.
The new site provided another advantage in terrain dominance and masking should a larger force return. J Team would be able to effectively attack with plunging fire. It also closed the distance between the MSS and OP to fifty feet, strengthening their mutual support. The site itself, though, was more exposed. All rock face with six-to-ten-foot ledges across the face and backside, there was sparse foliage, only scattered ankle-high brush. Jay recalls, "How we were positioned, we were not as concealed as you'd think you would be in the mountains of Afghanistan. I had a leaf suit on, but underneath a blue North Face coat. [And] it was not just that, I had a VS-17 panel out for IFF [Identification, Friend or Foe]. So if somebody flew over and saw us, an Apache or something like that, it wouldn't shoot at us." Theoretically. This was a real concern among the team. The unknown was how well the pilots flying across hundreds of miles and dozens of mountains and valleys were briefed on three small and autonomous groups of Americans deep in enemy territory.
Considering the close call with the Taliban, the men decided it was not all negative. It had unearthed their point of origin, the cave. Without realizing it during their wanderings through the terrain on infil, the team ended up no more than seven hundred meters from what was clearly a significant enemy position, much closer than they cared to be for an operation spanning more than a week. Looking through their sniper scopes, buildings could be seen as well.
With his first target identified, Jay got to work planning a pre-H-hour strike on the cave complex. For his first strike, he wasted no time on subtleties. He was going to announce the American campaign to Al Qaeda with an earth-shattering bang. The cave complex was to be the recipient of a Blu-118/B 2,000-pound thermobaric laser-guided bomb, courtesy of a B-1 bomber crew. It would be the inaugural use of the newly redesigned and improved ordnance.
* * *
As J Team settled in and began reporting enemy positions and movements, Andy Martin and Mako-31 were waiting for daylight to wane in order to continue their infiltration. The waypoint afforded them a direct view of Shahi Khot's center and the village there. Before the morning's storm moved in and eliminated all visibility, the team "observed some Afghans fleeing the area with two camels in tow, overloaded with their possessions." If there were lingering doubts about knowledge of the pending operation, the hasty departure of locals removed them. Not taking any chances, Goody held his team in place till sunset, when they hefted their gear once again and moved out under cover of thick fog, hoping to make it to their OP. The night's "hump" proved more difficult than the first. The terrain was extreme, and sheer drop-offs and crevasses created obstacles along their mountain trail. In six hours of movement, they managed barely three kilometers.
* * *
As Mako-31 were beginning their second day, CCT Jim Hotaling, along with six Australian SAS troopers, sat freezing and huddled with his gear in the rear of another CIA-operated Mi-17. He watched the valleys and peaks pass underneath in the Afghan twilight, thinking about the mission he'd received in Kandahar three days prior, with no notice or fanfare, from Major Terry Maki, the commander of the 22nd STS. He'd had only twenty minutes to prepare before relocating to Bagram and meeting up with his team and their leader, Matt B.
Hotaling was a thirty-three-year-old reservist CCT. He'd been on active duty for several years before transferring into the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) program, which afforded former CCT who didn't wish to be under the formal obligations of the Air National Guard the opportunity to remain in the community. IMA allowed him to train with the 22nd STS at McChord AFB in Washington State, where he worked full-time as a state highway patrolman. At five eleven, he had a round, stocky build with tightly cropped coarse brown hair and jovial facial features, earning him the nickname "Fozzie Bear." When the war kicked off, he'd been mobilized and then deployed to Afghanistan in October.
Upon arrival, he and another Controller by the name of John Wylie were immediately assigned to the SAS. For the next three months he "mission whored," a term that described jumping from unit to unit and mission to mission. It was the best opportunity to get in on action and airstrikes, and he bounced among the Aussie SAS's 1 Squadron, the Norwegian Marinejegerkommandoen (MJK) special forces, German Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK), and both B and C troops of SEAL Team Three. This ability to move freely among units, services, and allies, sometimes from week to week or even on a daily turn, is unique to CCT, again demonstrating the need to be competent and proficient across the spectrum of skills required in special operations tactics on a wholly global scale. Hotaling had done eight previous missions with the Aussies, including one other high-altitude patrol.
The SAS had endeavored to find a role in Anaconda and successfully lobbied for the opportunity to uphold a portion of the mission. For their efforts, they were rewarded with two patrols assigned to cover the south end of the Shahi Khot to prevent escape. The Aussies, recognizing their inexperience with US air and airstrikes in general, immediately requested the two Controllers they were familiar with.
Pre-mission planning had been a whirlwind of coordination and packing for both Controllers, neither of whom had worked with their assigned US or SAS teams before. Short-notice assignments to unfamiliar units were nothing new, but both men knew the stakes in this particular situation were elevated. Not only did the SAS highly value their participation, but each Controller carried the weight not just of the Air Force but of the entire nation.
The Aussies tended to pack more heavily than their US counterparts so, as a result, Hotaling's ruck weighed 110 pounds. Unlike Jay Hill with Delta (who was reluctant to push weight onto his team), the Aussies ensured that the ruck of each man on the mission was within two pounds of his teammates'. Still, to this, Hotaling added thirty pounds of "combat load," including a vest with ammo, first aid, water, signaling devices, an M4 with suppressor and ACOG scope, and NVGs.
The hour-long flight from Bagram was uneventful, but the men in back were keyed up—like the SEALs, they'd had no recce experience in the mountains east of Gardez. The helo set down in the dark five kilometers south of the Shahi Khot Valley, and the men struggled off the ramp under the weight of their packs. They trudged into the night and directly onto their intended OP, which had a commanding view of the approach and departure routes. Unlike Blaber's AFO teams, the Aussies, like the rest of the US and allied military, had no reservations about using rotary lift to insert, in this case right on top of the OP. It was also the reason the team was inclined to pack heavy; they did not intend to move or be resupplied, a decision they would soon regret.
* * *
Half a dozen kilometers to the north, Andy and the SEALs were anxious to arrive at their targeted location and acutely aware of their promise to Blaber. They moved out at 1430, still almost two kilometers from their OP, and the terrain between them and their objective was more challenging than the night before. This night completely drained the team, and they managed only 1,100 meters up the mountainous slope, finishing at nearly 11,000 feet above sea level and 600 meters short of their OP. As they moved, sweat poured from their bodies, soaking their shirts under their crushing loads. Pausing in the frigid mountain air, even for a few moments, caused them to freeze. It was something almost impossible to avoid, so although thighs burned with each heavy footfall and lungs ached with each gasp, it was better to keep moving than to stop.
They occupied a hide site and established security, catching their breath and stretching their aching shoulders and backs. There was precious little time to take personal stock; it was close to midnight. H-hour, the time at which 10th Mountain and the 101st Airborne were scheduled to land on the valley floor, was set for 0630 the following day. If they were to get eyes on the valley before sunrise, they'd never get there as a team burdened with their packs and equipment. With little choice, Goody sent two SEAL snipers, Chris and Eric, forward to scout their final OP while Andy established comms with AFO HQ.
The two SEALs, free of their rucks, crept stealthily forward through a snow squall, scanning their surroundings for Al Qaeda as they went. Two hundred meters forward of Mako-31's position, they were confronted by a gray-green five-man tent wedged beneath a rock outcropping a few feet from a cliff's edge. Complete with a tin chimney protruding from one corner, it was exactly where the team planned to place their own OP. Al Qaeda had arrived at the same conclusion, beating them to it by days.
Chris, who'd been a SEAL for over a decade and was the twin brother of a Combat Controller named Preston, pulled a Nikon Coolpix camera with an 8X lens from his mini pack to capture some shots for Andy to pass back, when Eric motioned for his attention. On the ridgeline fifteen meters above the tent was the unmistakable silhouette of a tripod-mounted Russian DShK-38 12.7mm antiaircraft machine gun, protected from the elements by a blue plastic tarp wrapped tightly around the barrel and receiver. Chris snapped some shots and then confirmed the weapon's location using his laser rangefinder and GPS.
The discovery was fortuitous. The position dominated the entire 700-meter-wide approach corridor the TF-Rakkasan helicopters were to use for insertion in little more than twenty-four hours. The DShK's 3,000-meter range placed the entire assault force in "duck shoot" range. The two men watched the position for signs of fighters, but nobody showed themselves in the cold, so they silently withdrew back across the snow-covered ridgeline to report their findings, careful not to dislodge any rocks as the squall covered their withdrawal.
Andy relayed a short message outlining what they'd discovered. At the AFO safe house Blaber read the message, absorbing the new information, the first concrete evidence of enemy preparation for the assault.
The SEALs went back for a second look in the light of day to determine whether the site was occupied and to get better photos, this time with Goody accompanying them. What they saw gave them pause. Two men were in the open. The first was a short, dark-haired, and bearded Mongol wearing typical Afghan tan "man jammies" and a sleeveless jacket of gray, red, and blue, topped by a brown wool hat. But it was the other man that caught the SEALs' attention. A tall, clean-shaven Caucasian with a full head of reddish collar-length hair, he was dressed for the elements in a heavy red Gore-Tex jacket, Polartec fleece liner, and Russian pattern camo pants. This man was clearly in charge of their fighting position. He'd carefully arranged ammunition in an arc around the DShK's pit for rapid reloading when the time came. Both men seemed fit and healthy, the Caucasian occasionally shadowboxing with himself and strolling between the DShK and the tent.
At first, they assumed he was Uzbek, but the longer they watched, the less sure they were that they had his ethnicity pegged. At the hide site, Andy downloaded the photos onto his Toughbook.
Andy was the team's communications expert, but it was Goody's mission to lead. He quickly typed a message for Blaber and the SEAL Team Six HQ, attached the photos, and hit send. Although Blaber was their immediate commander, the SEALs of Mako-31 were also reporting their actions directly to their chain of command in Bagram and excluding Blaber from these back-channel messages. This would have far-reaching and tragic consequences in the coming hours and days.
Because of this, John Chapman in Bagram and Jay Hill across the valley were oblivious to the message traffic, which would also have consequences when Mako-31 began reporting more enemy locations in the coming hours, including on Takur Ghar.
Goody designated his message "eyes only" for Blaber and included the assessment that there may be as many as five fighters. The daytime photos clearly showed the Caucasian in his mountain redoubt with the TF-Rakkasan insertion corridor stretching panoramically into the distance behind him. Mako-31's other concern was the possible presence of other allied forces. The Aussies were already in the south, so Goody asked Blaber, "Are the Brits up here?" It was possible. The Mako-31 team looked nothing like an American force, and who knew if the Brits were similarly outfitted and using locals as part of some uncoordinated operation?
The photos conveyed more detail and impact than any written report could. It was clear to Blaber that the Uzbeks and other foreign fighters were ready for a fight. Blaber assured Goody there were no Brits or other forces in their vicinity and immediately passed the message to Bagram. It caused concern among the planners, who had been assured by the broader Army and intelligence organizations, supported by dedicated satellites, surveillance aircraft, and even a CIA Mi-17 video flyover just the previous day, that threats to the insertion force simply didn't exist. Before they'd even reached their OP, Mako-31, and by extension Blaber's entire AFO force and concept, were changing the looming battle.
Goody, Andy, and the others needed to outline a plan. The DShK would need to be eliminated before TF-Rakkasan entered the valley, and it was impossible to say whether the weapon and fighters, now only six hundred feet from their position, were reinforced by a larger contingent tucked into the mountains nearby. But their mission was not to directly engage the enemy; they simply weren't equipped for any type of direct assault or sustained firefight. And there was the question of what Blaber might say. But some action _had_ to happen; they simply couldn't allow the DShK to stand. Even if TF-Rakkasan did modify their plan, Andy couldn't call in airstrikes from the current OP with an enemy force a stone's throw away. Eventually they'd be discovered. The SEALs and Andy, all of them trained snipers, were not inclined to leave an enemy force standing, and they believed they could take them, but would Blaber agree?
After further discussion, Goody got on his laptop and asked Blaber for guidance. Instead of providing direction, he asked the SEAL, "What's your recommendation?" To the SEALs and Andy, who were beginning to appreciate the Delta officer's leadership style, it was manna from heaven.
Blaber, who was acutely aware of the precarious position of his teams, waited while his team leader absorbed the question.
"I want to make sure we maintain the element of surprise as close to H-hour as possible. I will wait until H minus two [hours]. At H minus two I will start moving; that will allow me to take my time getting into position. I'll engage at H minus one, and then [have Andy] follow up with AC-130."
For good measure, Goody followed that immediately with, "I understand that you have to make the decision on this and I'll support any decision you make."
Blaber, always one with a flair for the dramatic and not wishing to miss an opportunity, sent back, "Good hunting," smiling at the exchange.
On a mountain deep in enemy territory, five men, seriously outnumbered and unsupported, smiled too. For the men of Mako-31, an opportunity such as this is why each became a Combat Controller or a SEAL.
* * *
At TF-11, everything was not smiles as Blaber's early reports and photos circulated. Some of the staff believed Blaber was exceeding his mission. Mako-31 "did not have sufficient men to attack the position, nor even 'doctrinal authority' to conduct a direct action," according to one TF-11 staffer. "Peter the Great" was at it again, scoffed another. Also taking note of the increased message traffic, and the impact of AFO, was the commander of SEAL Team Six, Captain Joe Kernan, and his ops officer, a SEAL named Tim Szymanski. Two of their men may have excluded themselves from AFO, but half of Slab's Red Team sniper element was now decisively engaged in a big opportunity. For Slab and the rest of the SEALs in Bagram, nothing was happening, and everyone in TF-11 was now fixating on Blaber's three teams in the field as Operation Anaconda began to spin up in preparation for combat operations. Wheels began to spin in the minds of the SEAL leaders.
Back in Gardez, Blaber sent a final message to Goody, a four-word mission statement: "Terminate with extreme prejudice."
Falling back on his Navy vernacular, the SEAL acknowledged with a simple "Aye, aye," before signing off.
Blaber looked at a map on the wall of the safe house. All three of his teams were in and "open for business," ready for H-hour. He was extremely proud of what the small, elite joint force was doing in the field and confident in their abilities. The enemy had a vote in what happened next, of course, and conditions remained perilous for the Delta, SEAL, and Combat Control operators, but he knew there was no one else in the world who could perform better in the days to come.
At TF-11's JOC (Joint Operations Center) in Bagram, Brigadier General Trebon, the deputy TF-11 commander, was just finishing a conversation with Six's Captain Kernan. He picked up the phone to dial the AFO commander with some news.
Chapter 14
2 March
BEFORE SUNRISE
The second of March dawned with better visibility and weather for the AFO teams as temperatures approached a much-welcomed 32 degrees Fahrenheit. Jay Hill and the Delta snipers were settled into their OP and had established a battle rhythm for reporting on the enemy. There was plenty to report. In addition to civilians fleeing the valley, positions were being fortified across the Whale, and forces could be seen mustering and repositioning. It was going to be a good day for killing.
The mission was Delta-led, with Kris delivering the reports to Blaber while Bill and Dave did most of the scope-spotting. The mission's statement and core, however, were all CCT. In preparation for orchestrating bomb strikes and gun runs (helicopters and fighters), Jay had two MBITRs and his PRC-117, which, when combined with his FalconView expertise, gave the team an unprecedented suite of lethality with which to decimate the enemy forces.
"I had my radios all set up, superior comms through the entire valley. Kris would make the calls to [Blaber] and I'd worry about range-finding, running down all the different targets, and nominating them." The day was well spent, "reporting back potential targets to Pete [Blaber], who would relay to Bagram who would...well, Trebon and those folks I'm sure were listening too, on SAT alpha [the designated AFO satellite frequency]. Everything was set up so we could talk to everybody. And we were in a good position where we had the entire valley covered." All he needed now were planes and bombs.
Below him, in the center of the valley, the enemy's preparations, advance warning, and superior numbers did provide them certain advantages, but could they use them effectively? Intercepted requests revealed their concerns as well as their strategy: "The traitors and their American allies are going to attack soon, we need to bring reinforcements to the village."
Maulawi Saif-ur-Rahman Nasrullah Mansoor was the commander responsible for fielding such requests and for shaping the overall strategy. With hundreds of mujahideen under his command, his assessment did not agree with his subordinate's request. Based on his experience as a subcommander under Haqqani in the Soviet campaign, during which they were victorious, he replied, "There is no need. We were in Shahi Khot during the first Afghan jihad [against the Soviets]. There were six mujahideen in total and we were surrounded by ten tanks. Over five air attacks were staged on us in a single day, and there were about one hundred Soviet soldiers who attacked us from the land. But all praise belongs to Allah alone—they were not able to set foot on a single hand-span of the village, and we remained in this same state for about one week." Convinced the high ground, coupled with mortars and antiaircraft systems throughout the valley (along with Allah's blessing) and the hundreds of fighters who'd fled from the north, was adequate to defeat the "soft" Americans, they waited, reciting their daily prayers.
* * *
The stage was set for the morning's US-led invasion of the Shahi Khot. Three postage-stamp-size elements of America's finest troops, thirteen men in all, waited to battle a thousand to fifteen hundred hardened and experienced fighters of the jihad who were arrayed across two hundred square miles of fortified fighting positions. They were armed with heavy machine guns, antiaircraft weapons, mortars, and artillery and occupied the vast majority of the high ground surrounding the Shahi Khot Valley. Yet for all AFO's capability and experience, Blaber's troops were merely peripheral to Operation Anaconda's main thrust.
The plan to eliminate the enemy was simple. The US Army intended to drop a few hundred infantry troops from the 10th Mountain and 101st Airborne onto the valley floor. They would then establish blocking positions against the mountains to serve as an anvil against which the (theoretically) terrified Al Qaeda fighters fleeing ATF forces (augmented by Chris Haas's Green Berets) would be crushed. But Army planners did not have accurate enemy numbers, nor did they understand the enemy's intention. They also fundamentally misunderstood their foe, as evidenced by Mansoor's directives. The Al Qaeda field commander correctly assessed where the Americans would land and began moving troops into position accordingly.
As the hours ticked down for the operation to commence, Juliet Team continued to "report enemy activity and waited for H-hour. The plan was, prior to H-hour, we would have control of fires [airstrikes] and, after H-hour, the 101st would have control." Jay was steadily building his target list, double-checking distances and locations with his Delta teammates and occasionally exchanging information with Andy. He could feel the tension rising from the valley. Al Qaeda and the Taliban could be seen on the Whale to his southwest and in the villages in the valley. Strangely (or not, as it would turn out), the latter had very few locals and none of the activity one would expect of daily Afghan life. Everywhere they looked were, exclusively, adult males moving with purpose. Other prominent sites, including the peak of Takur Ghar to the south, also revealed enemy activity. In the valley, J Team reported that the Army's HLZs remained clear of obstacles and enemy fortifications. This wasn't surprising, since the HLZs, centered in the valley and on level ground in front of the mountain peaks, afforded no tactical advantage, save as level landing sites for the giant and slow CH-47s. It was on the Whale that most enemy activity could be seen, and Jay took particular note of the mortar pits.
For J Team, their initial role during the operation's kickoff was simple. According to Kris, "[Jay's B-1] that was striking the cave next to us was supposed to check in with us prior to dropping. The 101st would land and establish blocking positions while the ATF came into [Shahi Khot] and did the dirty work. There was supposed to be a good fire support plan for mass bombing of the Tergul Ghar [the Whale] and Takur Ghar mountains. At H-3:00 we were cleared to engage targets." As day turned to night, and the night turned cold, the team took their last opportunity to attempt sleep while waiting for killing time to begin.
On their OP, Jay had arrayed his CAS equipment ergonomically around him: radios, scope, laser rangefinder, IZLID IR pointer. He tried to get some sleep, "maybe an hour and a half, because you were...You didn't want to go to sleep. One, it was cold as hell. Two, it was the excitement pouring through your veins. 'I get to do some Combat Control shit here.'" Still, with an unknown number of straight combat days before him, "we were trying." Thinking, "If there's a time to sleep, you better do it now because you've got to conserve yourself for the next couple days. This thing is going to be a long time. But we had to take shifts with sleeping and it never really worked out." The men sat, as silent as the night was dark. Watching. Waiting. Knowing.
* * *
As Jay froze in the pre-morning light, stuffed inside his puffy jacket, Andy and Mako-31 were already executing their pre-operation strike. Shortly after midnight, they had quietly jammed all their items into rucksacks (ensuring nothing would "rattle or clang" and betray them), picked up, and moved in the direction of the DShK while Chris traveled ahead of the others to find a site to stash their packs. When the rest arrived and dropped their rucks, Goody, Chris, and Eric began their slow approach toward the enemy's position.
Andy stayed with the equipment, not for security but to ensure he didn't give away their position when he began his airstrike coordination. He opened the top of his ruck to access the screen of his PRC-117 radio, turned it on, and configured it for operations. He then pulled the DMC-120 SATCOM antenna from inside and quickly assembled it, directing it at the appropriate satellite. He did a quick comm check on the net. Satisfied he was on the "bird," he pulled out the tools of Combat Control's trade (nearly identical to Jay's, nine kilometers to the north). Andy went through his mental checklist, comparing it with his plan to remove the DShK after the SEALs killed the Al Qaeda team leader they had seen outside the tent earlier. He finalized his preparations and sat back. Around him, the mountains were eerily silent. The SEALs made no sound as they closed in for the kill. He checked his watch; a little more than an hour to go. A sound reached his ears, the low, steady drone of a lone turboprop plane overhead. He looked through his NVGs at the reassuring shadow, invisible to the naked eye, that was making slow "two-minute turns" (orbits) in the distance. Andy smiled to himself. The first of the aerial predators had arrived: Grim-31, an H-model AC-130 "Spectre" gunship. It was Andy's favorite execution tool for conditions such as this. He shivered in the cold and thought, _It's going to be a good day_.
Chris led the other SEALs as they crept toward the enemy camp. Clouds came and went, alternately illuminating and then masking the terrain. They slid their way to a ridgeline and he realized they were only sixty feet from the darkened tent. Chris was in front, the other two behind him to minimize their profile against the sky. The snipers double-checked their rifles, two Stoner SR-25s and an M4, and marked the time: It was now two hours before TF-Rakkasan forces were to land in the valley, H-2:00.
Chris recalls what happened next: "I observed a man come over the top of the ridge and look down into the valley; he came from the direction of the tent that we could not observe at the time. I then realized how close we were to the site. The individual returned to the tent, and we continued to wait. The clouds cleared, and we could now hear the gunships overhead [there were two in the valley]. I observed the same sentry come out to the same spot; he was looking out to the west again. I slowly crouched down and tried to get the attention of [Goody and Eric]. Before I could, the sentry looked our way just as Eric stood up. Due to the illumination, he easily spotted the movement and turned and ran toward the tent."
The SEALs had compromised themselves. Left with no choice, Goody ordered the attack. The sentry was shouting at his comrades to wake as the three SEALs charged over the ridge. Chris stopped and fired one shot before his rifle jammed. Goody took a knee and had fired his first round into the tent when his rifle also jammed. Both men were shooting the SR-25s, each with a suppressor (providing muzzle-flash masking as well as sound reduction), and both had iced up.
The two men frantically worked to clear their weapons. The sentry, by then inside the tent, unloaded a full magazine from his AK-47 at them. The SEALs could see the blinding muzzle flash from between the folds of the tent flaps. They'd stirred up a veritable hornet's nest as men poured out of the tent with weapons in hand. One, a Chechen, charged Chris, who had finally cleared his jam. Chris pumped several rounds into the chest of his assailant, dropping him in the snow mere feet away. A second broke right, lunging toward the DShK, but was blasted by Chris and Goody simultaneously.
Their problems were just beginning. From the team's left, a fighter was flanking them. Eric dispatched the AQ soldier as Goody got on the radio to Andy, who was already moving toward the gunfire. The difference between the American and Al Qaeda weapons is very easily distinguished, and it sounded to the Controller like his men were on the losing side, based on the volume of hostile fire. As if in confirmation, a sustained burst of 7.62 passed just over his head, the telltale tracer rounds carving a slow-motion arc in front of the silent, starry backdrop.
Grim-31, fully briefed by Andy, was moving overhead at 20,000 feet above mean sea level (less than 10,000 feet above the team's mountainous ridge), its 40mm Bofors cannon and 105mm howitzer ready and trained on the DShK and tent. The pilot reported to Andy they had "two enemy bodies just outside the tent and another wounded and crawling away."
Andy and the SEALs met halfway. As he was telling Chris they needed to pull back so he could destroy the DShK position, Grim-31 announced through Andy's headset that there were "two other figures moving north of Mako Three One trying to get on their left flank." The flankers were only seventy-five meters away and appeared to be emplacing a machine gun. When a sustained burst of 7.62 PKM fire raked the ridge near the team's position, it obviated the need for further confirmation.
They were in serious trouble. An H-model gunship's "danger close" for its 40mm Bofors was 125 meters; for the 105mm it was 600 meters. The team was well under 100 meters from the DShK, and more fighters were appearing from the night, attempting to engage Mako-31. Relief was up to Andy, who had Grim-31 poised with an "at my command" weapons release.
The team continued its retreat as Grim-31 waited to hear the words that would authorize the unleashing of the first 33-pound, 1,550-foot-per-second, high-explosive shell. While the men tumbled across the rough terrain, pursued by tracer fire, Andy uttered them. "Cleared hot," he stated in a steady but winded voice.
The weapons of an AC-130 can only be fired by the pilot, who always sits in the left seat, the same side as its deadly cannons and sensors. As soon as the pilot, Major D. J. Turner, heard the clearance, he checked his sensor operators in the rear to ensure his "friendlies" were clear, and then pulled the trigger. It took the 105 round a little less than seven seconds to travel the distance, sticking its landing with a thud and _whump_ felt by Andy and the team.
Back inside the AC-130, the 105 gunners ejected the spent brass casing as soon as the recoil had finished and had the next 33-pound round in the breech in less than five seconds.
As soon as they called, "Gun ready!" Turner hit it again. This was the type of mission gunship crews lived for: killing bad guys when their brothers-in-arms were in dire straits, knowing full well no other fixed-wing aircraft was as decisive an edge.
The pilots and sensor operators watched with satisfaction as the rounds killed the two machine gunners instantly. Having been precleared by Andy for the rest of the target, they trained their weapons on the tent, shredding it with multiple 105 rounds and strewing the contents across the rock face.
As the members of Mako-31 collected at their rucks, Grim-31 fired on yet another flanker, killing him outright. They waited till the gunship finished its work, then moved carefully back to the DShK position to conduct a battle damage assessment, certain in their movement thanks to the watchful eyes overhead.
At the DShK and tent, they found five bodies cooling in the early morning air. Inside the tent was a treasure-trove of Cyrillic documents confirming the fighters' Chechen ethnicity, as well as a few Arabic papers. The most significant find came from inspecting the DShK. It was clean and serviceable, freshly oiled, with two thousand rounds stacked conveniently around it. Goody reported, "The AQ had built a makeshift traverse and elevation mechanism allowing it to hit targets out to 3000 meters and to easily cover the flight routes of the US helicopters which would arrive shortly." The position also had an RPG launcher with seven rounds, a Russian Dragunov 7.62mm sniper rifle, multiple AK-47s, and the PKM machine gun that the Chechens had used in their attempt to flank the team.
Mako-31 occupied their adversary's former position, making it their new OP, and planned to remain for the duration of the operation. When TF-Rakkasan flew into the valley fifty minutes later, the SEAL team leader tracked their approach through the DShK's gunsights.
Chapter 15
2 March
NIGHTTIME
Throughout the valley, Grim-31's explosive display announced the Americans' presence like a bullhorn in church, eliminating the need for further verification by the enemy. Both sides knew "it was on," and that realization had the fortuitous consequence of unsettling many of the Al Qaeda fighters. On the Whale, many took to firing their weapons blindly into the darkened sky, exposing them to the watchful eyes of J Team, who, like everyone else, had observed the display to their south. Jay listened in on the same "fires" freq Andy used to kill off the DShK element.
As fast as he could, Jay, using the entire team to help with distances and coordinates, began logging previously unknown positions for later strikes. They counted down the minutes until their own "first strike," when the B-1 with the 2,000-pound thermobaric bomb arrived at H-:30.
Sitting in the OP with his radios arrayed around him, but primarily concerned only with his MBITR on the fires freq, Jay watched and waited for the B-1. As soon as it made contact (known as "checking in"), he would verify the nine-line brief to ensure ground and air were synchronized.
Jay was ready. As soon as the bomber dropped the thermobaric and destroyed the closest threat, he hoped to move him to the Whale to drop a handful of 1,000-pound JDAMs. These were bombs that had been converted from dumb bombs (unguided except by gravity) to all-weather smart bombs. A "bolt-on" fin kit allowed the ordnance to be steered to a target by inertial guidance and GPS or laser energy.
Jay gazed out across the valley in the early morning twilight, his NVGs stored back in the ruck and a wool hat inadequately keeping the cold at bay. To the west, he was beginning to make out terrain features on the Whale, where the fighting positions they'd mapped in the dark were taking shape, when an explosion behind him rocked the entire OP, shaking the earth beneath them. The Al Qaeda cave had blown up. Wide-eyed shock and disbelief were exchanged wordlessly on the OP.
A mushroom cloud of coal-black smoke enveloped a fireball where the cave entrance sat an instant before, the sound still reverberating across the early morning calm. The B-1 had dropped without checking. J Team, less than seven hundred meters from the target, was just beyond the "danger close" distance of five hundred meters for a 2,000-pounder, but the men were pissed. This was just the kind of miscommunication that could get them killed in the coming hours and days. Suppose they'd moved closer to recon activity, or worse, the GPS coordinates were off? With no nine-line, it was a bit of Russian roulette, with dozens of aircraft "barrels" pointed at the AFO teams. According to Kris, the initial strikes comprised the following: "Eight JDAMs were dropped on the Whale and only one JDAM on Takur Ghar. The AC-130 also fired at the bunker [on the Whale] and that was pretty much it for the 'great' fire support plan. The Whale should have been carpet-bombed based on the disposition of the enemy forces. Takur Ghar should have been bombed more as well. Once again [AFO] intel had previously identified enemy positions on Takur Ghar. This would come back to haunt the US forces soon after."
With the reverberations of the explosion still echoing across the mountains, everyone in the valley—Al Qaeda, AFO, and any remaining civilians—was well aware that a battle, whose shape had yet to fully develop, had commenced.
At 0630, three CH-47s swept into the northern end of the valley below J Team, the _thump thump thump_ of their heavy rotors echoing off the mountain slopes. Inside each were forty combat troops from the Army's 101st Airborne Division. The infantrymen's battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel "Chip" Preysler, who was responsible for all of them and for the northern portion of the operation, was crammed near the front of the cargo compartment in one of the helicopters.
Inside the helo, a door gunner called out a warning: "Two minutes!" One of the senior infantry NCOs shouted the first order for the young soldiers inside: "Lock and load!" Simultaneously, forty-plus sounds of M4s, SAWs, and M240 machine guns chambering rounds could be heard over the din of rotor and engine noise, various _clack clack_ s on the machine guns and _chick klunk_ s on the M4s. "Thirty seconds!" came shortly after. The soldiers fingered their weapons nervously, almost none of them having seen combat and many having no real idea of what to expect.
At 0633, Preysler's helicopter touched down. As it settled and the landing gear absorbed the load, the men shouldered their rucksacks and stood as one mass. Led by a 240 gunner, they charged down the helicopter's ramp, moving to the sounds of comrades shouting, "Go! Go! Move! Move!" They ducked under the low roof at the hinge and stepped into the Shahi Khot...straight into enemy fire.
* * *
To the south, a similar scene was unfolding, only this time it was 120 men from the 10th Mountain Division. Lieutenant Colonel Paul LaCamera was in charge of the southern blocking positions—the anvil.
Colonel Frank Wiercinski, commander of the 3rd Brigade—the Rakkasans, from which TF-Rakkasan drew its name—was in charge of all the allied forces in the valley. The two-battalion movement, essentially a brigade-size air assault, had happened only one other time since Vietnam. Wiercinski was aware of the lives under his command and of the history that would be made on this day, one way or another.
As the blocking forces were inserting to the north and south, he orbited inside the rear of a flight of two Black Hawk helicopters, looking for a place to insert his tactical command team, known as the TAC. He planned to land near a geographic feature called the Finger, which lay at the base of Mako-31's new OP, remain on the ground only long enough to determine the operation's progress, and then fly back to Bagram. His chief task today was to assist his boss, Hagenbeck, with managing expectations at CENTCOM and in Washington, DC, where President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld remained intimately connected to the campaign.
Spotting a tactically desirable cleft in the rocky terrain, he keyed the microphone on his headset. "Put us down there," he told the pilots. The space was tight and Wiercinski's pilot missed his approach, forcing the helo to go around and line up a second time. The second Black Hawk managed to squeeze in, missing the rock ledge with its rotor by two feet, dumping the TAC's security and radio team.
As Wiercinski's helo circled back and lowered into the draw, an Al Qaeda fighter stepped from a rock outcropping with an RPG and leveled it at the slow-moving Black Hawk. He squeezed the trigger, and the grenade punched out of the launch tube, streaking up toward the exposed underbelly of the helicopter, scoring a direct hit against the chin bubble. A second fighter, wielding an AK-47, took aim at the "winged duck" and unleashed an entire banana clip. His aim was good as he perforated the length of the helo's tail boom, damaging the tail rotor hub and nicking a push-pull rod inside that is critical to countering the main rotor's torque. "If that thing had severed, we'd have lost tail rotor control, and we'd have been gone," recalled Jim Marye, the air mission commander on board.
The TAC was taking fire even before Wiercinski's team touched the ground, but he'd chosen the site well and it was masked from the enemy. Bullets were striking against the rocks above the soldiers as the two Black Hawks limped off in the morning light. They appeared to be safe from direct fire...for the moment.
As they established Operation Anaconda's battlefield command and control position, the same could not be said for the 10th Mountain and 101st Airborne troops moving off their LZs. Even before the tail rotor strike, Wiercinski was listening to radio calls from the blocking positions regarding casualties and fierce enemy resistance. TF-Rakkasan was learning what Blaber and the men of AFO had already suspected: The enemy was well armed, well positioned, and hungering for a fight. There were no fleeing jihadis and there was no organized retreat. Al Qaeda was here to fight.
As the TAC got their bearings and established a more secure perimeter, they were surprised to look up and find a corpse hanging off the ridge above them. Without knowing it, they were staring straight up at Mako-31 and the aftermath of their firefight, including the bodies of the enemy.
By this time, the second wave of heavy-lift CH-47s was landing with more infantry, but the TF-Hammer (General Hagenbeck's main thrust) forces had stalled. Grim-31 had moved over their convoy and, in a tragic incident, had fired on them in the confusion, killing one American Green Beret and several ATF. Because of the attack and lack of concerted bombing of enemy positions, TF-Hammer had retreated under the demands of a frustrated and angry Afghan Commander Zia, leaving the US infantry to carry on the fight alone. TF-Hammer also stranded Blaber, who was attempting to get into the mountains to better track the battle and assist his teams in the field.
Soon after the rest of TF-Rakkasan had inserted, the infantry had secured all the blocking positions except one, identified in the battle plan as Ginger. Ginger sat just below Takur Ghar mountain and was fiercely defended by a concentration of Al Qaeda troops. With the mountains and high ground surrounding the Rakkasan troops, and the enemy refusing to flee, the infantry began its assault against the enemy positions firing down on them. The majority of fire originated from the Whale but also seemed to be coming from the mountains to the north and east.
Things turned deadly for Mako-31 when they began to receive direct fire—not from Al Qaeda but from the Rakkasans, even though Andy had placed several VS-17 panels around their position when the fighting started. Roughly two foot by six foot, VS-17s were tough but pliable panels with parachute-cord tie-downs along the edges and at each corner. They were orange on one side and vibrant cerise on the other, and were used for marking virtually anything on the battlefield as friendly. As the team took cover, Andy manned the radio and found the TAC's freq and call sign, diverting the friendly fire "to a more prominent ridgeline" east of the team.
Soon after, hostile 82mm mortar rounds began to drop onto their position from a ridge just south of Takur Ghar. The first rounds landed short, but the team couldn't see the enemy tube. When the next rounds landed long, the team was effectively bracketed; incoming enemy or friendly fire could be managed, but not both. Goody made the decision to leave their OP. With all the shit that was going on, there was only one place to relocate, the Rakkasan TAC. It was a surprise to the conventional Army troops when Mako-31 walked into their beleaguered position (they too were taking more and accurate fire as the morning progressed) and introduced themselves simply as "recon and surveillance snipers." Andy and Goody briefed Colonel Wiercinski, and then Andy joined forces with the TAC air liaison officer, an Air Force F-16 pilot assigned to assist with air support, while the other snipers beefed up the perimeter.
In the north, Jay watched as the 101st was taking casualties. They were also returning the favor, pumping out 82mm and 120mm mortar rounds and engaging in pitched gunfights and mortar duels with enemy positions on the Whale.
Kris continues their observations:
Because the AQ had been tipped off about the attack 24 hours prior, they were now waiting for the ATF to come into their AO [area of operations]. The AQ knew exactly which way the ATF assault force was coming in because they were set up east-to-west, facing south, and on line waiting in shooting positions. We saw them from our OP and they were dressed in military kit: LBE [Load-Bearing Equipment], small rucks, weapons, and even a guidon [a symbolic flag, carried by soldiers since the Roman legions and used to identify units and inspire troops]. Dave was on the scope and watched the AQ occupy positions as their commander used hand and arm signals to stage them. Once in position, the commander motioned the guidon bearer to move to him and then directed him to move to a building in the town of Serkhankhel.
We had observation of 101st troops and they were moving right toward the AQ. [Jay] called a B-52 in with JDAMs to strike the AQ positions and within minutes he dropped them right on top of the AQ, killing several to include the commander. The 101st called us and asked who gave us permission to drop the JDAMs because they were about one kilometer away. We explained the situation and they understood but told them we needed to make another pass. After the first pass two guys got up and drug the commander's body down into some low ground. In this low ground more AQ were moving in and out. The 101st wanted to get farther out of the way, but instead moved directly toward where we were going to drop the next set of bombs. After the confusion of getting them moving in the right direction, [Jay] dropped right where the AQ were last seen and saw no movement from that area for about two hours. Then the AQ reoccupied the same positions again and [Jay] dropped JDAMs on them once more. After the third JDAM strike that day, they reoccupied the position and had JDAMs dropped on them and they never came back to it again. It appeared that they had a bunker or command post of some type in the low ground, because the AQ would come out of this area after each strike and drag off the dead. Even the survivors of the bombings, who must have been wounded, would always assist in dragging the dead away.
Jay was in his element as a Combat Controller and, by every measure, was enjoying the most significant day of his career. At the TAC, Andy was alternating between airstrikes in conjunction with Major Dino Murray, the air liaison officer, referred to by the acronym ALO, and the action taking place around their position. Chris, the SEAL sniper, had spotted an advancing force of ten to twelve fighters. "They moved every few minutes from position to position, each time pausing just long enough to take a few shots [at us]. Several with RPGs and a few, who appeared to be leaders, with hand-held radios waving their arms and motioning still others over the ridgeline to come join the fight."
The SEALs discussed the situation and, along with Andy, formed a line and moved forward, closing the distance with the enemy. An airstrike was out of the question—too close. Chris and Eric opened fire, killing several of the Al Qaeda countersnipers outright.
Andy and Goody crouched down and ran along a rock wall that masked their movement. Andy was also a trained sniper, a certification Controllers could pursue in the course of their career if they desired. The two snipers popped up and rapidly engaged one target after another, killing half the enemy force. Recalls the Controller, "The engagement was a one-sided affair."
Four men "eliminated the direct fire threat that had pinned down the Rakkasan soldiers, killing eleven AQ and wounding another five. They then moved back to the ridgeline, providing 'overwatch' for the conventional forces, while [Andy] Martin began calling in CAS and AH-64s on the enemy mortar positions detected by SEAL snipers," according to one AFO after-action report.
The engagement didn't end there. Andy continued to wield B-52s and B-1s, as the Rakkasan and Al Qaeda mortar teams traded salvos. The TAC was also being targeted during the exchanges, with the enemy effectively walking mortar rounds to within fifty meters of the beleaguered position.
* * *
Several kilometers farther south, Hotaling and his SAS team were watching events unfold through sniper and spotting scopes, the details relayed through the Combat Controller's radio as his CCT brother destroyed enemy positions and fighters by the score. Unfortunately, at the far southern end of the valley, no engagements or fleeing enemy forces presented themselves. The SAS had labored and pressed their American ally hard for inclusion, so watching the action from the bleachers as the day wore on and hearing the friendly casualty count mount was simply not acceptable.
As they talked it over, Matt, the team leader, was adamant; they needed to reposition closer to the action. The team pored over their maps and Hotaling's FalconView, identifying a new OP to the north that was close enough for them to provide support to the battle. Hotaling got on the net and requested pickup. Overloaded as they were, patrolling their way to the new location was out of the question. After some negotiation, one of two nearby CIA Mi-17 helos was promised for the mission.
The team packed up their gear and prepped for pickup. Shortly after 1800, Hotaling heard the CIA bird on a helo frequency. It was the same pilots from their insertion, and the unwieldy bird flew in ponderously, landing next to the team. They climbed up into the oil-streaked interior, passing their rucks inside. Unlike Chinooks, the Russian helicopters had no ramps. Instead, equipment and men had to be hoisted up to the floor, three and a half feet above the ground. When everyone had clambered aboard, the helicopter lifted off for the short hop to their new site. Four minutes later the team offloaded and the lumbering helo disappeared into the sky.
No sooner had it departed than it became clear they had been deposited in the wrong place. Not only were they _not_ on their objective, they were no closer than they'd been before they were picked up. Trying to get the Mi-17 back was futile; it was already on its next mission. The SAS was stranded on an eluvial plateau, the mouth of a dry stream bed emanating from between two peaks. Using GPS and their maps, the men determined their objective was up the water course.
Walking the course without analysis or intel on enemy locations was asking to be ambushed. Recalls Hotaling, "After the CIA dumped us not where we needed to be and we'd mapped the course, it led straight up the creek. The terrain on both sides of the creek bed was masked. There was no way to know what was up there or between us and our OP. Plus the distance was a motherfucker."
They had no idea how long it was going to take to make the movement, but there was no doubt they were going to do it. Hotaling got on the net again, this time hoping for something that could serve as an ISR platform, at least a P-3. He contacted an orbiting AWACS, the best source for airspace coordination and requests, hoping for an AC-130, but all the gunships were prioritized in support of the actual fight taking place to their north. Instead, what appeared overhead was a Predator, an armed CIA drone in this case, call sign Wildfire. "We're good," he informed Matt. The men shouldered their packs and stepped off into an uninviting darkness, their NVGs in place and weapons ready. It was going to be a long night.
* * *
For Blaber, the long night had already stretched into an even longer day. When TF-Hammer had gone bust, the Americans had returned to the safe house. On the battlefield, his teams were proving to be more of a decisive influence than the main force, who were taking it to the enemy in mortar duels and small-arms engagements but weren't destroying the majority of the targets and had suffered significant casualties. At TF-11, Brigadier General Trebon stated, "The good news was that TF-11 OPs performed their CAS function exceptionally well, inflicting 60 percent of the total enemy casualty count."
At the heart of those words were a few Combat Controllers. Of the day's events, Blaber recalls, "Jay Hill is in the field with Juliet Team and he's creating kill boxes on the fly. It was just incredible. These guys [CCT] are some of the most well-rounded, all-purpose guys. If I was going to Mars on a mission, I'd definitely take one. It's a critical and serious decision to trade off a Delta shooter when mission space is tight, not to be taken lightly, but, well, there you have it. I never go without one and every one I've had was a stud."
The damage AFO was inflicting was welcome news for the Delta officer. The doubters and obstacles were silenced or removed, and what remained was continuing to prosecute the mission to the fullest and ensuring he did everything he could to support and supply his men, who were hanging it out in the mountains.
As if to emphasize the point, at TF-11, congratulatory messages and calls came in from Major General Hagenbeck and General Tommy Franks, the CENTCOM commander. President Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld had seen Mako-31's DShK photos before they were twelve hours old. Inside "tent city," Slab and Chapman caught the news as it unfolded, realizing that by holding out for a high-value target mission, they were missing the main show. During the run-up to Blaber's AFO missions and Anaconda's execution, they'd not actioned a single target.
Inside the Gardez TOC, Blaber's satellite phone rang. He heard Brigadier General Trebon's familiar voice on the line. "Pete, wonderful job. Look, we can't ask you guys to continue this; you're not set for that. What I want to do is turn this over to the SEALs. Let them command it, and let them continue prosecuting the fight. You and AFO need to be out looking for the next battlefield. I want to send some SEALs down and I want you to get these guys in there as quick as you can."
Blaber was stunned. Nothing about Trebon's suggestion made sense. How the Air Force general officer and pilot would conclude there was an immediate need for more troops in the field was a mystery to him. He had little time to dwell on the subject, though, because all three teams were decisively engaged, and every minute of the twenty-four-hour battle was critical, including Blaber's time.
"Sir, my teams are fine for at least another forty-eight hours; I recommend that any team going into the valley goes through the same routine as the three teams already in the valley. Before they infiltrate they need to spend time at Gardez so they can acclimate to the altitude and study the terrain and the history of the Shahi Khot. They need to talk to the CIA, the Special Forces, and the Afghan militiamen who have been working in the area." He searched his mind for anything else that might dissuade Trebon, landing on what he thought would settle the matter for any senior leader with troops in combat. "Sir, sending those teams in without any time to prepare for the environment doesn't make sense; it's setting them up for failure."
The call ended without a definitive course of action. Blaber turned to his AFO intelligence officer, Glenn, who'd been with AFO from the beginning and had developed much of the plan that shaped the picture everyone in the safe house had come to rely on—AFO, CIA, and Special Forces alike. The Delta intel veteran shook his head with concern, his eyes bloodshot from lack of sleep. "I knew it; they have no idea how much preparation we put in to ensure those teams could operate in this environment." The two Delta officers locked eyes and then returned to their responsibilities. Something was going on at TF-11, but there was no time for solving that mystery.
As he put on his headset and switched to the AFO SATCOM frequency, Blaber had no idea how right he was about his mission preparation-time assessment. In less than forty-eight hours, others would pay a heavier cost in the absence of preparation, and for a few TF-11 men, the price would be the ultimate.
Chapter 16
2 March
MIDNIGHT
The period of darkness (POD) on the night of 2 March stretched on for everyone in the Shahi Khot Valley, including Al Qaeda. From the enemy:
_We spent our night alert and on guard, to deter any more airdrops throughout the night, as was expected. Before performing the morning Fajr prayer, we divided the brothers into three groups: the first joined the group of Maulawi Saif-ur-Rahman Mansoor, for he needed more people; the second took position where the Shilka ZSU-23 antiaircraft cannon was situated, at the entrance of the valley; which left myself, along with three other brothers, as support for any of the groups that needed more men. To begin with, we headed toward the location of the Shilka and took our positions in the rear, to help curb the aerial bombardment which had increased significantly. During the entire period, the enemy did not cease to spray the mountain peaks and valleys with the lava of bombs and missiles, while machine guns sprayed their bullets in every direction. The martyrs were too many to count. Many of the Afghans were now martyrs. One brother tried to hide in a trench from the bombs, but the trench was full to the top with dead Uzbeks._
For Combat Controllers Jay Hill and Andy Martin, the POD was a nonstop airstrike fest, each Controller sequencing aircraft, handing them back and forth, or sharing with TF-Rakkasan. The strikes were so frequent and numerous that the numbers and aircraft blurred. The devastation and relentlessness revealed in their after-action reports are impressive. Sometimes the strikes were identified by the aircraft or munition, other times they describe merely the outcome.
Jay: OP site and bunker (2-3 KIA)—AC-130
Andy: Enemy squad (11 KIA, 5 WIA)—2 x F-16s
Jay: Fighting position (4 KIA)—JDAMs [He reported over SATCOM, "If anyone was on the ridgeline they aren't now."]
Andy: Mortar position (unk KIA—poss 2-3, target suppressed)—4 GBU-31s
Jay: 3 x fighting positions (5 KIA)—JDAM bomb box
Andy: Hilltop fighting position w/poss mortars (unk KIA—poss 2-3, target suppressed)—4 GBU-31s—B-52
Jay: OP (3 KIA, 2-5 probable KIA)—JDAM bomb box
Jay again: Bunker (3 KIA)—JDAM bomb box
Andy: Congregation of enemy on ridge (unk KIA—poss 2-3)—2 GBU-12s
Jay: Mortar position and 1 x DSHKA (7—KIA)—JDAM
Andy: Cave complex (2 KIA, unk damage to tunnels)—8 GBU-31s—B-1
Jay: Sniper position (2 KIA)—Predator Hellfire
Andy: Mortar position (unk KIA—poss 2-3, target suppressed)—4 GBU-31s
Jay: Mortar position, 2 x Toyota PU trucks (4+ KIA)—MK-82
And so it went, through the entire night, without sleep, hands freezing on the mikes and handsets, changing radio and rangefinder batteries as they drained in the below-freezing temperatures. They suffered blurred vision and the pressure to ensure not only that each and every strike was on target but that there was also no confusion with friendly locations, since the entire battlefield was anything but static as units and enemy positions maneuvered and fought.
The two Controllers weren't alone; each was supported by his team. And though one mission was led by a SEAL and the other a Delta operator, the leadership roles reversed once they were engaged, as Jay explains:
A definite evolution, or change of mission responsibilities takes place after you first arrive. [Before then] there's more of them and they're taking care of certain things, "Hey, this is our OP. This is where we're going." They're getting you there, they're defining the area, you're doing your own stuff and your position hasn't percolated to the top yet because you're not talking to [aircraft]. But as soon as it does, well then you become the center point and you start tasking. "I need you to do this for me. I want you to verify my coordinates. Hey dude, I need you to check my math, make sure, because I'm literally bombing people off of FalconView and a laser rangefinder and they're three klicks away." The roles kind of get reversed.
It's really complex. To get your eyes on [target] and come up with a game plan of how you're going to get aircraft in and safely separate them, drop bombs, and do it at night with the gear and the sensors we were dealing with at the time, and they were just not adequate. Back then, we had to correlate coordinates off FalconView. If you say to a Controller today, "I was bombing off FalconView" he'd just shake his head in wonder. It was terrible, but it worked.
Because it had to. Each of the Controllers ultimately had the responsibility for life and death: life for the troops in contact and their respective teams, death for everyone else on the battlefield. The burden was heavy. Any slip when controlling such things as run-in bombing headings or restrictions, or incorrect coordinates (even those that were read back by the pilot), and there was only one man who'd be the target of the subsequent investigation and left with a lifetime of guilt, one man left holding the bag. Conversely, if you were good (and sometimes lucky), you moved forward knowing your efforts made all the difference.
* * *
As Jay and Andy traded aircraft throughout a night of blurred hours, Jim Hotaling only had access to a single platform...but it was all his and its presence was critical. The CIA Predator shadowed and guided the SAS team as they worked to reposition themselves nearer the battle after the errant helo drop-off. The men progressed at an excruciatingly slow pace. To them, the Predator was a lifeline. Even though they were moving at night with NVGs, Al Qaeda forces were everywhere throughout the valley and its facing mountain slopes, exactly where they were traversing. Worse still, the terrain in every direction was higher ground, and they felt completely exposed. They had no place to maneuver along the creek bed, so an RPG or DShK emplaced along their route would make short work of them. Even more alarming, the men staggered under the immense 140-pound loads they carried, making it impossible to identify threats from above. They were too busy trying to maintain momentum without falling over and, like the AFO teams, stopping only led to freezing in the night, so it became a torturous tightrope balanced between exhaustion and cold.
Between breaths, Hotaling periodically talked with the pilot, who was sitting in a heated box, "most likely sipping coffee," mused the Controller. But he remained grateful to "have the Predator as our point man." When the drone approached "bingo" fuel, it would depart, replaced by another Wildfire. On occasion, there were gaps in coverage, and Hotaling would fill the intervening time with the AWACS air coordination platform (call sign Bossman), a poor substitute for men moving on the ground in rugged terrain, but still a source of continuity and comfort. When the next Wildfire arrived, Bossman handed it off to Hotaling for control.
His faith in the system wasn't misplaced, but Predators' reliability was susceptible to overestimation. Visual acuity for the pilot scanning the ground below was no more than 20/200, rendering certain angles and terrains a mystery, especially those with shadows. It's often noted that the operator's view was little better than staring through a straw from high altitude, so unless the focused lens passed directly over a threat, it was quite possible to miss the heavy machine gun or RPG position that could cost a life.
Furthermore, as would happen repeatedly from the time of their introduction into the modern battlefield, Predators and other drones, even those with improved acuity, fed into another dangerous condition. For leaders sitting far removed from the battlefield, the temptation to believe that drone footage provided adequate situational awareness led to increased micro- and mismanagement by general officers and higher headquarters. They felt their central operation centers, by virtue of information flow and video feed, somehow "knew better" than the men on the ground and their forward commanders. Combine that with the urge to "do something" when situations became dire, and it was inevitable for them to take control away and make decisions for the men on the ground. This would play out in Anaconda in tragic ways over the next twenty-four hours.
For now, though, the Aussies progressed with the belief they were at least more secure than if there was nothing overhead, and it allowed them to double the speed at which they would otherwise have traveled—which was still a snail's pace. As the 3 March sun rose in the east, they waited for its heat to clear the ridgeline so they could feel the warming rays of the fiery orb. When it finally reached the exhausted men, they stopped for something to eat and checked their location. After twelve hours of constant movement, they were only halfway to their new OP. The long night would now become an even longer and more dangerous day. At least the sun was shining on them from a clear, but cold, blue sky.
* * *
As Hotaling shouldered his ruck, Pete Blaber was hitting his own wall. Awake for fifty-five hours straight, he pulled the headset off his matted, unwashed hair and dropped onto his cot inside the AFO tent for two hours of well-deserved blackout. When his alarm went off, he was still fuzzy. He grabbed his Glock pistol from under his pillow, tucking it into his tan cargo pants, and stumbled out into the morning with his toothbrush in his mouth to take a piss. In the tent next to him, Led Zeppelin's "Kashmir" was prophetically playing. Ablutions complete, he headed toward the TOC, passing "a bunch of unfamiliar faces," only to be intercepted by Glenn, the Delta AFO officer and Blaber's right-hand man in Bagram. Speaking rapidly, his agitated intel analyst told him two teams of SEALs had arrived earlier and their officer in charge was waiting for him in the TOC.
Inside, Blaber found a Navy SEAL lieutenant commander named Vic and two teams of SEALs from SEAL Team Six's Red Team; Mako-30's Slab from the recce element; and one other team made up of assaulters—not reconnaissance experts—call sign Mako-21, led by a man named Al.
"What are you doing here?" Blaber asked Vic, who explained that Trebon had ordered him to Gardez to command and control the SEALs, and that he was to infiltrate the teams into the ongoing fight _that night_. Blaber was instantly pissed. Grabbing a satellite phone, he stepped out of the TOC and into the compound for some privacy, leaving the SEALs behind, and rang up Trebon.
"What's going on, sir?"
"Same thing I told you. I want these guys in the fight. Vic is in charge of the [SEALs], you just stay in charge of the AFO guys. And when do you think you can turn them over to Blue?"
"Sir, there's no need to shove these guys into the fight. I don't need to put two more teams in tonight. We control the valley, not them—"
Trebon cut him off. "Pete, put both SEAL teams into the fight tonight. That's an order." The general hung up. Blaber knew what was happening. With the sterile-sounding and effective airstrike calls being reported across the AFO SATCOM net, it appeared to the TF-11 leaders that putting more teams and Combat Controllers in the field was simple...Stick them in a helicopter, fly them to some high ground, put the Controller on the radio, make strikes. Easy.
But in Blaber's mind there was more to the situation. Trebon was an Air Force pilot and would never come up with the idea to push SEAL Team Six into the fight. It could only be coming from Kernan and Szymanski. Glenn had been right: Neither the SEAL Team Six leaders nor TF-11 generals understood conditions on the ground, and dropping men into the middle of the battle at the last moment without preparation was asking for disaster.
The irony of Szymanski and Kernan pushing Trebon from below was not lost on Blaber, who'd had to convince the SEALs of the mission's value and had even off-ramped others for poor attitude and performance. Now they didn't just want in, they wanted the entire show, and they had co-opted Trebon in Bagram to get it. When Blaber had asked Trebon in previous conversations whether the SEALs they intended to send down were going to conduct direct-action missions (which were their forte), the general had replied their missions were to be the same as Blaber's current teams'.
The two had not settled on a time frame, so when Trebon asked about timing, Blaber replied, "I can't give you a time." The general wasn't satisfied. "I want you to come back to me with when the exact time is that you're transitioning this to Blue." The one concession Blaber received was that Vic would serve as his number 2 until he turned over control.
Vic was a contentious candidate to lead the SEALs in AFO operations. Technically, he was the Red Team recce officer in charge, placing him in the Navy command chain between Slab, Goody, and now (by virtue of his inclusion in AFO) Al the assaulter, and their senior officers, Szymanski and Kernan back in Bagram. His few months in Afghanistan had been anything but quiet and had exposed poor judgment and leadership on two occasions. The first involved an unauthorized New Year's Eve vehicle movement between Bagram and Jalalabad, during which Vic and the SEALs in the SUV were stopped at a militia checkpoint. It resulted in shots being fired, injuring a SEAL and necessitating the team's rescue by a British helicopter. The second of what became known as "Vic's three strikes" inside the TF-11 command occurred during a "dry hole" raid he led in which an unarmed Afghan had been killed when he approached the team's location. From the darkness of the SEALs' hiding spot, the civilian had been told in English to stop. When he didn't stop, the man was shot through the eye and killed. The SEAL who shouted the English command and fired the round that killed him was Vic. There was an investigation but no charges, leaving an impression that extended up to the TF-11 commanding general, Dell Dailey. According to a TF-11 general officer familiar with both events, "[Vic] got as much of a fair hand as any other person would who ultimately showed, probably, not the right judgment." Defending Kernan's choice to continue allowing the junior SEAL officer to lead, he added, "You can't pick out a lousy judgment–type guy right off the bat." However, others were less forgiving, including SEALs within his own unit. When one Navy operator returned from the field to find Vic in the Gardez TOC that morning, he was stunned. "I got the feeling [Vic] was now running the show on the ground. Of course, he was out of his league."
But the decision to send Vic to run things and put teams in play was done. According to one official after-action report, Kernan "had already made the decision to insert."
For John Chapman, the drama surrounding who led the missions "back at the rear" in the Gardez safe house was immaterial. He had a new mission and set about prepping his gear, studying the AFO maps on the walls as well as talking with Glenn, the Delta intel officer. He was joined by Ben Miller, the Combat Controller assigned to Al's Mako-21 team. While the two CCT had similar responsibilities, the nature of the separate teams' composition, and the fact that they came from different elements, caused the two friends to implement their actions independent of each other and immerse themselves within the separate forces—just as Chappy and Andy had done previously during their early missions with Slab and Goody. A divide also existed between assault troops, with their direct-action mission, and the more low-key snipers of recce. Slab, as the senior recce team leader, personified these differences with his introspective and laconic approach to dealing with others.
As Slab and Chapman were making sense of their short-notice mission, the battle continued to rage at Mako-31's location, and another piece of the TF-11/SEAL puzzle fell into place. Between identifying and nailing down targets with his SEAL teammates and calling in airstrikes, Andy received an odd communication. It came from the TF-Blue TOC in Bagram and didn't include anyone else in the AFO chain of command. Mako-31 had continued to provide their situation reports to TF-Blue, the SEAL Team Six element in Bagram. Of course, the two senior officers of the unit, Kernan and Szymanski, were also hearing Mako-31's transmissions on the AFO SATCOM channel. This message was different.
TF-Blue wanted Mako-31 to relocate to a new OP using one of the Agency's Mi-17s. That they would send the request directly to the team was new—and odd—but it was _where_ they wanted the team to relocate that got his attention...Takur Ghar.
Andy showed the message to Goody. The team's reply did not take long to formulate. Takur Ghar was three kilometers away and had a commanding view of the valley, much better than their current location, but it had problems. Mako-31 responded with three points:
1. The team was perilously close to running out of ammo and batteries and would need resupply to execute.
2. With that in mind, they'd still need to go back to Gardez and then reinsert, but not on top of the mountain. They'd have to offset and walk their way up, which would take time.
3. Takur Ghar was crawling with bad guys, as evidenced by the airstrikes and the inability of the 10th Mountain troops to occupy BP [Blocking Position] Ginger at its base.
Goody turned them down with a push of the send button, which closed the matter for Mako-31. What was clear to Andy was, "They [Six's leaders] wanted us to insert on an Mi-17 with a single door-mounted M60 [machine gun]. They wanted it done now. That mission would have required multiple DAPs and SEAL boat crews to take the summit. [DAPs—Direct Action Penetrators—were specially modified MH-60s flown by the 160th SOAR. Essentially attack helicopters, they came equipped with variations of .50-cal, 7.62mm miniguns, and 2.75-inch rockets.] When we declined the mission, they moved it on to Slab's team instead."
* * *
For the broader Operation Anaconda, things were not going smoothly. TF-Rakkasan was in fights, with strikes taking place everywhere in the valley. It was also taking a beating as Al Qaeda forces continued to muster numbers and close with the Army.
With a handset to his ear, Jay watched from behind sunglasses and beneath his wool cap as yet another strike took out an Al Qaeda bunker. This strike, from a B-52, delivered a 2,000-pound GBU-31 (actual weight 2,036 pounds and a monstrous twelve feet long).
An airstrike has a strange and macabre beauty all its own. Massive ordnance detonations against ground targets produce the expected satisfaction of destroying your enemies in a vivid, billowing, black-and-orange ball of fire, smoke, and dust. At only three kilometers away, the initial violent explosion is followed by the reverberation as the radiating sound wave compresses air in every direction and reaches the ears a second later. As the sound fades and the black smoke billows upward and out, bits of rock, weapons, and human parts rain down in the immediate vicinity of the detonation. Finally, the last image is of dust, settling and spreading across the valley floor. It is mesmerizing to friend _and_ foe.
JDAM airbursts used on enemies in open terrain are different. These produce a string of black aerial cauliflower blossoms in a line, puffs of deadly Fourth of July–type fireworks that, instead of celebrating a festive day, shred and mangle man and equipment below without the dirt and flying debris.
Jay and J Team continued to prosecute the mission, though things were not going smoothly for them either, despite their superior fields of view and, by now, seamless teamwork.
Like Mako-31, to ensure they weren't "fragged" by friendlies, the team did their best to mark themselves as American, but the task was made more difficult because "the bad guys had VS-17 panels as well, which we didn't know at the time, and they looked like us because they're wearing fatigue bottoms, North Face–type jackets, and civilian clothing, using Hilux trucks and whatnot. And many of them are Chechen or Uzbek or whatever, the point being they didn't look Arab or Afghan. [So] as far as on the mountaintop, we looked similar, and aircraft that were in the valley a lot, like the Apaches, might not know AFO was over here or there."
As Apache attack helicopters swooped across the valley, interspersed with fighter and bomber airstrikes, Jay was just beginning to work a flight of two F-15 Strike Eagles to hit a target on the Whale when Kris announced they had something in front of them. Jay and the Delta snipers watched through binoculars as an ancient white Toyota Land Cruiser pickup truck stuffed with enemy fighters rolled to a stop in front of the foothills below their OP. He recalls, "We're watching this guy, asking, 'What's he doing?' He's looking right at us and then jumps out and sets up a mortar tube and starts firing at us. We all went, 'Fuck!' as the first couple rounds were inbound. It was quick."
Unfortunately for the Al Qaeda mortar men, Jay's Strike Eagles hadn't committed to their briefed target, and he rapidly lined them up with a new nine-line, diverting the flight to the enemy mortar position now bracketing J Team. With little time to spare and no precoordination, the Combat Controller did it the old-fashioned way—he talked them onto the mortar position using years of expertise in guiding pilots to the target via descriptions of landmarks and features. Using only Mk-82 500-pound dumb bombs (no laser or GPS guidance), Jay and the pilots "shacked" the truck, mortar tube, and its crew, killing a handful of Al Qaeda.
The jet fighters lived up to every bit of their name and reputation, leaving a shredded pickup and bits of human in their wake as the two Strike Eagles sped back to their base for fuel and more bombs.
Chapter 17
3 March
TWILIGHT
As the night of 3 March approached, the men of "Redback," the Australian call sign (a reference to the deadly native spider of the same name), were dragging themselves up the few remaining steps of the near–cliff face to their OP. The final three hundred meters of their movement exhausted the last of their physical reserves.
Hotaling had reached his limits too, but as the rest of his team gratefully dropped their rucks and surveyed the immediate surroundings to determine the OP's defensibility and vulnerabilities, it was time for the Combat Controller to go to work. He placed his ruck near the top of a low saddle, opened it, and set about arraying his airstrike gear.
He thanked Wildfire for the escort and then called several other entities (among them Bossman, the AWACS; Kmart, the combined forces air component commander, who apportioned aircraft for use on the battlefield; and Tombstone, the TF-Mountain fire support center) before also dialing into the AFO SATCOM net. The question he really wanted answered was: What was going on in the other areas of the Shahi Khot? A great deal, as it turned out.
At the Gardez safe house, Vic, the newly arrived SEAL officer, was in a difficult position. He wasn't the ideal selection to lead SEAL Team Six's aspirational AFO operations in Anaconda, but the situation and directives were not of his creation. They came directly from his SEAL leadership in Bagram, who believed they understood the conditions in the Shahi Khot better than those who had been "boots on the ground" for days, or even weeks. The truth was, Six had never prepared for the long-duration and austere conditions under which AFO was operating. Delta's recce test missions had exposed this. Instead, SEAL leadership substituted prudent planning and preparation with a misplaced confidence in their men to overcome _any_ obstacles without notice. In short, hubris.
It wasn't that SEAL Team Six operators weren't capable—Goody, Chris, and Eric were proving that, even as TF-Blue worked to rush the new teams into the fray. But to rush (particularly the assault SEALs, with or without CCT) was to invite disaster. Blaber, the only officer on the scene with the knowledge and experience in the Shahi Khot to make such judgments, had made this clear, going so far as pushing back against Major General Dailey and Brigadier General Trebon to the point that he'd been told the generals were on the verge of firing him and removing him from country.
But Vic lacked either the confidence or competence to fall in behind the ground-truth understanding of Blaber and the teams in the field. I Team, the all-Delta mission, had even weighed in on the subject via the AFO SATCOM frequency, stating: "It's unsafe, it's unsound, it makes no sense." So the Navy pressed ahead even though Kernan hadn't originally pushed for such an early transition. In the AFO official after-action report it's noted that, initially, Kernan "proposed to Trebon that the shift from TF-AFO [as it was known] to -Blue should take place over the next few days, with the TF-Blue TOC assuming command and control on 6 March." What changed was the realization by TF-Blue that the majority of the airstrike killing would be over by the end of the first week of March.
Whether to avoid Blaber's pushback or for some other undisclosed reason, Vic and the SEAL Team Six leadership in Bagram established a separate communications and chain-of-command structure for planning and implementing their missions. This meant two parallel command and control architectures would be in place, and Vic was the belly button of the second. In implementation, it meant other organizations that had a piece of the mission would be unaware of communications and unable to provide input. Furthermore, it prevented the SEALs from fully understanding not just the environment they were introducing their men into, but the roles of other key actors within Operation Anaconda too, including air assets and allied forces. Ultimately, the separate communication structure and refusal to incorporate Blaber's battlefield experience was negligent. The SEAL leadership placed ego before all else, including the safety of their men. This arrogance would prove deadly.
On the heels of Blaber's call with Trebon, Kernan called to clarify when Delta would be turning command over to the SEALs. With no option to retain command of the mission he'd built and run for nearly two months, Blaber suggested it happen when Mako-30 and -21 lifted off from Gardez to insert into the Shahi Khot, but the two men never finalized the actual handover. To Blaber, this meant he was in charge until such time as he declared the handover complete. In the meantime, Kernan told him Vic would function as his number 2—in effect, the deputy AFO commander.
What was clear to everyone in the Gardez safe house was that Mako-30 and Mako-21 were going in _that night_. The question was—Where? Because TF-Rakkasan was now concentrating its efforts in the north of the Shahi Khot, and TF-64, the Aussie SAS effort—which included both Hotaling's and Wylie's patrols and two other vehicle-mounted blocking positions—was shoring up the south, Vic and the SEALs looked to the north. Blaber recalls, "Due to the fact that they had to go in that night, walking was not an option, as you needed at least a day and a half, not counting the time it takes to do the terrain analysis."
That meant helicopters would be used, breaking AFO's standing rule. Blaber was concerned but consumed with running the current operations where his men were in enemy contact. Still, he took the time to walk Slab outside for a private word. Slab and Blaber had worked together in Bosnia when the former had run man-hunting missions there. Blaber had great faith in the quiet SEAL's sound judgment and extensive experience. He hoped perhaps Slab's seniority could sway Vic and the SEALs in Bagram from attempting to put the teams in so quickly. Away from Vic and the others, he said, "Slab, I'm really uncomfortable with you guys going right in. I want to make sure you get all the advantages the other guys had."
"I totally agree. But I do what I'm told, and we're being told to go in tonight," replied the SEAL in classic Slab understatement, ending the conversation.
With only a few hours to plan, Vic and the SEALs determined that Mako-21 would infil near the front line of TF-Rakkasan at an HLZ adjacent to J Team. And since they would infil onto an HLZ secured by the 101st Airborne, they would take a resupply to J Team, because Blaber intended to leave them in the field for another two nights. Of all the teams, they were the best equipped and most effective on the battlefield, due in large part to Jay's deft handling of airstrikes and aircraft coordination. Mako-21 would then move east on foot to another high-ground OP and cover a sector with a road that was suspected to serve as an east-west enemy supply route.
Meanwhile, Mako-30 would insert at the base of Takur Ghar and walk to the summit of the 10,469-foot peak. The teams would depart the Gardez safe house HLZ simultaneously on separate 160th SOAR MH-47s, after nightfall but early enough so that both teams could complete their movements before dawn. They would then join the airstrike "orgy," with their Combat Controllers directing even more strikes on the enemy, who continued to refute their defeat by fierce resistance. No position in the valley had yet given itself up to capture.
In order to make it safely up Takur Ghar, Slab knew he needed to infil as soon as possible, figuring that, to make the summit, he'd need four "AC-130 covered" hours to ascend 1,300 meters. Whether Slab tried to adjust their plan or influence the SEAL Team Six leaders remains in some dispute. Ben Miller, Mako-21's CCT, remembers Chapman going outside into the cold to use the laptop to connect with Bagram throughout the day, with Slab hovering over his shoulder. Inside the TOC it wasn't possible to use the portable SATCOM radios, because the roof interfered with the signal. The time before Chapman left Bagram was frenetic, as the SEALs and Controllers packed as best they could for the as yet to be fully defined missions. "I don't think Chappy'd had any sleep. He worked information and planning all day and was freezing out there. Slab too," recalls the other Controller. As the day wore on, there was some confusion with MH-47 timing, and Slab had Chapman working via the laptop with everything he had to coordinate their lift. Miller continues, "Everyone is wondering when the helos are coming in for our insertions. CCT can often find info faster than anyone else, and so John ended up the point guy trying to find out." It was not exactly cozy inside the safe house either—the only heat came from a sickly fire in the TOC—but Chapman was outside for most of the day, and his reserves were being sapped before the team even took its first step off the helo on infil. Additionally, he would not only be expected to retain all the call signs, frequencies, and airstrike "special instructions" procedures (called "spins," these complex restrictions and procedures were requirements for each Controller to memorize and be tested on before ever controlling a strike on every battlefield); he would also be packing the heaviest ruck. Miller could see it weighing on his friend. Since Slab was the senior enlisted SEAL and, therefore, the most experienced Navy operator in the safe house, it fell to him (and by extension Chappy, his CCT) to work the logistics and planning for both teams' missions. It was a difficult and heavy burden for both men.
When the plans were solidified, Vic approached Blaber as the latter was making his own preparations for the night's operations. Blaber intended to join the "new and improved" Green Beret/ATF convoy making its second attempt to hammer Al Qaeda. Inside his small SUV, Blaber had installed a laptop and a fixed X-wing SATCOM antenna with radios so he could remain in contact with all the teams in the field and across the communications spectrum while he was moving or even under fire.
At 2200, thirty minutes before the Mako-30 and -21 helicopters were scheduled to land at the HLZ adjacent to the safe house, Vic again approached Blaber in the compound as the AFO commander finished loading batteries and ammo, and broached the subject of changing Mako-30's HLZ from the bottom of the mountain to the summit itself. As Blaber recalls in _The Mission, the Men, and Me_ , "He had brought the same idea up hours earlier, but both Slab and I had dismissed the concept for tactical reasons. Fully aware that Mako-30 was only thirty minutes away from moving to their [pickup zone], I cut right to the chase. 'There's nothing on the ground cueing us to make a change, so it doesn't make sense to change it.' I added that...the helicopter pilots would never consider any change at the eleventh hour; it was against their standard operation procedure. 'No problem,' he responded, not pressing the issue. We talked for a few more minutes about coordination for the night's operations, during which I reinforced to him that I would be running things from my vehicle near the fishhook and that if he had any questions or issues, he should call me." With that, Blaber climbed into his vehicle and departed. Vic was now in charge of the safe house and operations there. As it turned out, Vic never spoke to Blaber again that night, not even when helicopters began to plummet from the sky, riddled with bullets and RPG warheads—in a disaster of the SEALs' making.
Thirty minutes later, Slab, Chapman, and the rest of Mako-30, and Al, Ben, and the SEALs of Mako-21, moved to the HLZ, where they sat with their gear piled around them on the ground. The men were anxious to get started so, just before launching, patience was not their strong suit. Waiting around for helos was agitating...and things were about to get complicated.
In the air, Alan Mack led the two-ship flight of MH-47Es toward the Gardez HLZ. The sixteen-year Army chief warrant officer was also a seasoned veteran of the 160th and the most senior of the four pilots spread between the two helicopters, designating him the flight lead. MH-47 Chinooks are large and gangly-looking helicopters compared to the Black Hawks, Little Bird MHs, and AH-6s flown by the 160th. To the pilots who flew them, they were beautiful: faster than the others and with a broader performance envelope, which made them perfect for the high altitudes and heavy payloads required by Delta and SEAL Team Six missions in Afghanistan. This one was no exception. Mack descended slowly toward the Gardez HLZ—the Chinooks did nothing fast—and hovered just above the ground before finally settling onto the dirt, coating the SEALs and CCT with dust.
On the ground, he, Slab, and Chapman conducted a preflight brief confirming the plan. Mack and his crew would insert Mako-30 and use the aircraft call sign Razor-03, while the other helicopter, call sign Razor-04, would insert Mako-21. Both aircraft would depart together toward the Mako-21 insertion, and Razor-03 would then continue alone to the base of Takur Ghar. For the aircrews, it was just another night of insertions and did not appear to be a difficult or lengthy mission.
When both crews and teams were finished briefing, everyone loaded the Chinooks, which cranked and lifted off shortly thereafter. Razor-04 slid in behind Mack's helicopter. In front of them and overhead, Nail-21, an AC-130U (the latest version of the gunship, affectionately known as a U-boat) arrived above Takur Ghar and their designated HLZ near the bottom of the mountain. Its mission—to ensure the site was clear and cover Mako-30's infil.
Six minutes from landing, Nail-21 called Razor-03 on the radio and informed them that he "could not put 'eyes-on' target due to a CFACC strike, [and] was forced to clear the area until the strike was complete." It was another busy night in the Shahi Khot as Jay and Andy worked airstrikes with their infantry counterparts. For the Razors, remaining airborne while the strikes took place would burn precious fuel. In order to fly heavy and at high altitude and still leave some performance leeway in the aircraft, Mack loaded enough fuel for the flight, then added enough for fifteen extra minutes for contingencies. With no idea how long the strikes would take, he returned to Gardez.
Once on the ground, Mack "selected 97 percent rotor RPM to reduce fuel burn," which, essentially, put the aircraft into idle. As the strikes continued, Nail-21 informed them he was "bingo" fuel (empty) and departing but would soon be replaced by Nail-22 (who was also approaching minimum fuel) and shortly thereafter by Grim-32. Mack dropped the engines further to ground idle, the lowest fuel consumption configuration he could use with the engines still running. Then word came down that the 101st was conducting an air assault, forcing yet another delay, so Mack shut down the engines but left the auxiliary power unit (APU) running to provide power to restart.
Mack was sitting at the controls, biding his time, when Slab appeared. The SEAL was concerned. Each precious minute that ticked by brought him and his team closer to sunrise. Mack recalls, "He asked if it was at all possible to take him directly to his OP on top of the mountain. I told him I had the aircraft performance to do it, [but] told him I could not guarantee a suitable landing site [on top] since I had no imagery. Since we could not ensure the landing, we decided to stick with the original HLZ at the base of the mountain."
As the 101st assault wrapped up, Mack prepared to start engines, when Nail-22 called them. "He had 'eyes-on' our HLZs. They were clear." He passed the information to Slab on the intercom. Things were looking up.
Mack began his preflight checklist and started engine one, followed by engine two. But as soon as the second engine fired up, it "ran away," revving up uncontrollably until he was forced to perform an emergency shutdown. The problem, "exceeding several operational limits," made the aircraft no longer mission capable. For the crew and men of Mako-21 nearby, the engine problem was announced by a spectacular "ball of flame" shooting out the back of the engine. "I called the [TOC] and asked that a spare aircraft be flown down [and] informed the team leader."
Now Slab was in a bind. It would take at least another hour to get replacement birds to Gardez. Two were dispatched, because Razor-04 was also approaching critical fuel due to the delays.
He stepped off Mack's helicopter into the cold, the APU whine of the helicopter dominating the night. He moved away from the helicopter to think. The absolute earliest they would make it to their insertion HLZ was now 0300, three hours before morning nautical twilight—the time at which they would be visible to everyone— _if_ everything went off without a hitch. As it stood, that seemed unlikely.
Slab found Vic and conferred. There simply would not be enough time to make it up the mountain before sunrise, and there was no way the SEAL was going to put himself and his team in the position of having to ascend the slopes in daylight, into an ambush that would likely cost them their lives. He asked for a twenty-four-hour delay, the only prudent decision, and relayed it through Razor-03's radio so Chapman wouldn't have to unpack his ruck. The recorded transmission in the TF-11 JOC log is "RAZOR-03 RELAYS TO SHARK 78: EARLIEST INFL IS 2215Z TO 2230Z THIS TIME WILL FORCE DAYLIGHT MOVEMENT; ELEMENT AT RAZORS LOCATION REQUEST BUMP 24 HOURS; WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL THE TEAM." In the log, the only recorded response is "STANDBY."
Vic needed to discuss the situation with his immediate superior, so he got on the satellite phone and made a call, but it wasn't to Blaber, who was already en route to the Shahi Khot. Instead, he called the TF-Blue TOC in Bagram. As the AFO rep in Bagram, Delta major Jimmy Reese notes in the official AFO after-action report, "Not once was [the situation] addressed with the AFO chain of command. We had no idea these conversations were going on. They were discussing this on the TF-Blue command net, instead of coming up on the AFO command net and discussing it with the ground force commander, Blaber." Vic's decision to exclude the standing AFO chain of command would have dire, far-reaching consequences.
Nowhere is it recorded to whom Vic spoke, and he's never identified the individual by name. On his end of the call, Vic stated, "The earliest infiltration time possible is now 2:45 to 3:00 a.m." He then asked for instructions and was told, "We really need you to get in there tonight."
With his orders now clearly spelled out, and with no other choice, Slab discussed the new plan with Mack while they waited for the replacement aircraft. They decided that the pilots would swap and fly the new helicopters with the enlisted gunners and crew who arrived in them—strictly a pilot swap, since they'd planned and flown the mission to that point, and further changes were only asking for trouble.
After talking about the summit, with its lack of imagery and planning, Slab asked Mack, "Well, what's it going to be, chief?"
"I'm willing to try if you are," replied Mack, but reiterated there was no way to determine if there was a suitable HLZ.
"Well, if you can't get us in, then you can just bring us home," replied the SEAL.
The replacement MH-47s arrived and the pilots swapped. They listened on SATCOM for any indications of further delays or disruptions, while the engines remained running and the two teams loaded. Razor-03 and -04 took off for the last time from Gardez at 0227 for the twenty-plus-minute flight to insert the Mako teams. Mack, sitting in the left seat, watched as Razor-04 dropped out of formation toward Mako-21's insertion site, an HLZ secured by the 101st Airborne, taking a resupply bundle with them to hand off to Jay Hill and J Team. Razor-03 continued toward Takur Ghar alone.
In Bagram, Jimmy Reese was sitting next to Major General Hagenbeck's desk in the latter's TF-Mountain TOC having a conversation with Brigadier General Gary Harrell, a former commander of Delta Force. States Reese, "We [AFO] in the mountain TOC would hear intermittent reports from the MH47s passing info back to [160th TOC]. That is how we heard the new HLZ location about a minute or two prior to the first insertion of Razor-03. They called in a proposed grid [the top of Takur Ghar] just as they were going inbound to the HLZ. It was the first we had heard the report and were surprised they were trying to insert on top of the OP."
At the same time, in his OP to the north of Takur Ghar, Jay heard some of the traffic on the AFO SATCOM net but paid little attention. He was too busy working an AC-130 in support of the TF-Rakkasan air assault that caused the Razor-03/04 delay. He was frustrated by the multiple airstrikes diverted or confused in the complexities of the battlefield below. Twice he'd pointedly asked, "What is the deal with CAS?" Twice he'd called in strikes on a mortar position pummeling the 101st, and twice the aircraft had been called away. Finally, the planes—F-16s—returned, "but can't hit targets accurately."
While Jay was requesting different aircraft, "Something with JDAMs," J Team's team leader, Kris, was looking for clarification on Mako-21's infil and their linkup for the resupply they were promised: fifteen of the critical BA-5590 batteries, twenty-four MREs, five gallons of water, and sixty AA batteries (for NVGs, IR pointers, and other devices), material the team desperately needed if they were to stay in the field several more days, as directed by Blaber. Of the three teams in the field, theirs had so far been the deadliest and best placed.
Astonished, Jay saw them—two MH-47s flying from Gardez, materializing out of the night. "We're up there doing strikes, marking targets, the whole nine yards, but we're pretty smoked because we'd never gone to sleep. Then we hear the helicopters and I'm thinking, 'What the hell?' And I remember looking off our [position's] shoulder and going 'Hey, KO [Kris's initials], who's this? What's going on here, are they bringing in weapons?' I thought it was reinforcements for the 101st to be honest with you. I'm trying to drop bombs and I'm like, 'Hey guys, you can't drop bombs through helos, I need to know [if aircraft are inbound].'" The no-notice infil jeopardized ongoing strikes.
Kris had no idea either, and the team watched Razor-04 as it peeled off to land nearby. "We could hear two of them, and it was a huge shock when we saw where they were going because your eyes had adapted to the lighting, so you could see really well. And then they flew right into the place that we'd reported earlier that was bad. In fact, we'd put eyes on it earlier. We told [AFO], 'Hey man, that's "bad guy land,"' because you could clearly see the little bonsai tree and positions with personnel [on top]." As Kris documents in his after-action report, "The sad part about this whole thing is, at _no time_ [emphasis added] did [TF-Blue] contact the OPs and ask them about the situation on the ground."
Razor-03 continued its flight toward the mountain summit. "And then they turned in, and I remember that hook turn, the gray helicopter, they flew right to the top, and that's where it all went downhill. You see a huge flash, I can still see it clear as day, and then just explosions, like it was a TV show. You could hear gunfire, the Dishka [DShK] actually returning fire, shooting at the helo," Jay recalls.
And then Razor-03 was gone, lost to the night. In its wake, a short gunfight. Neil Roberts, having fallen from the helicopter and landed unharmed in the snow, was fighting for his life, his last moments uncaptured by any drone or gunship footage but witnessed by J Team. What is known is he was hit by enemy fire that caused extensive bleeding shortly after falling. His machine gun was found jammed, gummed with his blood. The fight did not last long; he was severely wounded during the initial exchange. Roberts never even pulled his pistol. His end came when one of the Chechens killed him close up with a single round to the head, execution style. After the bullet that ended the SEAL's life was fired, there was only silence on Takur Ghar.
Chapter 18
4 March
0255 HOURS
As they lurched from the summit, Al Mack barely had control of his MH-47. The cyclic and collective kept going "dead" in his hands. Each time they did, the helicopter became a 40,000-pound chunk of metal plummeting out of the sky. In the rear, Dan Madden was furiously opening quarts of hydraulic fluid with a beer-can opener that hung from a string on the wall, pouring them into the manual filling station and then quickly yanking the manual pressurization pump handle up and down to introduce the precious liquid into the system. Each time he did, the controls would sputter to life in Mack's hands. Yet as soon as Madden stopped pumping to spear another quart, the controls would seize as the helicopter bled out through the shredded lines, and the aircraft began to plummet once again. Madden only had four cans; after that, there would be no stopping the helo from falling out of the sky, killing them all. As it was, even when the hydraulics were topped off, the Chinook shuddered in flight as if the rotor heads and transmissions were going to come apart at any moment.
Leaving both a trail of fluid and a man behind on the mountain, Mack continued wrestling the controls with the help of his copilot, Chief Warrant Officer Talbot. Impact was inevitable, it was merely a question of where. If he could keep the aircraft upright on impact, they _might_ survive the crash. If it rolled, all of them would be crushed by inertia and the weight of the aircraft. Coming off the peak at over 10,000 feet it was just possible, with their momentum and downward flight angle, to reach the valley floor nearly 2,000 feet below. In fits and starts of hydraulic relief, he spotted some reasonable terrain in front of them at the exact moment the controls seized. Madden, pouring their last can into the reserve, saved the crew a final time as Mack fought to bring them down upright.
At ten feet, Mack stated, "I could not move the cyclic stick." The helicopter had flown seven kilometers from the lone SEAL on the mountain. It slammed into the ground on a fifteen-degree uphill slope and ten-degree cross slope but, miraculously, didn't roll. Both pilots jettisoned their doors and, collecting their maps and sensitive packet material, dropped to the ground, joining the survivors in the back. It was a remarkable feat of teamwork and airmanship to bring the crew and operators down alive. Without both pilots and Madden working the problem till they touched down, every man would have perished.
Once on the ground, Chapman immediately set about getting them an AC-130 for cover and to fend off potential adversaries should the threat prove real. Joined by the crew, some of whom were feeling bad about the crash, Chapman responded, "Aw, don't worry about it. I've felt harder PLFs [parachute landing falls]."
With his SATCOM and UHF ground-to-air radio up and running in a matter of seconds, the Controller wasted no time. "Any Grim, any Nail, this is Mako Three Zero Charlie. We've just had a crash landing and need some perimeter security," he announced on UHF.
All Grim call signs reflected AC-130H aircraft, while Nail was used by the newer model AC-130Us. That night the Anaconda operation was supported by two U-boats (Nail-21 and -22). However, at the time of the crash they had already departed and had been replaced by two older, but still capable, H-models with the call signs Grim-32 and -33. The problem was, with the changeover, the two arriving gunships had no pre-brief on the Mako-30 mission and no situational awareness of the immediate events. Their first inkling they were involved in a highly dynamic and soon-to-be confusing command and control situation manifested with Chapman's transmission. Hearing Chapman's call, the first H-model on station responded, "This is Grim Three Two, what can we do for you?"
"It looks like we lost somebody at the LZ," he stated and then passed Roberts's grid coordinates, communication and identification (MBITR and IR strobe) capabilities, and a probable call sign. In practice, the SEALs did not stress communication training to the extent their Delta counterparts did, relying more heavily on their embedded Combat Controllers. Mako-30 was no exception. Chapman loaded, programmed, and checked the entire team's radios, explaining, as he always did, how many clicks on the presets each SEAL would need to turn to reach different nets. For this reason, it was possible Roberts, known as Fifi to his teammates, might use any number of call signs or frequencies to identify himself.
Upon receiving the initial request, Grim-32, piloted by Major D. J. Turner, immediately diverted to Chapman's location. After a cursory scan to ensure the crew and SEALs were not at risk, it departed for Takur Ghar, coordinating with the second AC-130H, Grim-33, to take up position over Razor-03.
Meanwhile, believing their mountain objective was nearby, Slab put one of the SEALs on planning a foot movement back to Takur Ghar. He thought they could hike to the lost SEAL and then coordinate a pickup with another helicopter from there, using Chapman and the gunship to keep any problems at bay. While the other SEALs worked on it, Slab had Chapman relay their intent to HQ.
Chapman called the AFO deputy commander, Delta major Jimmy Reese, at Bagram, where he functioned as the AFO's link to the larger Army HQ that commanded Operation Anaconda. Because of the friction and disconnect between Blaber and Vic, Reese had learned of the unfortunate plan to insert directly onto Takur Ghar only moments before their tragic attempt. He acknowledged the team's plan.
The SEAL tasked with planning their foot route returned to his team leader and, regarding the mountain Slab had pointed out, announced, "That ain't it." He pointed to a distant peak in the dark, barely visible even with NVGs. "That's it over there. We ain't going to make it," he stated flatly.
When the calls started going out on SATCOM and UHF, other elements of AFO already on the ground began picking up the situation. Ben Miller and the SEALs of Mako-21 had themselves been on the ground for only a few minutes when the Combat Controller heard Chapman on the fire support frequency, furiously working to resolve their crash-site situation. "I heard him talking to all kinds of air. I didn't talk to him because I wanted to keep the mike fresh and net clear. But there was definitely a lot going on with their crash and rescue."
Powerless to assist, and with their own objective still many kilometers distant, they started their movement into enemy territory.
Also listening to the crisis unfold was Jay Hill. The two friends knew each other well, and Jay "was very familiar with Chappy's radio 'etiquette' and 'phraseology' as a Combat Controller," as well as the Mako-30C call sign he was using. The call sign Mako-30, when used without the _C_ suffix, indicated the man on the radio was Slab. But Hill also knew Chapman's voice, and the two indicators told Hill exactly who was who on the AFO radio net.
At the crashed Chinook, Slab reversed his initial decision, electing to use the pickup helicopter Chapman had called in to retrieve them. Chapman immediately raised Razor-04, the sister ship of Razor-03, piloted by Jason Friel. "When you get here, what I want to do is, this crew will stay here. We'll fly up to the mountain and get Roberts and come back and get the crew, and we'll all get out of here."
Mack, still surging with adrenaline and standing out in a naked darkness, no longer commanding the night from a well-armed helicopter, told Slab he was willing to remain with his crew while Mako-30 conducted its rescue—on the condition Slab leave him someone to help defend their position. Slab, desperate to get to the mountain but loath to leave any shooters behind, offered Chapman, their ablest air support and best choice for a single individual to defend a tenuous position.
Chapman had other ideas. He refused to be left behind, and he and Slab had a heated exchange over the matter, during which Chapman stated definitively, "I'm part of the team, and if you're going, I am too." Faced with the Controller's intransigence, the SEAL acquiesced and elected to take everyone to the top, including the Razor-03 crew.
On the air, Friel refused, stating, "Naw, that's not going to happen."
Hearing the response on Chappy's radio, Slab took the handset from the Controller. "Put me there. You can do this."
"Not with that LZ under fire. I'm taking all of you to Gardez and we'll sort it out there."
When Razor-04 and Friel landed, the pilot greeted his good friend, Al Mack, happy to find him alive. Left with no alternative, a frustrated and anxious Slab and his team climbed aboard while Mack's crew stripped and sanitized Razor-03 of weapons, ammo, and sensitive material.
Razor-04 returned to the Gardez HLZ at 0434, and the team unloaded the helicopter. While they went inside, Friel kept the engines running and blades turning. At the remote outpost, if he shut down and had a mechanical problem—always a possibility in the overtaxed 47s—he'd be stranding the team and signing Roberts's death certificate. Yet although it increased the likelihood of the mission's flight, it was also burning precious fuel. Checking the gauges while Chapman and the SEALs were inside, he noted the helo was already on its reserve tanks. Calculating flight times to Takur Ghar and the nearest refuel point, he realized he was left with no margin for error or contingency; more good news to pass to the team when they came out.
Inside the high-walled safe-house compound, Chapman considered what was essential to execute the rescue. He'd need to move fast, and the only thing that mattered was the ability to talk to "air." He needed to think in three dimensions. The SEALs, like everyone else on the battlefield, thought strictly in 2-D: Point A to point B had this type of surface terrain, or a particular position afforded this or that advantage or disadvantage. But John didn't think that way, nor could he afford the luxury of its simplicity. His world was ruled by three axes, not two.
HQ, with their constant questions about status and location, had already proved to be an obstacle, not a solution, so long-haul SATCOM wasn't critical. He looked at his ruck and its full load for the original multiday mission. None of the food, water, spare batteries, and clothing mattered.
The only item of solid value he considered was the PRC-117 SATCOM radio. It doubled as his primary weapon for wielding airpower, with its twenty watts of power to push out transmissions, but it weighed ten pounds without batteries. As a seasoned Combat Controller, he never traveled without spare batts for every radio. It was one of the many reasons CCT had to be in better physical shape than sister-service spec ops forces they worked with; a Controller's ruck always weighed significantly more than anyone else's. The PRC-117 ran on two BA-5590 batteries weighing 2.25 pounds each. So taking his PRC-117, even in a pared-down ruck, would give him an additional 25 pounds to haul. On the run at 10,000 feet. In the snow. Under fire.
Chapman dispensed with the ruck entirely and opted to carry his MBITR, which would cover the frequency ranges he needed for air support but could push only five watts. In addition, he took a VS-17 signal panel and compass to back up his handheld GPS stuffed in his cargo pants. It would have to do. Besides, they were only going to be on the mountain long enough to rescue or recover "Fifi," for what...thirty minutes? They weren't even taking water with them. Snatch and grab, and kill everyone who got in the way, the latter being his job. He could do that.
He pared down every ounce he could, except his gaiters. No sense in getting snow in your boots running through a mountaintop gunfight. None of the SEALs or Chapman took body armor or ballistic helmets to the top. They'd left that gear in Bagram, preparing, as they had, for a long-range recce patrol.
Chapman didn't even add ammo to his Rhodesian vest. The uglier it got, the less likely he was to be shooting. It was the Controller way. When everyone else fired, he'd be on the radio that much more—turning back tides of rushing Al Qaeda, taking pressure off their own lines, or removing threats before they could inflict casualties. He and his radio were their last line of defense. Five watts would get him to Grim-32, already waiting for him at Takur Ghar. If they lost that, even twenty watts of transmission power wouldn't save them. As insurance, he did pack several Russian mini hand grenades. These were lighter (though less effective) than the M67 grenades carried by conventional US forces. He joined the others and Slab, who was busy fighting to convince HQ of their situation and intentions.
"I had this many when I left," Slab explained, and gave the names of the seven men on Mako-30 to the leaders at the Navy's TF-Blue TOC in Bagram. "Now I have this many," and he listed all but Roberts. But the questions and requests for numbers and confirmations kept coming while the clock ticked. In exasperation he concluded, "Look, we lost a guy. I have everybody except for Fifi. You have to believe me on this." He hung up and the men returned to the helicopter, where Friel told Slab, "I don't have too much gas." The closest FARP (forward area refueling point) was a site called Texaco, twenty miles away; Bagram was even farther. There were no options for the team leader. He asked the pilot to fly the mission anyway, and Friel agreed. It meant they'd be flying directly to the top, with no opportunity to scan the site to determine enemy numbers or even whether Roberts had managed to get to a defendable location.
Under the red lights of the MH-47 cargo space, Slab outlined what they knew and were going to do. With the turning blades and turbines making it difficult to hear, the team closed in around him to catch every word. The smell of fuel and hydraulics permeated the craft, mixed with the smell of men who'd been sweating and were infused with adrenaline.
"Okay, here's what I know. Reports have come across that the gunship saw a strobe up there. Four or six dudes are around Fifi. That was the last report I heard. The strobe is on. He is alive. Four to six dudes are with him. We can deal with that. We'll set up a strobe when we get there, identify ourselves, and anybody that is outside our circle, the gunship will light 'em up."
To a man, they realized that Fifi being surrounded did not bode well for their teammate. Slab continued, "We'll get a foothold up there. We'll find a place, clear it, and move onto it. We're going up there and the bird's going to land. We are getting off fast in pairs. Don't wait for the ramp to get all the way down. Get the hell off." The team nodded somberly as he spoke. At the end, Slab announced, "Hey, we're going back up there and killing every last one of those motherfuckers." It was something all agreed on.
Slab then pulled Chapman aside, explaining the two of them were a pair and would be the first off the helo. "Your sole job is to get to cover and get guns on. Do nothing else but get to cover and get on the radio. We'll take care of everything else. We need you on that radio," he said as the helo's engines spooled up for takeoff. There was no turning back for any of them.
The seventeen-mile flight from Gardez was short and intense. The SEALs stared out the Plexiglas windows, each anticipating the mission. Toward the rear, Chapman waited too, his mind a kaleidoscope of frequencies, procedures, and call signs. He would need to draw from them all if he was to keep the team alive and rescue his friend.
Slab was working to get pre-assault fires onto the mountain before they landed to give them a chance of getting established before being outgunned. The AFO commander, Pete Blaber, was also working the issue. Interestingly, Slab had chosen to call Blaber rather than Vic and his own Navy chain of command. The Delta AFO leader and SEAL each outlined scenarios for Grim-32, the AC-130 gunship now orbiting Takur Ghar, to fire on the mountain in support of the lost SEAL. The gunship, however, rightfully refused to entertain any of them, arguing that there was no way to determine which heat signature was Roberts and therefore any strikes targeted against individuals could inadvertently kill the very object of the mission. This meant no pre-assault.
* * *
On Takur Ghar, the Chechen who executed Roberts (and attempted, unsuccessfully, to decapitate him) moved within a bunker on the summit. Other Chechens and Al Qaeda had finished rooting through the SEAL's possessions and passing them around, including the IR strobe, and had dispersed. The leader, with years of separatist fighting against the Russians under his belt, knew the Americans would be back. They had a weakness for their own. He didn't know why the American they'd killed ended up alone on their mountain, but he was certain more would come back for him. And they would return in helicopters, probably many. He and his men were ready. Killing one lone American was not the satisfaction or glory he sought; he desired to kill many and meet Allah as a martyr to receive the blessings and rewards that were his due.
Chapter 19
4 March
0455 HOURS
As Mako-30 neared the mountain without any pre-assault fire support, frustration boiled over in the SEAL leader. "Motherfuckers!" Slab muttered regarding the gunship, and told Friel, "Go around," so he could get a look and perhaps induce the gunship to fire.
"Not going to happen," replied the pilot. Without even enough fuel for him to make a second pass, he declared a fuel emergency before they inserted.
Slab now had an impossible choice: Leave with the helicopter and abandon his teammate, possibly saving the lives of his remaining team and the helicopter crew, or go into the same HLZ as before without support, fully announcing their intentions to the enemy. It wasn't really a choice at all.
In the cockpit of Grim-32, frustrations were also growing. The pilot, Turner, couldn't fire, no matter how much ground forces begged. His responsibilities were equal parts destruction of the enemy in support of the operators and the prevention of fratricide. His situation was not uncommon among AC-130 crews. The men on the ground, with a very narrow view of the battle, often could not appreciate the ease with which locations and forces could be confused. Turner's fire control officer offered an opportunity when he announced, "Two guys have been walking around that rock all night and I know they are bad. Why don't we shoot them?" To do so required the concurrence of the entire crew. When one of the other officers on the flight deck voiced an objection, the last opportunity to force the enemy's head down vanished, as did all hope of Mako-30 getting on the ground without taking fire.
As the helicopter neared the landing, the final words Friel spoke to Slab were rhetorical: "It ain't going to be good."
At 0457, the MH-47 prepared to touch down in the exact spot where Razor-03 had met its fate. Its twin turbine engines spewed heat and noise from the back of the fuselage, defeating the mountain silence. Snow scattered in every direction in what remained of the night. Anyone within fifty feet of the helicopter would be blinded in the rotor-induced blizzard. The enemy was far enough away to allow an unobstructed view of the giant settling onto their summit, though the noise made it difficult to communicate. But communication was no longer necessary; they were all fully armed, the only means they needed to communicate with their most despised enemy.
For the men in back, the final seconds of infil were an unbearable eternity. Waiting for the helicopter to make its way sluggishly to the ground left them exposed, a terrible feeling of powerlessness for men of action. The crew doused the lights, leaving those in the back in complete darkness. Only the men's NVGs provided illumination, yet with the swirling snow and the narrow field of view out the ramp, nothing was visible. Chapman was pushed up against Slab almost as if the two were going to make a skydive out the back. His adrenaline was pumping, and he was anxious, as they all were, to get out of the thin-skinned death trap. He felt the helicopter jerk as it touched down.
When the wheels hit, Slab and Chapman launched themselves off the ramp. Slab took two steps in the knee-deep snow and plunged face forward, filling his NVGs with snow in the process and temporarily blinding himself. Chapman, second in line, wasted no time and went around the SEAL, heading to his left in search of high ground or shelter to begin orchestrating airpower with Grim-32. The four remaining SEALs spread out in two-man fire teams around their leader, who quickly recovered.
On the snow-covered slope, Chapman paused for a moment, orienting himself to the terrain. Fire was incoming but concentrated on the helicopter, even as it began lifting off, trailing smoke and dragging enemy fire along with it. Then it was gone, and the mountain went silent for a moment. The Chechens and Al Qaeda stopped firing, trying to determine what had happened in the blackness. The SEALs and Chapman had yet to fire a shot, and in the dark and confusion after the blowing snow and rotor noise, the enemy had no idea how many Americans were on the ground. Without NVGs, they were mostly blind...but only for another forty-five minutes.
The quiet was short-lived. Fire exploded all around the team as the enemy let loose a barrage. John made a snap decision and began running uphill, into the fire, without looking behind him to see if Slab had recovered or what the other SEALs were doing. He took a knee and began firing at the closest point where he could see muzzle flash and a fighting position in the first bunker, Bunker 1.
Twenty feet behind him the SEALs huddled, getting their bearings before splitting off in their two two-man fire teams. Slab, seeing Chappy upslope, stepped out in pursuit of the Combat Controller.
John could see the enemy had the advantage of high ground and dug-in terrain. There was no cover for him to set down and start calling airstrikes. That would have to wait. If he didn't do something _now_ , there'd be no one left to call for air because there would be no one left.
His heart was pounding in the thin atmosphere at over 10,000 feet. Even Gardez was only 7,500 feet, and the extra elevation was attacking his cardio system as surely as the Al Qaeda were attacking the team. He stopped momentarily once again, then drove forward, breaking trail through the snow, which rose past his gaiters to his knees. As his boots plunged through the snow, he held his M4 pulled against his shoulder, barrel pointed forward at an angle into the slope. He stopped for a breath, brought his weapon up, and, sighting on Bunker 1 using his laser and NVGs, snapped off a few shots. Then he ran again, lungs aching, to his right. As he surged uphill, the bunker moved up and down through his NVGs, but outside the circle of illumination, all was dark, creating the effect of images swimming.
Behind him, Slab moved to catch up as Chapman stopped again, took a knee, and snapped off another three- to five-round burst. Before the SEAL could catch him, Chapman was up and moving again, his knees and feet blazing a trail in the virgin snow, increasing the distance between them again. It was as if the Controller was a man possessed. He never looked back at Slab, just fired and moved like a machine into the enemy's fire. Slab stopped, getting the lay of the land and checking the rest of his team.
Two of the SEALs (who would come to be the upper fire team) had moved left and uphill a few feet from the original huddle and stopped, firing upward at the invisible enemy. The final two SEALs of Mako-30, the lower fire team, had spread out near the huddle and were searching for targets. The team was taking fire from three directions—east, west, and north—the most effective of which was raining down from the hilltop to the north, directly in front of Chapman. Slab turned and looked uphill at the Controller, now twenty feet ahead of him, and watched in disbelief as John again charged at the enemy, snapping off shots.
Still the Controller never looked behind him to see if Slab had caught up. The fire from Bunker 1 was cracking as it passed him and the team. He couldn't believe he hadn't been hit. Between heaving breaths he looked through his NVGs, the muzzle flash from the AK-47 fire blinding due to the light amplification of his optics. He didn't wait; he launched himself—stumbling through postholing snow would be a more accurate description—headlong at the bunker.
Bunker 1 was arrayed in an arc under a ten-foot-tall bonsai-shaped tree. The defensive position was well constructed, having been improved by the Chechens and Al Qaeda fighters from its original construction by their mujahideen predecessors during battles with the Soviets twenty years earlier. Inside were two Chechens, well protected and masked by the tree overhead and a large rock outcrop to the left that covered their flank. Twenty-five feet behind them sat a second bunker, Bunker 2, filled with more fighters, including Roberts's executioner, a PKM heavy machine gun, and several RPG tubes with a stockpile of rounds.
The two Chechen fighters were spraying the team below them. They could hear the Americans, but they were difficult to identify in the dark, a problem compounded by the blinding effects of their own weapons and their lack of night vision devices. They felt they had the upper hand: They'd shot down one helicopter already, and this second one had limped off. Plus, they'd tasted their first kill for the glory of Allah, the reason they'd traveled through Pakistan to the rugged peaks of Afghanistan. And had He not delivered to the mujahideen an American for them to kill and his gear to pillage? One of the fighters was already wearing the American's Gore-Tex pants, another his black woolen watch cap. Allah would surely give them more Americans to sacrifice and desecrate. They fired their weapons, fear and excitement driving them.
It was the last action for the two dirty and ill-equipped fighters. John appeared, lungs burning, in front of the bunker's berm and between it and the flanking rock. Taking advantage of his NVGs and laser he killed first one, then the other in as many seconds. Shocked by the American materializing from the black, both went to Allah without another shot. John had been on Takur Ghar for exactly two minutes and had now killed the first men in his thirty-six years of living.
Slab was still behind him but closing the distance. Below, fire team one, saved from the deadliest fire by Chapman's one-man onslaught, began charging up the steep slope toward the rock outcropping, ignoring the wild fire from the west flank to their left. The two SEALs were intent on getting into the fight, finding Fifi if he was still alive, and killing every single motherfucker on the mountain.
John, now in command of the bunker, oriented himself to his new surroundings, looking for a place to establish his airstrike position. Fire continued to pour in from the next bunker and off to his right. He engaged both directions, changing out at least one magazine in the process, as Slab finally joined him under the tree. The two shared an instant before Slab engaged Bunker 2, loosing several three-round bursts.
Chapman dropped to a knee next to the tree's trunk. To his left, Slab was facing Bunker 2 when a burst of fire from that position split the few feet between the two teammates. Slab slid behind the rock outcrop farther to his left and yelled, "What do you have?"
"I'm not sure," replied the Controller.
Slab returned his attention to Bunker 2 and tried firing a couple 40mm grenade rounds from the M203 launcher slung beneath his Stoner SR-25 .308-caliber sniper rifle, but the twenty-foot distance to the next bunker was so close, one grenade failed to arm before impact and rolled down the hill. It exploded without effect. The second detonated, but the fire kept coming.
Slab moved to his left against the security of the base of the rock outcropping. A grenade thrown by the enemy in Bunker 2 detonated in the snow half the distance to the two Americans but failed to inflict any damage. Slab didn't realize it, but the very reason for them being on the mountain lay mere feet from his position. Focused on staying alive, the SEAL never saw Roberts's body.
Farther to his left, fire team one arrived at the rock outcropping and was taking fire from Bunker 2 and the heavy DShK antiaircraft gun behind it. The two SEALs pressed themselves into the snow, attempting to lower their profile from the vicious raking. Below them, fire team two continued their attempt to flank to the right but couldn't beat back the fire pouring down, so they withdrew another thirty feet downslope.
John was now concentrating his fire on Bunker 2. He stepped up, exposing himself to deadly fire again. The close range and blinding flames from the PKM machine gun made it impossible to ignore. He was sweating from his push up the hill, still trying to catch his breath. Luckily there was no need to take aim through his scope; he merely centered the laser point on the muzzle flashes. Years of training alongside the best combat shooters in the world, Delta Force and SEAL Team Six, put him on autopilot. Despite the adrenaline and physiological stress, he exhaled, then smoothly pulled the trigger until the suppressed weapon coughed, but he was not rewarded with seeing the impact.
An Al Qaeda fighter charged him from his right side to counter-flank the Americans, firing wildly. John shot his assailant from a few feet away, stopping him and knocking the man over. Before he could pick another target, he was suddenly slammed in the torso and knocked backward. "Where'd that come from?" he yelled to Slab over the sound of the machine gun. But he never heard the answer, toppling back and onto his side. His world went dark.
Slab heard the shout but didn't respond. He saw Chapman ten feet away, the NVGs' green glow illuminating his face and his laser pointing against a tree, rising and falling with his breathing. The Controller's legs were crumpled beneath him, but he was alive.
The mountain was exploding around Slab and his two remaining fire teams. To his left, the first man of fire team one arrived, with the other SEAL hot on his heels. The latter had their only crew-served firepower, an M60, and he scuttled around behind his teammate with the rock masking him, so he and Slab could huddle. Slab looked over at Chappy, but the laser, while still on, didn't appear to be moving, and he concluded the Combat Controller must be dead. He was now down two men. "Get on top of the rock and fire point-blank in the bunker," he told his 60 gunner. Slab needed to put an end to Bunker 2 quickly if they were to survive.
"Roger that," replied the other, who climbed the half dozen feet to the top and began firing from a knee. When he couldn't get a good-enough angle into the bunker, he stood up and began pouring sustained fire into the position. As he did, Slab moved to the other fire-team-one member in preparation for a sweep to the left to finish off the resistance, when a frag grenade, thrown from the bunker in the face of the 60 gunner's withering fire, exploded near the SEAL's feet. It was followed by another determined fighter exposing himself to return the point-blank barrage with his AK-47, striking the 60 gunner's thighs. The SEAL rolled off the rock, calling out, "I'm hit!" as he collapsed at Slab's feet.
The two SEALs held another rapid discussion while the first member of fire team one continued to fire from the left side of the rock. At least the enemy wasn't charging them. Slab had no idea of the numbers of Al Qaeda and Chechens on the mountain, but if they rallied in force, the SEALs, now without Chapman's expertise in walking fire up against their own positions, would be wiped out. Two and a half men behind a lone rock, only marginally supported from below by a single two-man fire team without heavy weapons, were powerless to stop a rush.
"Are you hit in the chest?" he asked.
"No, I'm hit in the legs." That was good.
"Can you move?"
"Yeah."
They'd been on the mountain now for eight minutes, with two more casualties, a dwindling supply of ammo, and no better command of the terrain than when they'd landed. Slab had used up his entire supply of 40mm grenades and had discarded his M203 in the snow, leaving him only his sniper rifle. He made his decision: They were retreating. Now.
The three SEALs wasted no time moving off the summit and rapidly past Bunker 1. The first fire-team-one SEAL had also been shot during the firefight, with a grazing wound to the knee. In their rush to retreat, no one checked Chapman's condition, though only Slab knew at the time that Chappy had been shot.
A Predator pilot leaned back in the chair of his "cockpit" inside an air-conditioned trailer fifteen hundred miles and a time zone away, silently watching the SEALs' and Chapman's battle for life. On his next pass, while the SEALs withdrew, the nameless pilot dropped the Predator a thousand feet to get a better view of the action. Though he didn't know their names, he watched the SEALs passing below the bunker. On his screen, Chapman's still-warm body very clearly showed under the bonsai tree and, slightly cooler, Roberts's body lay along the SEALs' path.
The pilot watched the SEALs as they huddled below Bunker 1. In defilade below the bunker and ten feet from the stricken Controller, they continued to return fire. Downslope, fire team two did the same, but the route from the outcrop to their current location did not pass Chapman. The most likely event in the dark is that Slab passed Roberts's body, which was between Bunker 1 and the outcrop but not _above_ the bunker. Chapman, in his last engagement before going down, was above Bunker 1, where he had engaged the flanking Al Qaeda.
For the moment, believing Chapman dead, Slab was concerned only with their survival. They were still a divided force, and unless they consolidated and moved off the mountain, they'd all end up like Chapman, who had bought them initial relief and salvation in the early part of the battle. They spent the next four minutes taking stock of their condition, ammo count, and situation, discussing the matters while still engaging the enemy from below the bunker.
When it was time, Slab tossed a smoke grenade to mask their retreat, and they left the summit for the final time just after 0510. The 60 gunner, with his damaged legs, went first as the three began to scramble and slide toward the lower fire team. The last to leave the position, Slab was suddenly confronted with a donkey on the far side of Bunker 1. He pumped two rounds into it as it sat in the snow, believing it would help to mask their retreat.
The three stopped at the edge of a cliff and waited for fire team two to join them. The lower fire team was across an open saddle where it extended out onto a ridge, projecting out to a rock fin at the end. Throughout the engagement, two Al Qaeda fighters had traversed the ridge, encroaching and then withdrawing from the fire team, seemingly torn between closing with the enemy in the darkness and fearing the consequences if they did.
Fire team two made the move to consolidate with the others across the nearly fifty-meter open saddle. As they ran, pursued by the PKM from Bunker 2, one of the SEALs shouted out in pain and fell. He'd been hit in the right ankle, the round nearly severing the SEAL's foot from his leg. His teammate half supported, half dragged him the remaining distance. When they joined the other three survivors, one of the SEALs took a head count. Coming up one short, he asked, "Where's Chappy?"
"He's dead," Slab told him. Slab again took stock of his diminishing team. Two dead, three injured, two of them seriously. The fire-team-two SEAL who'd been shot was bleeding heavily and in great pain. They were off this rock. There was only one direction to go—down—but the terrain below was a nearly vertical snow-covered slope interrupted only by straight ledge drops of unknown height. If they could gain enough distance, Slab could perhaps get on the radio and have Grim-32 destroy the entire summit. He couldn't know with absolute certainty, but Roberts _had_ to be dead. And as for Chappy, Slab believed him to be dead too. Blowing the mountaintop would not change that fact.
In Bunker 2, the Chechens continued to engage. Despite the smoke, the SEALs were now more exposed to incoming fire and vulnerable in the morning twilight. For men without NVGs, the predawn broadcast movement. And the American weapons were easily identified, if not by their muzzle flashes and disciplined fire rates, then by the report of their bullets leaving the barrel. US 7.62 and 5.56 ammunition, the only two rounds the SEALs were using, have a distinct sound all combat veterans know well. The same is true of the Eastern Bloc 7.62 coupled with the AK-47. There is no mistaking the weapon. Whether or not the Chechens and Uzbeks knew how much damage they had inflicted on their enemies, or the limited number of Americans they fought, will never be known. What _was_ clear was their willingness to engage in a fight.
At this point in the battle, it was academic for the SEALs. They'd now huddled below Chapman for over five minutes and started down the cliff thirteen minutes after they'd stepped off the helicopter's ramp. The first to move created a snowslide down the vertical. The rest followed. The snow may have saved their lives as surely as Chapman had. The steepness allowed the two severely wounded SEALs to slide and drag themselves without having to stand erect. Even the Predator video showed the snowslides preceding the men down the mountain, gaining speed as they traveled.
When the Americans stopped firing at Bunker 2, it emboldened the now three Al Qaeda fighters on the fin above them. Barely a minute after the SEALs began their sliding retreat, two of the Muslim brothers began to move again. No longer taking fire, the two walked to overlook the Americans at the far end of the fin, where it terminated in a rocky outcrop and sheer fifty-foot drop. The Americans could be clearly seen sliding down the slope, presenting the perfect opportunity to kill them all.
Under the bonsai-shaped tree above Bunker 1, Chapman's body lay inert. To all appearances he was dead.
Chapter 20
4 March
APPROX. 0300 HOURS
While the gunships and CCT in the Shahi Khot were making short work of Al Qaeda, Staff Sergeant Gabe Brown was sound asleep in his rack at Bagram Airfield, when he was shaken by the shoulder. From the depths of a sound sleep, Gabe couldn't comprehend who it was, merely a voice as though from far away, "They need you." Bleary eyed, he shook off the cobwebs, tumbled into a semblance of uniform, and stumbled to the JOC. Another false alarm, no doubt. He'd never had a combat search and rescue notification turn out to be anything other than false.
The twenty-nine-year-old Combat Controller had been in Afghanistan for only a couple weeks and felt lucky to be in-country at all. To be on alert with TF-160 for CSAR along with two PJs—team leader Keary Miller and Jason Cunningham, who like Gabe was part of a "pickup" game of augmentees from other assignments for roles such as this—was good fortune indeed.
That's not to say that combat search and rescue duty provided real opportunities. It was known among the CCT that, while CSAR was potentially stimulating, the odds of a real crash in which you engaged the enemy and killed them with airstrikes while saving fellow Americans were slim. The last time Special Tactics had conducted a CSAR of any note was in Somalia in 1993, during the battle infamously known as Black Hawk Down. There, the 24 STS package of two PJs and a CCT saved the lives of multiple Rangers and Delta Force operators over the grueling and deadly eighteen-hour battle. Gabe had pulled CSAR enough to know these things.
The CSAR package and its associated Quick Reaction Force (QRF) of Rangers were pre-staged at Bagram Airfield for contingencies, on alert twenty-four hours a day. Comprising a Ranger platoon and a three-man Air Force Special Tactics team tailored to CSAR, it had one Combat Controller and two PJs. Their job was to fly into the worst fight or crash site and take control, providing relief, fire support, and recovery all in one package. The Rangers provided the relief, the CCT the fire support, and the PJs the recovery.
A quietly determined and confident man, Gabe is stocky at five foot nine, thick in every direction, with a full head of auburn hair and calm features. He smiles often, with or without a beer in hand. He's not built like the typical image of a Controller, but if told he needed to walk from the Yukon Territory to Hudson Bay unsupported and starting tomorrow morning, he would shrug his shoulders as if to say "yeah, okay," pack a rucksack, and set off without so much as a question, to reappear four months later on the other side of the continent, looking for a beer.
In the fall of 2001, seven years into his Combat Control career, he was midway through what he considered an administrative assignment: supporting the C-130 pilot school at Little Rock AFB in Arkansas. He'd taken the assignment to focus on his goal of finishing a degree, an endeavor he was diligently pursuing along with raising a young family. Unlike some of his contemporaries, he hadn't chosen to pursue an assignment at the 24. "I was never one of those guys that was setting myself up for the two-four: doing extra workouts at night, focusing on operational academic excellence. I'd rather drink a beer in the evening." But when the 9/11 terror strikes hit, he felt left out in the backwater eddy of Arkansas, so he volunteered to deploy with the 23rd STS out of Hurlburt Field, Florida.
His big break came when he joined Keary Miller's CSAR team in Afghanistan in February of 2002. He liked Keary—a giant of a man at six foot four, with a mop of brown hair—who had a down-to-earth personality and didn't mind bending a few rules. He was well respected throughout the Special Tactics community, and particularly at the 24, for his calm demeanor and expertise with trauma medicine.
The second PJ, Jason Cunningham, was a twenty-six-year-old golden boy on a thin, five-eleven frame—boyish smile and talkative personality. As a senior airman, he was the lowest ranking and least experienced of the three-man team. Like Gabe, he had a young family. Two little girls waited at home with his wife, Theresa: Kyla, age four, and Hannah, barely one. He and Gabe talked about family a lot together.
When Gabe arrived at the JOC, he was told, "There's a missing aircrew member down south, beginning self SAR." That was all the information they had. "Self SAR" indicated the individual was separated from the rest of his crew and friendly forces, but didn't add any details of value to the Combat Controller. It also didn't make a great deal of sense. "I didn't think much of it. Likely just another spin up for no reason, and I expected to go back to bed."
However, on the flight line where the helicopters were staged, Gabe, Keary, and Jason ran into a sister CSAR team from the 24—CCT Greg Pittman, PJ Scott Duffman, and another PJ. Greg's team was just coming off another mission. All highly experienced in their jobs, the two CCT and four PJs huddled to discuss which team would take the now very real mission. Of the six men standing on the ramp in Bagram on that frigid March morning, bristling with gear and weapons in the scant illumination, two would die in Afghanistan—one killed in the next few hours, the other less than four years later.
On the ramp, with the MH-47 blades spinning, things were developing fast. A Ranger QRF was also assigned to the mission. Consisting of a dozen young Rangers and led by Captain Nate Self, they were clearly going to launch. The question: Which package of CCT and PJ experts in trauma medicine, aircraft recovery, and close air support was going to take the mission?
"Greg Pittman and Scott Duffman were just coming off a mission. I think it was airborne support for the Anaconda insertions for AFO. Anyway, Keary, as a two-four member and our team leader, ended up having a bit of a debate with them but must have come out on top because he said [to Gabe and Jason], 'We're going,' and that was it. So I went and found the Rangers and their team leader, Captain Self, who I didn't know, to sort out fires," recalls Gabe.
Furious activity swirled around the designated CSAR helicopter, another TF-160 MH-47E, call sign Razor-01, piloted by Chief Warrant Officer Greg Calvert, the pilot who'd flown down to swap out the helo with the runaway engine at Gardez just an hour before, and who was therefore somewhat familiar with the area. Furthermore, Calvert and the other pilots (the CSAR bird flew with three—one riding jump seat at the rear of the cockpit) had practiced rescue scenarios with the 24 teams and other forces in preparation for just such a crisis. Gabe, Jason, and Keary dashed for their nearby gear and returned to the spinning rotors of Razor-01, clambering aboard along with the Rangers.
Gabe recalls, "We launched without any additional information. On the hour flight toward [Shahi Khot], Self passed around a grease board with some coordinates on it, which didn't mean shit to me. Might as well put me in space and point at the earth for all the good it would do." He'd have to go in blind.
For Calvert, the situation was frustrating. He may not have known the details, but he certainly knew the men flying with him. In the cockpit, they discussed the grid coordinates they'd received with the sketchy information on the ground situation. "We could see on the moving map that the objective was the pinnacle of a tall mountain we had been flying around, twice I believe. There was some confusion as to whether this was 'the place.' We still had the idea the isolated person and Razor-03 may have been colocated (or close). [The other two pilots] and I did discuss that something just did not feel right, and the fact that we all had that 'hair on the back of my neck standing up' feeling. Don [the most senior pilot, riding in the jump seat], to lighten the mood, said that it was just his fingers on the back of my neck."
But the aircrew's instincts were telling them more than TF-11 could. Things were happening on Takur Ghar, and none of the pilots or QRF whirling their way to the mountain knew what the outcome was going to be.
Chapter 21
4 March
APPROX. 0515 HOURS
John Chapman must have become aware of himself, gradually...and painfully. He was lying in the snow, crumpled on top of his own legs. He wasn't sure what had happened, not exactly. It was dark but his NVGs were still on. The night sky was clear and the air bitterly cold. Above him was a lone tree with a thick trunk extending perhaps ten feet toward the heavens before spreading out into a thick crown, like a supersize Japanese bonsai tree, though arboreal aesthetics were immaterial. He needed to figure out what had happened. And he couldn't ignore the pain. A cursory check would reveal two gunshot wounds in his torso. He ached, not only from the impact of the AK-47 bullets to his body, which had shocked the tissue around their points of entry, leaving already-dying flesh surrounding the holes, but also from the ungodly pain in his abdomen. One hole was just above his navel on the right side. The other bullet had entered just below the ribs on the same side. There was blood on his uniform, sticky and dark in the night, where the bullets had penetrated. The pain was intense. Was he bleeding internally? It would be difficult to say what damage lay beneath his uniform. Since none of the team had worn body armor, the rounds tore through his tissue like a hot knife stabbed into a pat of butter.
His cursory self-inspection complete, John needed to focus on his situation. A quick scan revealed his surroundings. Next to him was the trench from which the Al Qaeda fighters had attacked him as he'd charged uphill. Two bodies lay dark and lifeless in its recesses. Nearby was the body of another fighter, the man who'd shot him. At least _he_ was dead. To his left was the large rock outcropping where he'd last seen Slab. Where the hell were Slab and the others? Were they dead? Or had they left _him_ for dead? _Fuck._
Gunfire from Bunker 2 above brought the situation into instant focus. The PKM was firing, but not at him. Answering fire from far behind and below, easily identifiable, answered his SEAL question. They were down there somewhere—not far, but a lifetime away for a wounded man. He couldn't see them, but maybe he could reach them on his MBITR.
He fought through the pain as his frozen fingers fumbled with the radio on his chest. He was no longer sweating; shock and the cold were attacking his capabilities, and the pain was intense. His watch read a bit past 0520; still dark, though morning twilight would illuminate the mountain to the unaided eye in another thirty minutes. He needed help immediately, or the Chechens and Uzbeks would surely overrun him in the daylight...if he lived that long.
Switching from the fire control frequency he'd preset for airstrikes before they left Gardez, he dialed it to a LOS UHF battlefield common frequency. Airstrikes were not what he needed at this moment. He didn't know where Slab and his team were or how many might still be alive, although clearly they weren't on the summit any longer. But there were other Combat Controllers in the vicinity, Jay and Andy in particular, and all CCT viewed battlefield common as their private comms freq, even if that wasn't expressly what the frequency was for.
"Any station, any station, this is Mako Three Zero Charlie." And he waited alone in the dark.
It's nearly impossible for the average human to understand the implications of true abandonment. The worst thing for a soldier is to be left on the battlefield, and that is exactly what happened to John. At this point, John Chapman was essentially a grunt, the basic individual battlefield element in combat. The distilled essence is kill or be killed, and his extensive specialized training, while not negated, was much marginalized. All the men on the mountain—Al Qaeda, SEALs, himself—were simply soldiers in the classical sense, fighting as soldiers have always done, in sweat, in cold, in fear, and in determination. The overriding imperative was their commitment to their comrades they lived and fought alongside.
And the one _absolute_ of combat among soldiers is: _Never_ leave a comrade behind or to the enemy. Heroics, courage, cowardice...These things can vary, even within an individual, depending on the circumstances and the day. It's a concept difficult for civilians to understand. To them, a soldier soldiers on, rising to an occasion to perform some act of heroism when called for. But the truth for men in combat is the opposite. Courage is nothing but the necessity of action when a comrade is in trouble. To _not_ act is cowardice, the opposite of the requirement to save one's brothers. Invariably, those awarded medals for courageous acts on the battlefield view their actions as "Just doing my duty. They would have done the same for me." This is most acute in the face of a friend under fire and threat of capture by the enemy.
Yet now, the unbreakable rule had been broken. For men who are willing to fight and contend with the fear of capture by an enemy whose objective is to torture and _then_ kill their captives, abandonment by their brothers is tantamount to a mother who abandons her child. It strains credulity. To the individual—child or soldier—this new reality comes crashing through the mind's barriers. "This can't be happening." One can only imagine the impact on Chapman when the realization of abandonment hit home.
* * *
Three kilometers away, Jay Hill also sat freezing on a 10,000-foot peak, with his friend and Delta team leader, Kris. Despite the cold, Jay was busy. Extremely busy. On his mountaintop OP, his radios were arrayed around him, each within grasp. Now entering their fourth nonstop day observing Al Qaeda positions, he'd been up for the last seventy-two hours straight. No sleep and the constant cold were a fierce combination in an endless struggle deep inside enemy territory.
Earlier in the night, they were shocked to watch as Mako-30 made its undeclared insertion attempt directly onto Takur Ghar. "From my position I had good vis [visibility] on their summit. We were surprised they went in there, we didn't know beforehand.
"It was busy at our location too. We were getting mortared, but I'd just laid down from being up for three days straight. When the mortars came in, the [Delta] guys picked up my radio and were talking to a flight of B-52s who were checking in. I woke up and heard them and told them, 'Hey guys, you gotta get off the radio. Let me do that, that's _my_ job. You guys keep eyes on and provide security.' They were using the laser rangefinder to coordinate, but had the wrong coordinates for strikes, so I got up and worked it. But I don't want to give the wrong impression. It was a team effort. I needed to double-check coordinates for the calculus, then plot it on the map. We were using FalconView on a Toughbook at the time and a 1:24 map to cross-reference. It was all pretty dicey compared to how we do it now."
Two hours later, Juliet Team had been stunned to watch a second MH-47 fly onto Takur Ghar, a location Juliet had passed during their infil, choosing instead their current peak, nearly as high but unoccupied. "We'd pulled up to that spot and realized it was a great location to observe the valley. We were gonna use it, but it's got bad dudes all over it." That night on Takur Ghar, "you could see the helos going in and see flashes of gunfire. RPGs. I could see the bonsai tree, but not the base of it."
Jay was working on the net, talking to Andy and Hotaling, sharing information and air assets, when he heard Chapman call the first time. He didn't know where Chapman was calling from, but knew it was his fellow 24 STS teammate; he recognized Chappy's voice. And no one else used the Charlie suffix, so it wasn't the SEALs of Mako-30.
"Mako Three Zero Charlie, this is Yankee Uniform Three, go ahead." YU3 was Jay's call sign on J Team, one of the few CCT call signs not to use a _C_ suffix. He was rewarded only with static. With no response from Chapman, Jay returned his attention to his own tasks.
Over the air a few minutes later, it came again: "Any station, Mako Three Zero Charlie."
"Go ahead Three Zero Charlie." Nothing but static. Jay checked his radio in the dark, something he could do by feel. It was configured correctly. Chapman was calling on a battlefield common UHF frequency, one used for non–fire control or emergencies to communicate among friendly US SOF.
Of the transmissions, Jay said, "His voice was...He was struggling to get words out. He was stressed, you could hear it in his voice. You knew it was him. Besides just his voice, only Controllers used the 'Charlie' suffix."
* * *
It's impossible to say what John felt on Takur Ghar in the moment of realization that he was completely alone. Fear surely, and pain and shock were already gripping his body. But determination must have compelled him. When he got no reply to his transmissions, he likely worked through the mechanics of his radio equipment one component at a time—the radio first, then his comm cord, connecting it to his headset, and finally the earpiece and mike. He tried calling multiple times but must never have heard Jay's responses, for reasons unknown. He gave up on his radio for the moment. He was getting colder from blood loss. All he had worn for warmth was a thin layer of black Capilene liners for his legs, a lightweight green fleece top, and his desert camo pants and blouse. His feet were warm in wool socks and leather heavy-duty Asolo hiking boots, and he had gray, loosely-weaved fingerless gloves on his hands, but without body armor or a helmet, his torso and head were suffering from exposure. His PVS-15 NVGs were mounted on a padded bracket, universally referred to by the guys as the "fucked-up head harness," which allowed the goggles to be worn without a helmet but was uncomfortable and awkward with its pads and straps.
His MBITR was connected to a single-ear headset with a boom-type mike for speaking. To transmit, he merely needed to push a button with his index finger and the programmed frequency would send the signal. Only now, he was receiving no response.
At least his M4 was working. That was critical. It had a reflex-style sight as well as an AN/PEQ-2 laser—the same pointer Slab had seen moving just before the SEALs retreated—and a suppressor, not that suppression mattered. It would provide no masking of his location at this range, which raised a question: Did the Chechens and Uzbeks know he was here?
As Chapman took stock of his situation, two Al Qaeda fighters were moving upslope in his direction along the ridge below, but their sights were set on the SEALs sliding down the cliff face. They slowly encroached, attempting to gain a view of the Americans. If they could get over the top, they'd be able to strike at them.
Slab and the other SEALs were still only fifty meters from Chapman, but he had been cast from their thoughts. Their focus was survival. Without the Combat Controller, Slab was forced to break out his MBITR and work through the presets to find the fire direction net frequency.
Turner, overhead in his gunship, had been watching the calamity unfold, powerless to help and not able to reach Chapman or the team as the "firefight in a phone booth" unfolded five thousand feet below. In the back of the AC-130, Staff Sergeant Chris Walker sat in the "sensor booth"—essentially a room built into the right side of the fuselage opposite the 25mm GAU-12 Gatling cannon, 40mm Bofors, and M102 105mm howitzer. As the low-light-level TV operator (LLLTV), he was responsible for illuminating targets covertly in the dark. The images could be amplified to produce a clear battlefield picture even without moonlight. He was joined by three others, the infrared (IR) system operator, an electronic warfare officer, and an observer. They sat in a claustrophobic row. Together, with both pilots and a fire control officer on the flight deck, they saw everything that happened on the ground below.
When Slab raised Grim-32 on the radio, the aircrew was relieved to find someone, anyone, to talk to. Now they could get down to business, doing what no other fire support platform in the world could—orbit a friendly force surrounded by hostiles and turn back the tide.
The first thing Slab called for was the Quick Reaction Force. With his request relayed, Slab turned his attention to the gunship's weapons, telling Turner, "We're kind of hiding on the edge of a little precipice. I know how to call for fire and I know I'm danger close, but I'm telling you I need the fire now." He went on to describe the peak.
"There's no friendlies up top?" asked the leery pilot. Only two days earlier, Turner's gunship had been involved in the friendly-fire incident with Blaber and Haas's convoy. He was not about to repeat history. The SEALs had by now turned on an IR strobe, which Walker clearly identified on his screen. Walker could also see the SEALs.
"No," replied Slab. Neither he nor the gunship had any idea Chapman was now moving under the tree just below the summit. And Chapman, no longer on the fire direction frequency, had no idea he was now in greater peril from his compatriots than from Al Qaeda.
"I want guns on two big clusters of trees up there. Only two are up there near a big rock. You got the strobe?" Meaning his own location.
"Yeah, I got the strobe." Thirty seconds later, the gunship put several rounds down on the summit and asked the SEAL for corrections, but Slab had no means of observing where the rounds were impacting. With the SEALs unable to adjust their fire, the gunship was shooting blindly. Chapman, sheltering below the bonsai tree, remained crouched in the bunker as the mountain exploded around him.
On the ridge above and just south of the SEALs, the two Al Qaeda fighters continued stalking the Americans. Another fighter remained on the point of the rock fin, watching the two "brothers." He was safer in his rock position, observing the events unfold.
In the gunship, the copilot asked Slab, "Do you have anybody to your south?"
"No. I have all my guys."
"I have two or three guys moving to the south."
"They are not mine."
"Roger."
A 105mm howitzer round exploded on the rocky fin's farthermost point, destroying the rock outcropping and vaporizing the observer.
"They aren't moving anymore," came the gunship's simple assessment.
The two stalkers, a mere 150 feet from the detonation, changed their minds, withdrew from the ridgeline, and moved into a small collection of rocks just below Razor-04's landing site. One of them, an Uzbek, had on Roberts's desert camo Gore-Tex pants, which he'd rifled out of the dead SEAL's rucksack. The two were soon joined by another, who came up the draw by himself. There they discussed what should be done. The Americans may have retreated but they still possessed immense firepower in the form of the AC-130 that could be heard droning relentlessly overhead. The summit was taking a pounding beyond Bunkers 1 and 2, and the jihadists could do little during the onslaught but wait and pray to Allah.
A few kilometers in the opposite direction, Combat Controller Ben Miller and Mako-21 were observing the chaos. With the obvious fight unfolding a scant distance away, they were anxious to get into it. Ben made repeated requests on their behalf, stating Mako-21 "is about seven klicks west of current situation" and able to assist if only headquarters "can send a helo their way." Pete Blaber, now mobile in the valley below, monitoring a number of troops in contact, and with a clear view of the mountain, listened patiently. Eventually he told the team, "Hold what you got." Al, the team leader, had to quell a near mutiny by the other SEALs, who felt their place was in the battle. "Blaber wouldn't let us leave our mountain." But Blaber knew the CSAR helicopter would be on its way, and it was impossible to generate another to move the men, who weren't equipped for a sustained gunfight the way Gabe, Keary, Jason, and the Rangers were, with multiple heavy machine guns, ammunition, and grenades. Mako-21 was also not even close to its own objective and was struggling in the frozen terrain. They'd already passed J Team's resupply to the 101st for delivery instead of taking it themselves. With their own mission a long way off, they needed to focus.
* * *
A distressed Chapman repeatedly called out on his radio, each time heard four klicks away by Jay, who responded immediately every time. Chapman either never received the replies or couldn't hear them under the fire of the gunship. However, John must not have been monitoring the AC-130's fires net or he would have made himself known to the aircraft. Jay was increasingly concerned for his friend; the gunship was churning up the mountain. "On our OP we were talking [about what was happening on Takur Ghar]. Everyone agreed there were two elements on the mountain. You could hear Slab on the FDO [fire direction frequency] talking to Grim. And Chapman was on either LOS or another freq."
In his bunker, John continued to bleed. The pounding by the AC-130 was terrifying, and he knew, better than others, that if a 105 round hit his position, he'd be obliterated. Intermittently, he reached out to raise someone, anyone, on UHF without success. His attention was diverted by the enemy, who now knew he was there. Their intentions were announced by an RPG exploding against Bunker 1's upper berm a few feet above his head, showering him with dirt. With a blast kill radius of several meters, he survived only because most of the detonation was deflected over his head, yet it still damaged his ears and left them ringing. Okay. They knew he was here. Ironically, it was likely the unwitting gunship and its rounds ravaging the summit that had prevented a rush by the Chechens and Uzbeks. To allay any doubt about their understanding of the situation, a grenade tossed from Bunker 2 exploded between the combatants. Using his PEQ-2, John fired his weapon over the top of the berm and hunkered down lower, while the Al Qaeda in Bunker 2 continued to pound his position repeatedly with AK-47 and PKM fire.
Despite the gunship, the mountain was now populated across its upper slopes by additional fighters converging on the Americans. Here and there, pairs and singles of Al Qaeda searched for targets. One of the fighters, the Uzbek who'd taken Roberts's Gore-Tex pants, made a decision. It was obvious an American was in Bunker 1, a fortified position he himself had helped to build and occupy in preparation for the glorious battle he hoped to wage against the Americans. And now, one of the infidels had the audacity to occupy "his" mountain. He began to snake his way upslope at an oblique angle to Chapman's position, using the fire from Bunker 2 as a mask.
Other Al Qaeda knew the Americans were now split, with one group falling down the cliff face the jihadists had avoided, and at least one more in Bunker 1, where the only true firefight was raging on. It drew most of their attention to the beleaguered Combat Controller. As a consequence, it also drew most of the fire, alleviating the pressure on the wounded and retreating SEALs, who continued to slide down the mountain in order to gain distance from the enemy. On the Predator's camera, the unfolding violence was captured silently by its unblinking eye.
John's world became an interminable one-man stand as he fired sparingly, trying to pace his ammo depletion. He was either already too weak from blood loss or thought better of exposing himself to throw any hand grenades. Whatever his reasons, he used none of them. Mortars now rocked his position as well, as the jihadists on the lower slopes lobbed rounds onto the mountain, apparently unmoved by the potential fratricide this might produce. More alone than ever and shaking from the cold and shock, John fought on. He had no choice. Either the SEALs would come back, a rescue force would arrive, or they would not, and he would fire until he was out of ammunition or killed. The SEALs were no longer firing, so they were either dead or had left the summit. Either way, he was alone in this battle.
As he lay there in an enemy trench, the sun slowly crept toward the horizon, chasing the darkness from the mountain. Its deadly illumination was already snatching John's few remaining advantages by laying the predawn twilight at Al Qaeda's feet. He snapped his NVGs, now useless, up onto his "fucking head harness." His watch read 0553, twenty minutes before true sunrise, but that hardly mattered. This high on the mountain it was already light enough to see, for _everyone_ to see.
Overhead, Chris Walker continued to watch the events unfold. Next to him Gordon Bower, as the infrared sensor operator, was working Grim-32's IR system to target the enemy for the pilots. The AC-130H IR system did not pick up infrared strobes like the one John had now activated. Rather, the plane's IR system registered heat signatures only, so that anything warmer than the surrounding terrain appeared as a black outline. The two sensor operators frequently compared inputs to events on the ground, allowing them to form a comprehensive picture. As Walker recalled in his witness statement, "Indications of friendly engagement from within Bunker 1 against the enemy were frequent and consistent. I continued to observe glint tape, strobe lights, muzzle flashes, and IZLID laser movement after 0042Z [the GMT time at which the SEALs retreated from the summit] from Bunker 1."
Those innocuous and sanitized observations failed to convey the carnage on the ground. John Chapman was fighting for his life and losing the battle. He was now marred by shrapnel in his arms and body, his misery compounded by growing weakness as the bleeding in his abdomen continued. "Any station, any station, this is Mako Three Zero Charlie," he tried again in vain. Jay Hill heard the call and responded for the dozenth time, but his transmission never reached John's ear.
A fusillade from Bunker 2, including yet another RPG, seized John's attention. This was followed by an Al Qaeda flanker from his right, across the slope and from below Bunker 2. John quickly dispatched the threat with a few well-aimed shots.
There was no time to regroup in his isolated bunker. Without warning, the Uzbek in Roberts's desert Gore-Tex pants, dyed henna beard, and green Russian camo charged him from the boulder above Bunker 1, firing as he rushed over Roberts's dead body. Fortunately, Gore-Tex Pants was struggling to make ground on John as quickly as he hoped. He was wearing slip-on shoes with no tread, and his progress was slowed by the lack of traction. Still, he was only feet away and firing point-blank at the American. John swung his M4, and from a distance of a mere ten feet, felled the Uzbek with several precious rounds to the chest. The Uzbek dropped like a rock onto his back into a twisted final pose, never to rise again, his lifeless eyes staring skyward. The time was exactly 0600.
John was breathing heavily now, the pain pushed back by true fight-or-flight adrenaline but by no means eliminated. Two rushers attacked in as many minutes. He was now going through ammunition at an alarming pace. Of the seven thirty-round magazines he started with, he was down to only a couple. And unlike the SEALs, he had no pistol secondary.
A lull arrived like a double-edged blessing. True, no one was shooting at him for the moment. But huddled in the bottom of the dirty narrow trench, surrounded by frozen bloody snow and dead bodies, John was now more alone than ever. Seconds felt like minutes. Time stretched, the pain dragging it out. An eternity. With no options, he waited.
Four minutes passed. He tried another unsuccessful radio call. How many did that make? He'd lost count.
The threats all seemed to come from above and his left and right, certainly the heavy machine-gun fire. What John didn't realize was, while the first flanker charged from the right and Gore-Tex Pants had been approaching from the left in preparation for his own assault, another lone gunman was making his way upslope.
Silently the stalker advanced. Seeing his two "brothers" fall to the man in the bunker, he decided another rush assault was inadvisable. Clearly the American, armed with an M4 by the sound of its report, was deadly with his weapon. Stealth was called for. Sporadic fire from Bunker 2 directed at Bunker 1 assisted in masking his approach and keeping the American's attention, and so the man pushed forward.
At 0606, the lone gunman arrived below Bunker 1, in precisely the location the SEALs had occupied just before leaving Chapman behind. Who struck first will remain forever unknown, but John engaged the gunman in fierce hand-to-hand combat, his already shrapnel-ridden and bleeding body drastically diminished. The gunman connected with the Controller at least a few times, leaving "blunt-force injuries of the head, neck and extremities," "a contused forehead," and "abrasions of the lips, nose, and cheeks," as noted in the official forensic pathology report.
Somehow, the severely injured Chapman overwhelmed his attacker and killed him, leaving the body at the mouth of the bunker. Exhausted and hyped-up on another rush of adrenaline, he had no time to recover. Bunker 2 launched an even more ferocious attack, firing one more RPG into Chapman's redoubt.
Chapman heard the MH-47's heavy rotors beating the cold clear air in the early morning twilight. He may have even seen the helicopter's approach, though whether he did or not was immaterial. There was only one place the rotor sound of a laden MH-47 laboring up the mountain slopes would be headed: Takur Ghar. A wave of relief surely washed over him as he realized that either Slab, their insertion helo, or headquarters must have initiated the QRF. They were coming back for him. Another reality: With no one else to defend the HLZ, this MH-47 would meet the same fate as the previous two. Though he couldn't have known, this helo was stuffed with Rangers, two Air Force PJs, and fellow Combat Controller Gabe Brown. All totaled, eighteen men. The loss of life, should it fall victim to a fully alerted and prepared enemy with multiple RPG firing positions and heavy weapons, would be catastrophic, the worst in the war to date.
Chapman knew what the enemy wanted. His fighting position, Bunker 1, had a clear view of the helicopter's approach and a direct line of fire where it would set down. As things stood, from their positions higher on the mountain, the enemy couldn't engage the rescue team; they needed his position to place their RPGs. If the Rangers made it to the hilltop intact, the roles would reverse, and Al Qaeda would be the ones in danger of being overrun, not Chapman.
His options were nil. To save the lives of the rescue force sent to save his own, he needed to negate the threat—just as he had done an hour before, saving the lives of his entire SEAL team. If he was to survive, he'd need to somehow climb out of the bunker, battered, bleeding, and severely wounded, and take the fight to the enemy, challenging the jaws of death once more. Remaining static would surely be his demise. He had one weapon and little ammo, but the course of action was clear.
John's commitment to his comrades was clearly evident that morning, and it necessitated rising from the bunker to save the men he didn't know on Razor-01. His actions can best be summed up in a word: brotherhood. And to men in combat, brotherhood is love. There's no difference between the two words. While it's impossible to say if the thought crossed his mind, or even if he recognized it at all in that short moment, his decision to act at this point was surely the embodiment of those two interchangeable words.
At 0611, with a glorious sunrise striking his east-facing bunker, John Chapman, face battered and bloodied, his body wracked with pain, made the bravest decision of his life. He mounted the shrapnel-spattered berm onto the dirty and bloodstained snow, blinking against the blinding rays of the morning sun. If the Chechens and Uzbeks had any questions as to whether the lone American was still alive, he answered them with his first volley, a multi-round burst aimed directly at their PKM, his ejected casings glinting in the morning sunlight as they launched skyward. He emptied the magazine in his M4, then switched mags before dropping prone in the snow in the face of the PKM's response.
A barrage was unleashed on Bunker 1 as Al Qaeda fighters saw the loaded MH-47 making its final approach, seconds from landing. On the far side of the summit, a lone RPG gunner moved into position, while a second RPG warhead was mounted on a launcher inside Bunker 2. Elsewhere across the slopes, fighters continued to converge. Another flank attempt was made from the east.
John slid down the slope on his side with his legs in front of him, stopping just below his bunker and the bonsai tree. With a fresh magazine, he engaged and killed the eastern flanker. But there was absolutely no time to stay in the relative safety of defilade below the tree. Struggling up the rocky snow-covered bank, he turned his adrenaline on the PKM again, firing as he moved, until more AK-47 rounds assaulted him from the east. Staring into the blazing sunlight, he searched for targets, firing rounds in desperation to protect the helicopter now throwing snow from its rotor wash and drowning out the noise of enemy gunfire with the thumping of its mighty turbine engines. John leaned his haggard body against the giant bonsai, using it for protection, methodically engaging any movement on the mountain. There were just too many targets for one man.
More fighters appeared to the south along the ridge like ants from an anthill. The unmistakable sound of an exploding RPG warhead stopped time. Behind John, the giant MH-47 reeled under the impact of a direct hit as the grenade exploded against its right engine, destroying it instantly. The left engine immediately compensated for the loss of power by revving. It was no use. Overloaded and at high altitude, its fate was sealed. The copilot had already been shot in the leg and helmet. Calvert, the pilot, considered making a single-engine descent from the summit but realized he'd never clear the ridge in front of him. He immediately dropped the helo down expertly with a thump.
As the Chinook settled onto the slope, John resumed engaging the Al Qaeda fighters. Dropping prone again, he fired at the most immediate threat to the devastated helicopter, which had yet to disgorge any soldiers or airmen. The fighters along the ridge enjoyed a broadside view of the bird and immediately set about raking it with heavy fire, including more RPGs, killing several Rangers and a crewman instantly. As John fired along the ridgeline, his back was exposed to the concentration of fighters from Bunker 2 and the DShK position.
As the Rangers, PJs, and Gabe Brown began to pour out onto the snow from the helo's ramp, John was raked with fire from behind, several rounds connecting with his legs. Two entered his lower left leg, lacerating his left calf, and another embedded in his heel. His right leg was devastated. One round entered above the kneecap, exiting out the other side a few inches away. Two rounds slammed into his thigh, the first shattering his femur. His body jerked involuntarily with the impact.
Though his body was mangled by small-arms fire and shrapnel, John Chapman battled on, changing out to his last good magazine. The only other he had on him had been shot through on his Rhodesian vest, rendering it useless. He fired at any target he could see along the ridge, unaware of the many enemies converging behind him, focused intently on his back.
One of them, Chechen or Uzbek, took aim at the prone American now in the open and on the ground, an easy target at a handful of steps, and fired two rounds from his AK-47.
John, quite literally firing the last of his ammunition at the enemy immediately in front of him, would have felt the bullets strike home. The tight two-round shot group entered his upper torso close together on their trajectory until connecting with his aorta, exploding the organ and dropping his blood pressure to zero. His ammunition and life expended, John Chapman died. The last images before his eyes closed forever were of blood-spattered rock and snow on a desolate mountain peak, while other men raged around him, fighting for their own lives.
Chapter 22
4 March
0613 HOURS
On his first approach to Takur Ghar, Greg Calvert was concerned about what they were going to find on landing. Both pilots decided to make a pass to assess the situation before committing themselves and the men in back. "During the high-speed pass over the pinnacle, I saw out the right window that there seemed to be several black spots that I said looked like explosive impacts. I also saw flashes from what I assumed was small-arms fire coming from a large rock outcropping and tree at the very pinnacle. That passed off the right side and we dove down over the cliff to regain speed. I did some jinking to make sure that we weren't too easy of a target."
Razor-01, carrying the QRF, may or may not have been an easy target, but one thing was certain: Their landing was not going to be easy. "We came up a draw on the backside of the mountain to stay as invisible as possible to the pinnacle. I picked out a landing area with the big rock and tree at the two o'clock position. Everything from here on out seemed to move in slow motion. On short final, at about 100 feet, I remember thinking, 'Well, this is it, make it a good one,' and put the aircraft in a decelerative attitude." As he looked out the cockpit, trying to judge his final approach, "the whole cockpit seemed to erupt. Although I only heard the aircraft noises, holes started popping through the windscreen and side windows, but I continued the approach. I called out, 'Taking fire from two o'clock' and heard Sergeant Phil Svitak's gun open up on the right side. I felt the 'breeze' of rounds whizzing by me, and my head was 'nudged' several times to the left. Also felt several hits to my chest [body armor]."
Then the situation turned, in the worst possible way for a helicopter pilot. The first RPG slammed into the right side of Razor-01, destroying the engine and sending burning shrapnel slicing through the rear of the fuselage. Calvert "felt the aircraft shudder and nose pitch up and knew by the sound and feel that we lost an engine, although I didn't know which one."
The aircraft was coming down; there was no longer any doubt. Calvert, drawing on over a decade of flying MH-47s, still managed a "near zero airspeed landing." Despite the steep angle of the mountain and lack of control, "[I] felt we made a good, but firm, landing under the circumstances, but the aircraft did not feel stable so I held the controls, knowing that the customers in the back would be offloading while Chuck [the copilot] reached up and pulled back the [power control levers]. That was my first realization that we would not take off again. Chuck reached over, slapped my arm, yelled, 'I'm outta here,' and disappeared out the left emergency exit."
The cockpit was filling with smoke. Flames came out of the instrument and power distribution panels in front of Calvert. Outside, he could see three people firing at them from a large rock outcropping. The pilot grabbed his M4, charged the weapon, and began shooting through the window, while still holding the helicopter stable with his left hand on the cyclic. It was a remarkable display of calm and courage, especially given he was the only one left in the cockpit.
When the helo seemed to finally settle and stabilize, he took his left hand off the cyclic, reached up, and tried to open the emergency exit, thinking, _I've never done this before_. He managed to get it open, kicking the panel free, and it fell to the snow four feet below. Still firing his weapon one-handed, his left arm up in the air, "I felt it slam away from me to the left. I don't know how long I sat there, but I can remember just sitting there staring at my hand. The glove had popped off, inside out, hanging on by just the tips of my fingers. It didn't hurt, and I can remember thinking that [my hand] looked like a lava lamp. Blood was squirting out of it, it had fallen over the side of my wrist, and it glowed." What Calvert didn't realize in his shock: The glowing object was actually a 7.62 tracer round, burning inside his hand.
In the rear of the aircraft, Gabe was sitting in his seat, close to the cockpit and right behind Phil Svitak, the right-door minigun gunner. He felt the aircraft shudder and, even over the whine of the engines and rotors, heard the RPG's detonation. He and Keary made eye contact, "both of us thinking the same thing, 'Here we go!'" The entire troop compartment rocked back and forth just as Svitak opened up at six thousand rounds per minute, projecting a liquid stream of bullets that connected him to the enemy. The M134 made a loud _vrrrrt!_ sound for a second, then abruptly stopped. Gabe watched the aerial gunner slump over his weapon, shot dead from a machine-gun burst that struck him in the chest.
The carnage grew inside the helicopter as the stricken bird settled to the ground. Inside, a Ranger, Specialist Marc Anderson, leader of a two-man M240 machine-gun crew, shouted to his assistant gunner, "Today I feel like a Ranger!" amid the cacophony. His words had no sooner left his lips than he fell dead from rounds fired by unseen assailants, striking him through the paper-thin aircraft skin. As men ran off the back, two others, Sergeant Brad Crose and Corporal Matt Commons, fared no better. The two platoon mates dropped dead only steps from the open ramp, cut down by more machine-gun fire.
Gabe, now on his feet, was waiting his turn to get the hell out of the death trap. Things _must_ be better outside. When Svitak absorbed the full blast of the machine gun, he probably saved the Combat Controller's life, at the cost of his own. There wasn't time to reflect on luck. Gabe hadn't even stepped off the helicopter and he had already seen three men fall. At that rate, all of them would be dead in the next five minutes, and he still had no idea where exactly he was. None of them had maps of the mountain or area, another CSAR curse (there were never maps of the target area, simply because the location was never known until after a crisis occurred). He waited to die or escape the helicopter as the men in front of him attempted to "un-ass" the destroyed helicopter. The time was 0615.
As soon as he stepped off the back, he saw Jason and Keary working on casualties. "They were doing PJ things, treating guys." As the Controller stumbled into the snow, he found himself asking, "What do I need to do? How can I positively affect this?" He took cover at a rock as fire erupted all around him, snow dancing and dirt pitching into the air as rounds struck. Behind him, the helicopter took another RPG round, this time to the nose, but the blast and its concussive force carried all the way to the rear and to Gabe. He looked at his rock, which was only calf height, and took a knee. There was nothing else but snow. He shouted to the closest Rangers, "Who's the team leader?" It sounds odd, "but you have to remember, I'd never met the guy and everybody's wearing the same damn helmet. And it's chaos. I don't know who's dead."
Gabe and Self shared a brief exchange amid the deafening fire as the Rangers were lighting up the hilltop. Above them, the enemy reoccupied Bunker 1. With John Chapman dead, the position opened up new opportunities to plunge fire down on the latest group of infidels to land on their mountain. Even with their own casualties mounting, it was hard to believe their good fortune of a _third_ helicopter, no doubt delivered into their hands, all praise to Allah. And while this one had a larger fighting force, they had the numbers, the high ground, and superior firepower.
With no place to hide and needing to orient himself, take stock of the terrain, and gain control of all the air assets that were surely coming his way, Gabe Brown single-handedly set about changing the enemy's advantages. His immediate call was on the gunship common frequency to the AC-130s he could still hear overhead. "I got hold of Mike Bushe and also [CCT] Joel Hicks, each on different gunships, but both of them told me, 'We have to go,' and they left." So much for gunship support, but it wasn't their fault.
This mission was not going to be easy. "So now I'm trying to coordinate and figure out what's going on. You have to deal with what you've got. Or not got, depending..." One thing seemed obvious: He was not likely to survive in the open. He made a quick scan for better cover, looking to his left at the smoking wreckage of the helicopter, hit by yet another RPG, this one skipping across the tail ramp and down the mountain, confirming _that_ was definitely not the place to go. In front of him, looking uphill, were Rangers and open space, where he saw bodies strewn on the ground. To his right, two more Rangers were fighting furiously. He elected to stay put.
The next crucial call, to get air support, would need to take place via satellite. He set about getting his SATCOM running, calmly erecting his satellite antenna, connecting it to his PRC-117 radio, and immediately making comms with Champ-20, the TF-11 fire support call sign, whose job it was to obtain and push aircraft to the Combat Controller. Gabe's call sign was Slick-01, and Slick had just become the number-one priority of America's entire war effort, holding the lives of everyone on the mountain in his handset.
Aircraft were already being diverted to him by Champ. The first to arrive were F-15 Strike Eagles. Their presence wasn't going to be enough. Before he (or any CCT) called in airstrikes in a dynamic and chaotic crisis, he needed to ensure his air support did not hit any friendlies. It took precious minutes to determine there were SEALs nearby (the remainder of Mako-30) but not on top of the mountain. Satisfied striking the rock and bonsai tree above his position posed no threat to the closest friendlies, he started the lengthy process of "talking on" the pilots to his location. With Gabe and the Rangers so close, they weren't willing to drop bombs...not yet. However, anything to keep the enemy suppressed would help and, possibly, save lives immediately. But "the F-15s had never done gun runs like this. Their cannons were designed for air-to-air engagements, and they had to start their runs from 20,000 feet, using a much steeper than acceptable angle. They did it anyway. The pilots really stepped up their game. During my entire day and night of calling CAS, I only had to call two 'Knock it off's' [aborts]. It was amazing, really."
* * *
Back inside the helicopter, Calvert was looking out the side of his cockpit to the snow below and suddenly decided that it didn't seem like such a good idea to drop onto the ground below on the same side as the enemy fire. He pushed into the rear after his flight gear got hung up on his seat. He hollered at the closest medic, the helicopter's own Cory Lamoreaux, "I'm hit!" just as the RPG round Gabe had seen struck the nose. The medic's garbled response didn't make any sense until he very clearly heard him shout, "Take your fucking helmet off!" He tumbled into a heap near several others as he took off his helmet, and Cory began to work on him, applying a tourniquet to stem the blood loss. "I remember thinking how big and purple my hand looked. And I was pissed because they had shot off the new watch my wife had sent me." Calvert looked at the spent tracer round protruding from his hand. "I don't know why, but I pulled it out and put it in my sleeve pocket." He then watched Cory put an IV in his arm, followed by Jason trying to put an oximeter on his finger to measure the oxygen levels in his blood, only to find it wouldn't work. Frustrated, Jason discovered one of the wire leads had been severed by a bullet. The PJ tried to put a pressure sleeve on the IV bag to increase the fluid's flow rate but discovered it, too, had been shot. Calvert remembers seeing Svitak and wondering why the two medics weren't working on him. He looked up at them and recalls, "We were still taking rounds through the aircraft, but Cory and Jason were still up and moving around. I told them to 'Get the hell down, we can't afford to lose you guys.'"
They eventually moved the pilot out of the aircraft, placing him alongside other wounded crewmen. "Cory, Don [the third pilot], and Jason would alternatively work on us and fire back at the enemy that were now firing from the six o'clock of the aircraft, behind a large rock and what looked like a large bonsai tree. I wanted my M4 back, but somebody had already taken that."
Meanwhile, Gabe was getting multiple aircraft support. "I had [F-]15s, 16s, you name it. Then Jay comes up on the radio, which was helpful." The two Controllers began shaping the battle together. From Gabe's position on the side of the hill, he couldn't get a good sense of the Al Qaeda defenses above him, their numbers, or locations of fighters. J Team had a clear view looking at it from the north, and from their repeated exchanges, Gabe's challenges slowly came into sharper focus.
As he gained confidence, he began to "walk" bombs onto the mountain. Bunker 1 continued to pour fire down on the QRF. One Ranger had his SAW machine gun shot to pieces in his hands as others were struck down around him.
The SEALs of Mako-30, while not on top of the mountain, remained missing for Gabe. Pinning down their location was critical because more enemy forces would most assuredly converge. Hotaling, 3,200 meters to the south, finally put eyes on the beleaguered remnants of Mako-30. Champ-20 also keyed in on this information and asked him to contact the SEALs. At 0745 Hotaling reported, "Negative contact with Mako. Jaguar [Hotaling] is south of their location. Bombs getting ready to drop [in vicinity] of helo in approx. 30 seconds. Helo on top of hill. Fighter was talking to Slick [Gabe]." From Hotaling's position, he and the Aussies continued trying to find the survivors of Mako-30. Finally, he spotted them and called Champ. "Jaguar reports they are south of the [helo's] location looking up the valley onto the western side of the ridge."
With all friendly positions accounted for, the three Combat Controllers—Gabe, Jay, and Hotaling—began managing all the airstrikes and dominating airspace above the battle raging around Razor-01. To those unfamiliar with exchanges like those between the Controllers, Champ-20, and the strike aircraft, they can appear confusing. Like air traffic controllers, each party uses abbreviated speech, acronyms, and sequencing to convey precise information. The following transmissions come from the battle's official logs and take place over the span of four minutes. These are the only ones that were captured in the record. During the event, the volume of radio traffic was extreme and challenging for even an expert ear to decipher:
AFO [Blaber]: Aussie commander intends to push an element to the 16 88 grid square. Watch the valley to the east, south of Marzak. They will be dropping bombs there.
Champ: Trying to get Mako [-31, Andy Martin] down south to control the fire. [J Team] said they have eyes on the location. [AFO] is going to push the bomber to [J Team].
Jay: Roger. Be advised, friendlies are danger, danger close!
Hotaling: Aussies on channel [frequency] internal freq while moving.
AFO: Need [J Team] to work anything on the whale that comes up.
Jay: Roger.
Champ to Gabe: Slick 01, you got a Wild Fire above you that is armed. You've got 13 Rangers at the base of the mountain. They are working there [ _sic_ ] way up the hill. Have you linked up yet?
Gabe to Champ: Negative. [Have] 4 dead, numerous wounded. Slick 01 going back to work the fighters. [In order to alternate between fire direction frequencies and SATCOM, Gabe recalls: "I was playing the antenna game, switching between SATCOM and UHF line of sight because I only had the one PRC-117 (radio). Every time I did, they thought I'd died because I kept going off the air."]
Hotaling to Champ and Gabe: Slick 01 was working F-15s. Now out of bullets. Two by F-16s now in area. Is Slick good with comms with AC [aircraft]?
Gabe: Yes, F-15s are dead on with their bullets. Bullet runs only.
From Jay's OP, where he was simultaneously dropping bombs on the Whale and keeping an eye on his friend's precarious position, he saw Al Qaeda fighters at the bonsai tree and told Gabe, "Hey, they're still alive. I can see them moving behind that tree. I can see them. One guy, two."
Gabe reported, "Anybody up there. You've got a guy with the high ground. All he has to do is roll over, and pin any one of us trying to run uphill."
Enter Wildfire, the CIA drone mentioned in the transmissions above. Gabe recalls, "Wildfire showed up and he's selling me on this shot on [Bunker 1]." Realizing this shot is going to be no more than fifty meters from the closest Rangers, Gabe discussed it with the team leader, trying to convince him that the bonsai tree was a good point of reference and was a known position, and the Wildfire pilot who, unlike the fighters, had been circling and observing the battle for some time knew what he was doing. "Self [the Ranger team leader] is not about this shot. Didn't want me to take it. But the Wildfire guy is insisting he can take it." A tense minute of consideration and calculation passes for the young Combat Controller who is embroiled in his first gunfight with life-and-death airstrikes. "Finally I tell him 'kill the fucking tree' but I'm thinking, _Holy shit, I hope this works out_. Because of the danger close, back then we were waaaay inside the danger range, I had to give him my initials to authorize it, 'Cleared hot Golf Bravo,' and crossed my fingers. And he hit right in the bunker.
"And that's when we began our transition up the hill."
* * *
At the rear of Razor-01, Jason was rotating among his growing number of patients. Calvert remembers, "Jason was trying to start an IV in my neck but was unsuccessful." Cory, who was working another patient, said, "We'll take care of that later."
Calvert was beginning to feel the accumulated damage to his body. In addition to his arm and the excruciating pain, he'd also absorbed several pieces of shrapnel from one of the RPG impacts. Lying in the snow, strapped to a litter, he faced his body armor toward the enemy and was anything but sure of the day's outcome. "Dirt and snow continued to be kicked up on us from rounds." He passed out several times. When Cory bent over to check him once, "I asked him that if I didn't make it, please tell my family we did a good job that day, and that I love them very much."
"Cut that shit out, we're gonna be off this mountain before you know it," replied the medic, who was glad the pilot continued to engage and remain aware. The time was 1030 and Calvert remembered "hearing and seeing the Predator overhead. [I] could also hear fast movers, but never saw them. It was strangely comforting to hear and feel them strafe close to us."
By then, Gabe was getting saturated by air support, which was a double-edged sword. In order to keep those higher in the command chain informed and reduce the number of times he was switching antennas, he resorted to using Jay Hill and Hotaling as his relays. He also wanted to get the worst of the casualties off the mountain and told Jay he believed he could get a medevac in safely—probably an MH-60 would be best, since their approaches and departures were accomplished significantly faster than the lumbering MH-47s'.
Jay to Blaber: Slick 01 has taken the hill but is [taking] ineffective mortar fire 200 meters east of his position. He feels it is safe to bring in a MEDEVAC at this time.
Blaber: Advise him that ATF is firing mortars [in other words, it is friendly fire].
Jay: Roger. Slick has linked up with the QRF [the thirteen Rangers from the second helo]. Believes personnel 800 meters to the east are enemy. Once he gets MEDEVAC he will direct [strike aircraft] onto location. Slick feels he can secure the HLZ and requests ETA of MEDEVAC.
AFO (backing the man on the ground) to Champ: [AFO] copied transmission. Hill secure, ineffective mortar fire to the east. [Slick] feels safe to bring in MEDEVAC. Linked up with Chalk 2 pax [the second group of Rangers].
Jay: [J Team] advises Slick wants MEDEVAC to come in on top of hill beside crash site. Slick will vector [aircraft] in.
In Bagram and Masirah, where all the "rank" resided, they remained unsure of the ground situation, and compounded their fundamental misunderstanding by relying on the Predator feeds being pumped onto computer monitors through the two TF-11 JOCs. Trebon and his staff were not willing to commit another helicopter and crew to attempt the evacuation. This exchange—Gabe and Self asking for a medevac and TF-11 denying or delaying the request—continued throughout the entire mission.
As the day wore on, Gabe continued his onslaught while using Jay to relay information, occasionally handing planes off to or receiving them from Hotaling, who was bombing Al Qaeda positions to the south.
To Calvert, this very personal firsthand experience of close air support was new. As a helicopter pilot he'd never been on the ground with troops before, and what he was experiencing for the first time was similar to everyone else on the hill. The "danger close" aspects of Gabe's airstrikes were unlike anything seen by the men on the mountain, including the Controller. Imagine standing on a point, then throwing a Frisbee the distance an average adult can manage. Frisbee distance does not produce the standoff measurement one hopes to be from a 500-pound bomb when it explodes. Consider, still, that this lethal delivery is provided courtesy of a twenty-eight-year-old pilot flying a fighter jet at 500 mph using a joystick. These considerations do not make being on the mountaintop, mere feet away from detonation, desirable, unless one has supreme faith in the pilot and the Combat Controller.
"We would hear [Gabe] yell 'thirty seconds to impact,' not knowing what that meant at first, but realized it when the first bomb hit. The whole world seemed to shake. It was like the earthquakes at Bagram [the city experienced a 7.4-magnitude quake the day before, killing 150 people across the torn country], but more violent. It seemed to me at the time that I could see the bombs coming in, screaming across the sky. I can remember saying to Chuck that I hoped these guys were good, because the bombs seemed to go right across my vision and hitting close."
He had no idea just how close the skilled CCT was cutting it until "I remember watching the rock and bonsai tree. When the bombs hit, I saw bodies flying, and dirt and shrapnel fell around us. That felt good to me. After the noise subsided, I could hear screaming from behind the rocks." But Calvert and the men around him were not free from danger. Their hilltop redoubt was being assaulted from multiple directions. The summit had merely been _one_ of the enemy pockets. Even with the addition of more Rangers, the possibility of being overrun remained a threat as the casualties continued to mount.
Rounds were impacting all around Calvert and the others who lay prone at what had become the casualty collection point. There was no safe place to put the injured. "We could actually see them firing at us. I yelled to Cory and Jason, who were up on their knees working on us still, to 'get down or get the hell out of there.'" The two trained lifesavers ignored him...and their constant exposure to enemy fire finally caught up with them a moment after Calvert shouted his warning. Both men were hit by the same burst of fire. "I watched them both fall over, and when they didn't move, I thought they were dead." Eventually Cory stirred and managed to check his own injuries. He'd been shot in the belly, twice. "It felt like someone hit me as hard as they could with a sledgehammer," recalled the father of two who, as he came around, felt it was manifestly unfair to his children that he was going to die on this mountain. Jason lay still, his injuries grave. As Cory checked him, he realized his fellow trauma expert was bleeding heavily internally; his pelvis was in pieces from the round that shattered it. It was now 1130.
The airstrikes continued throughout the day. From his new perch on the top of the mountain, Gabe found some company in the form of a dead Chechen. "He was this little brown dude in a Rastafarian hat, clutching his weapon, crumpled up next to me, up to his knees in snow. I tilted his hat back and, holy shit, a perfect head shot from one of the Rangers. And so I spent the day with that guy. It was the best vantage spot I had."
1217: Gabe to Champ: Currently working Scarface 11 [two F-16s], but he is unable to drop JDAMs. He has to go refuel.
Champ: Champ will go to Bossman [AWACS circling overhead] and get more CAS.
1310: Champ to Gabe: Do you have comms with any CAS [strike aircraft]?
Gabe: Roger. Talking to Stone 31 at this time.
Champ: Be prepared to receive Snake 41 [carrier-launched F-14s] after this.
1330: Champ to Jaguar 12: [J Team] just completed bombing run with B-1. [Now] observing eastern ridge. Need Jaguar to continue to push suppression on the south.
Hotaling: Jaguar 12 copies all and will standby this freq.
1420: Gabe to Champ: Slick 01 advises total pax to exfil is 33 and that the 2 casualties that were on the HLZ prior [Roberts and Chapman] may be booby trapped. 6 total patients: 5 litter, of those two urgent surgical, 3 priority, 1 routine. 6 KIA, includes 2 found on LZ.
Champ: Champ will pass info to hospital and medical so they will be ready. Let the boys know we are going to take care of them. We will pass this off to the [exfil rescue] commander. They still haven't had authority to launch.
Gabe: Slick would like to keep CAS coming to keep enemy off [our] backs.
1440: Hotaling to Champ: Jaguar observed no scattering of troops. [Will] continue to work southern targets and to the west.
Champ: When we get to H-hour [the extraction of Gabe, the Rangers, and casualties], we want you to go to Bossman and get CAS and split it between you and Slick. [To] help prep the area before the Apaches come in from the north and west. Suppress the ridgeline and valley on their way in.
Hotaling: Jaguar copies all.
1456: Champ to Gabe: You are having a two ship of fighters being pushed to you. Right now [J Team] has them because they are receiving mortar fire.
Gabe: Roger.
1607: Hotaling to Champ: Jaguar will take care of C2 [command and control] tent and truck location. Slick is too busy with troops in contact. Don't know if Slick has enemy contact, just that he is busy with CAS overhead. Need to confirm no friendly [positions] within 1.5 km of target.
Champ: Roger.
1758: Jay to Champ: [J Team] wants a 400 by 1000 meter box of bombs to be dropped vicinity WB177914 to get rid of some pesky mortars.
Champ: Champ verifying no friendly pax in the box.
As the day wore on, Gabe continued his attempts to convince TF-11 to send them a medevac to get the critically wounded out. By 1800, Captain Self also called Champ, stating: "KA16R [Self's call sign] requesting through Champ to bump up exfil time. If not, [am] sure two critical will die." Champ's consistent response: They are working it.
Unfortunately, the "golden hour," so called because if a casualty is treated within the first sixty minutes, his chances of survival are more than doubled, had long since passed. Matt LaFrenz, the Ranger medic, was now treating Jason as best he could since Cory had lapsed into incapacitation. Calvert, himself in severe shock and shivering in the cold darkness that had enveloped them, watched and recalled, "I can remember them working on Jason, and then announcing he was dead. Heard the anger in Matt's voice, telling Captain Self that we had lost another man. I can remember saying a prayer for Jason and his family."
At 1814, Self got on the radio to Champ and confirmed all sensitive items (communications equipment) were zeroed on Razor-01, meaning it was now clean to be abandoned when the QRF and casualties were extracted, adding flatly at the end of his transmission, "KIA numbers to seven." Jason Cunningham, the young PJ so focused on learning all he could to treat and save others, became the last man to die on Takur Ghar.
When the extraction helicopters finally began to arrive, the first landed at 2016, two hours after Cunningham had passed away. That first helo, another TF-160 MH-47, bore the wounded for their long flight to Germany and then home.
The second, and last, exfil helicopter arrived at 2027. Gabe handed CAS control over to Dave Smith, another CCT from the 24, who had flown in on the helicopter. "I did a handshake with the two-four operator. I briefed him on 'Here's where we're taking fires.' He asked me if I had any spare batteries. I just laughed. 'No.'"
The second MH-47 carried the dead who'd been staged on the top of the mountain to await transportation, including Chapman and Roberts. Remembers Keary Miller, "We were concerned that the bodies might be booby-trapped so the Rangers initially moved them with ropes." It took the PJ some time to discover one of the bodies was his 24 Green Team teammate, a shock to the veteran operator because "we were told there was only one American on the mountain going in, and when we finally got on top, in addition to John the enemy were also wearing some of Roberts's [American] clothing." With the dead went the remainder of the original Rangers and Gabe. As he trudged up the ramp, exhausted, emotionally drained yet still amped up, he remembers vividly, "We had to climb over the dead bodies, stacked like wood, in a weird way, which have a certain smell, and it's combined with the fuel smell of helicopters. I was sitting farthest to the rear." His brain was still on. "I was mentally preparing myself. 'If we go down, I'm going to have to start this again.' Preparing my equipment, ready to execute if we get shot down again. In my mind, it was a bit like being back at Combat Control School, 'Are we done yet?'"
* * *
Ten time zones away, in Fayetteville, North Carolina, it's a mild and sunny March morning. The East Coast grass is already coming to life, introducing patches of green to its winter brown. Valerie Chapman has just dropped off five-year-old Madison at kindergarten, having deposited her younger sister, Brianna, at preschool. She stops at the office where she works as a nurse doing in-home care. At her desk, she dials the 24 and gets an admin person. They exchange pleasantries and Val asks for John's new mailing address, because she has a package to mail him. With address in hand, she hops in her green family minivan and heads to her first appointment.
By lunch, she's headed to a simple case, short-term wound care. Much easier than some of her other housebound patients, this one is the father of her supervisor. Val was assigned him because her boss knows she will do a good job. She sits on the couch and looks over the wound; nothing serious. In the background, he has his TV tuned to Fox News. They both see the ever-present BREAKING NEWS banner at the bottom. This particular one announces SIX TO SEVEN SPECIAL FORCES SOLDIERS WERE KILLED TODAY IN COMBAT OPERATIONS IN AFGHANISTAN'S HEAVIEST FIGHTING TO DATE.
Valerie and her patient, a veteran, read the banner, but no other information comes from the talking head. She thinks, _Gosh, I feel bad for those Army families_. A sad thing, they both agree. Her duties complete, she reverses the process, retrieving the girls from school, and heads home to make dinner.
Chapter 23
4 March
LATE AFTERNOON
Combat Controller Jeff George had just arrived in Bagram at the TF-Blue JOC. He and his SEAL troop had finished conducting blocking point operations and were standing by as additional QRF in support of other operations underway in Kandahar, several hundred miles to the south. The missions weren't particularly fruitful, and the men had returned to base looking for more work.
As he rolled into the SEAL operations center on 4 March, it was clear something big was going down. Outside, Captain Kernan, the SEAL Team Six commander, was on an Iridium satellite phone talking with Vic, who was by then on the lower slopes of Takur Ghar with Slab and the other surviving members of Mako-30. "You could see the stress he was under in his face and posture. He was clearly out of his element but trying to make sound decisions. The guy was maxed out," Jeff recalls.
Inside was charged pandemonium. Brigadier General Trebon was technically in charge, but the TF-Blue TOC was wholly a SEAL Team Six affair. It was the general's presence that made it a higher headquarters—TF-11, but the SEALs were running the show.
Jeff and his teammates were put on notice for the possibility of being the QRF to the QRF on Takur Ghar. He recalls, "We're waiting for word that we're going to go or for the situation to sort itself out. As the day went on, information began to trickle in. Then word comes that there's casualties and some KIAs, but we're not going anywhere."
He wandered in and out of the TF-Blue TOC as day turned to dusk and then into evening. "Meanwhile, we're waiting for helos to bring the guys back." Finally, word came that the first helo was inbound. Jeff was helping with the transloading of wounded when the second helicopter landed carrying Gabe and the bodies of those killed in action. The deceased were collected by some of the 24 and 23rd STS PJs in Bagram for forward movement to Germany and then Dover Air Force Base, Delaware, where all KIA US service members are received and prepped before being released to their families.
Ross, one of the SEALs and a friend of Jeff's from mobility troop, approached the twenty-seven-year-old Controller and cut right to the heart of the matter. "Sorry, man. Chappy's one of the guys."
"I was the first Air Force guy to learn," he recalls of hearing about his friend and fellow 24 CCT. Shortly afterward, the Rangers were looking for someone from the 24. Jeff was the only one nearby when one asked him, "Who's taking care of this?" The Ranger was holding a green aviator's kit bag, the ubiquitous military two-foot-square canvas carryall, which held all of Chapman's gear. Everything had been stripped from his body by medical personnel, with the exception of his uniform. Jeff took the kit bag and headed toward the 24 "hooch" area, where John's cot and personal items remained, just as he'd left them forty-eight hours before. Unlike most operators' living areas, Chapman's—a cot with a low row of unfinished wood shelves and a small card table for a nightstand/desk—was neatly arranged. On the stand were several pictures of Madison and Brianna.
Inside the bag, Jeff looked at the final artifacts of the Controller's life. His weapon, which had absorbed multiple rounds, was junked. His Rhodesian vest was shredded, clear signs of struggle, and was covered in blood. Inside the vest was a full magazine, useless. It had been shot through by one of the AK rounds that killed or wounded his friend. He set the bag down with the rest of his friend's belongings and, with nothing more to do, left the muddied and bloodied vestiges of John Chapman, the photos of his daughters standing sentinel over them.
* * *
At home in North Carolina, Valerie and John's tiny sentinels are settling in for the evening on 5 March. Outside, she checks her mailbox and encounters her neighbors, Laverne and Roger. "They were this older couple, a sort of mom and pop we were very close to, and Laverne said, 'You have this different aura about you,' and I'm thinking, _Okay, not sure what that means_. But I didn't feel anything was 'different.'" Infinitely practical and not prone to superstition, she bids farewell and sets about her evening. The nearly complete family has an ordinary dinner, and by 9:00 p.m. the girls are in bed, when the doorbell rings. Both of them, excited by the distraction and the possibility of putting sleep off a bit, rush to the door, shouting, "Who's that?"
"Daddy's friends," calls their mother, stepping in from another room. But Valerie can see blue uniforms through the sidelight window, and she knows what's coming. "Go back to bed, girls," she tells them, and the two scamper off in knee-length nightgowns, trailing blond and brown curls.
At the door, she braces herself, opens it, and steps outside so the girls won't hear. On the doorstep stood Lieutenant Colonel Ken Rodriguez, the 24 commander, Master Sergeant Kenny Longfritz, the unit's first sergeant (whose job is the welfare of and assistance to unit members and their families), and an Air Force chaplain.
"Please tell me he's just hurt badly," she implores. But Rodriguez shakes his head and asks if they can come inside. Valerie tells them to wait on the porch while she calls the neighbor to have them collect the girls first. They stand uncomfortably over the prolonging of their grim task.
When the girls had been spirited away, the three men step inside and everyone sits down. Without preamble, Rodriguez speaks the words every wife dreads: "Valerie, I'm sorry, John's been killed in combat." This is not the Air Force–approved script, which is explicit in its delivery and simplicity, but on the way to the house, Rodriguez had been hit by a realization that directed how he would proceed. "This news was going to change the lives of all three girls irrevocably, and the process, starting with the news, was about helping Val and the girls as best I can...if at all. The last thing I was going to do was deliver some bureaucratic bullshit."
Sitting on her couch, leaning toward Rodriguez and looking directly at him, she asks, "What happened? I want to know." She knows his answer will avow that life as she knows it is over...forever.
Rodriguez, a deeply religious and emotional man, said, "I'll tell you everything I know, including classified information. What I know so far is John's actions were very selfless and likely saved the lives of members of his team," and went on to recount what he knew at the time, which wasn't everything—not yet.
Valerie, alone in her own home with three messengers of death, absorbs the information and asks a few more questions as they wait for another member of the 24 to arrive. Alex Johns was John's friend and fellow Controller, and would serve as Valerie's family liaison officer, whose job was to see to the widow's needs throughout the repatriation, funeral, and subsequent memorials. Alex would virtually live with Valerie and the girls for the next few weeks, only going home for the occasional shower and change of clothes.
Before Rodriguez and Longfritz depart, the commander asks, "Is it okay if we pray together?" The compassionate gesture is completely outside notification protocol, but in that moment and without reservation, Rodriguez felt it was exactly what to do. His instincts proved correct when the two of them, one burdened with immense loss, the other with the obligation to deliver the message, dropped to their knees in prayer. In that moment, Valerie and Rodriguez, two people, relative strangers bonded by death, began an unlikely and lifelong friendship.
* * *
Back in Bagram, Gabe Brown arrived at the 23rd STS area on a different part of the former Soviet airbase from the 24 and TF-Blue forces. His first thought was to place a call to his wife, Gloria. "It was a quick call. I told her I was in a series of bad situations that were significant events for me, but that I was okay," he recalls with understatement. His deployed commander, Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Pihana, managed to produce a bottle of whiskey and waited to have shots with Gabe and Keary. Gabe did a single shot and went to bed, exhausted. The next day, he recalled a conversation he'd had with Jason Cunningham in the week leading up to Takur Ghar. "We were walking, bored one day, throwing rocks toward this minefield and joking about how maybe we could set one off," when the PJ mentioned, almost in passing, "My daughter [four-year-old Kyla] had a dream and told me, 'Daddy, Daddy, you're going to get shot and die.'" Even as Cunningham lay bleeding out and dying, Gabe recalls, "I still believed he'd pull through. I'm a hopelessly optimistic guy." The entire experience—the mission, Jason's death, and his little girl's dream—left Gabe feeling "ready to go home and see my family. I'd had a part to play; did it well. Could have done better. But feel I was the right guy at the right time. I was glad I was there. It all goes back to how I grew up and became a part of this thing [CCT]."
Operation Anaconda was considered to be a failure by most measures. No fleeing masses of Al Qaeda fighters were smashed by the hammer of Commander Zia's ATF against the 10th Mountain and 101st Airborne anvil. For the men of AFO, though, it was a solid success. In the end, they were responsible for the majority of the killing. The Pentagon estimated the number of enemy killed was upwards of 800. This figure is almost certainly spurious. Based on captured documents, enemy intercepts, and physical evidence, a more likely figure is between 150 and 300. In General Trebon's estimation, the thirteen men of Blaber's AFO were responsible for 60 percent of enemy casualties, but the TF-11 commander's estimation leaves out an important calculus: The vast majority of those enemy numbers can be attributed to five men—Jay Hill, Andy Martin, and, once the battle for the summit of Takur Ghar is included, Jim Hotaling, Gabe Brown, and John Chapman.
The travesty at the end of the operation is the loss of the seven men on Takur Ghar. Those deaths—SEAL Neil Roberts, CCT John Chapman, PJ Jason Cunningham, air crewman Phil Svitak, and the three Rangers, Marc Anderson, Bradley Crose, and Matthew Commons—do not lie at the feet of Delta's Pete Blaber and AFO, but the leaders of SEAL Team Six, specifically Joe Kernan and Tim Szymanski, and their rush to push men into the battle and take over operations from Blaber. But to Blaber, Vic (the SEAL officer in Gardez) abandoning the safe house without coordinating was tantamount to dereliction, and the confusion it caused on the mountain directly resulted in Jason Cunningham's death.
But the losses to Al Qaeda were also significant. There is strong evidence that al-Zawahiri, the number-two AQ leader, was present in the valley, perhaps even wounded with a head injury, but escaped. Tohir Yuldashev, leader of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, also escaped. One other was not so lucky: Saif-ur-Rahman Mansoor, the symbolic guidon–wielding fighter who led his men bravely from the front, was killed. Their failed last effort to stand ground and combat the allied troops en masse did cause an exodus, though the allied victory may have been pyrrhic. Many would return in future battles in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
* * *
From the enemy:
_We begged our commander, Saif-ur-Rahman Mansoor, to allow the brothers to leave the valley. This was the way of the Mujahideen, move away from an enemy that outnumbers and possesses superior weapons. We had no water, my mouth was bleeding, and the sores prevented me from eating my bread. All the Uzbeks were now martyred; the Afghans were all gone._
_Then I received word that our commander was martyred and I began to cry. We tried to get to his body to carry him away but the bombs were too many and the enemy were now everywhere._
_I asked all our brothers to retreat, except the ones manning the PK machine gun and RPG-7 rocket launcher. Brother Abu Talib As-Saudi insisted upon staying and said to me, "I feel ashamed in front of Allah to retreat from the Americans." Due to the heavy bombardment, a large portion of his head was missing, but he joined us as we began our retreat._
_The brothers all dispersed in different directions. I traveled with ten Arab brothers. Due to the increased numbers of Coalition forces blocking the area, as well as the aerial channels the enemy had, we were forced to travel for three days and nights in conditions that were extremely harsh. We had nothing to eat with us, except a case of green tea and a pot in which to boil snow. After this long journey, enduring the cold and the snow, and traveling over mountain peaks and through valleys, we finally reached a village where we received a great welcome, such_ _that it made us forget all that we had suffered and endured, and All Praise belongs to Allah Alone._
Mansoor was killed by Jay Hill in a B-1 bomb strike. J Team had watched the leader through their optics. Recalls Kris, "He was short (5′4″–5′8″), stocky-strong, wore a medium length beard, black hair, carried the banner/flag when it was taken down, and gave hand and arm signals. [Jay] was finally handed a B-1 and ordered a bomb box with 6 JDAMs set on airburst. The bombs scored one direct hit, one near direct hit." They watched the site for signs of follow-up activity, and the next day, "seven enemy in white turbans moved to the destroyed fighting positions and attempted to remove the leader from the wreckage."
AFO had accomplished its mission better than anyone could have expected. For Blaber, it was validation of his method, his men, and their mission. Andy Martin and Mako-31 had slipped out, passing through friendly 10th Mountain force lines and back to Gardez at the very time Chapman was fighting for his life. They woke the next morning to the news of Chapman's and Roberts's deaths.
Two days later, J Team crept off the mountain to end its mission. Jay had called in his last airstrike only an hour or so before they mounted their trusty ATVs and started down the mountainside, now purged of Al Qaeda. Along the way the team paused to examine the cave complex they'd bombed the first morning, from which the Al Qaeda fighters nearly ambushed them. They found two Soviet D-30 artillery pieces, a destroyed 37mm antiaircraft gun, and fire pits inside the surrounding buildings, which were accented with planted trees and rock curbs along the road—signs of a senior AQ leader. In the buildings, they found discarded sleeping bags, fruit juice boxes with Arabic writing, and well-established fighting positions surrounding the compound. Tire tracks led away from the complex, heading east...toward Pakistan.
Having witnessed some of the near-fratricide incidents firsthand, they left in daylight so as to pass through the 101st lines before dark. Jay had secured a P-3 escort, just in case. After dark and their safe passage through friendly lines, they were met by two MH-47s. The exhausted men sat silently on their ATVs, watching the helicopters as they made their way across the valley toward their extraction HLZ. The team loaded onto the helicopters, blades spinning, and were carried above the devastation they'd wrought throughout the valley. They could see the destruction on the features below as they passed on their way back to Gardez, the last of the original AFO teams. All of J Team faced the risks and challenges of Blaber's AFO missions, but only one carried the burden of precision and "no fail" aspects of the destruction of the enemy they faced—Jay Hill, the lone Combat Controller.
For Combat Control, Anaconda exemplified the maturation of a nearly forty-year evolution beginning in the jungles of Laos. Without direction or pre-planning, individual Controllers, some of whom didn't even know one another, established a self-organizing and -directing network that destroyed the most organized and effective force Al Qaeda and the Taliban would ever muster on a field of battle. In all, there were fourteen CCT involved in the operation.
Of the role of CCT in Anaconda and elsewhere, Jay Hill states, "We [Combat Controllers] were the most technically savvy guys out there. We pull our experience from the best in the world: Aussie SAS, British SBS, Delta, ST6, all of them. Nobody else, _nobody_ [emphasis added], has that exposure and experience. None of the units we work with work with each other like that, aside from an occasional bilateral op [operation]. Sometimes, when you raise your hand [during operational briefings], younger SEALs or Delta operators roll their eyes, 'What's the Air Force guy got to say?' But older guys know."
Part III
# Aftermath
Chapter 24
5 March
In Windsor Locks, Connecticut, Terry was in her kitchen pulling meat off a chicken carcass to make chicken soup. At 10:30 p.m., she heard a knock at the front door. No one _ever_ went to the front door. Terry says, "If they knew us, they came to the back door. I went into the living room, flipped on the light, and opened the door. All I could say was, 'No, not my Johnny. Not my Johnny!' I let them in and yelled for my husband Nicholas as I sat on the couch, crying uncontrollably while they read their statement."
Around 10:45, Nick called John's sister Lori. Waking from a dead sleep, she immediately knew something was wrong; _no one_ called her that late. She could hear Terry wailing in the background, and all Nick could muster was, "It's your brother." Lori slammed the phone down, woke her daughter, Rachel, and piled her into the car for the five-minute drive, all the while begging, " _Please_ let him just be injured!" A dark vehicle was pulling away from the front of the house, and she knew. Lori bounded up the back steps, where she was met by her mother. Terry fell into her arms as she managed to shriek through halted speech and a torrent of tears, "Johnny's gone! My Johnny's gone!"
After hugs and tears, Terry said, "We need to tell Kevin and Tammy. I can't. I just can't do it." Lori called her sister, Tammy, in Vermont first because it was late; Kevin was two hours behind. When Tammy answered, Lori asked, "Is David right there with you?" She didn't have to say anything else; Tammy knew. She had seen the news but waited for Lori to continue. "We lost John today." Tammy fell to the floor, where David found her curled into the fetal position.
Rattled, Lori hung up to call Kevin. It was 9:30 Colorado time. When Kevin answered, Lori wasn't as composed as she tried to be and blurted, "I have bad news. We lost John today." She gave him time to absorb her words, but he had collapsed onto the floor, unable to speak. Kevin's wife, Connie, came on the line and, when she heard the news, said, "I have to go. Kevin needs me," and hung up.
The tidal wave of raw pain coursed toward Michigan to an unsuspecting Gene and his wife, Tess. The Air Force notification team had trouble finding their house, so by the time they arrived, Gene and Tess already knew. Gene passed away in January of 2004, but Tess remembers that night vividly. "We were waiting. I don't know exactly why they couldn't find our address, so by the time they came to us, it was already late. They came to the door and they knew we already knew, but they had to tell us anyway. Gene was standing in front of me, and he about...Even though we knew, he still about dropped to the floor."
Starting the next day, and for more than a week following, while the world continued to spin, time moved in slow motion for the Chapman family as they converged on Fayetteville, North Carolina. The 24 held a memorial service in a giant hangar on Pope AFB. The cavernous building was standing room only, filled with a sea of red berets and blue uniforms as Colonel Rodriguez took the podium to speak of John and his bravery in facing "the jaws of death." The audience was spellbound. As the family began meeting many of John's comrades, they started to truly understand the caliber of men John worked alongside; they were cut from the same cloth as he.
Two of those men, Technical Sergeant David Gendron and Staff Sergeant Scott Toner, volunteered to escort John's body from Dover AFB in Delaware to his final resting place in Windber, Pennsylvania. They were honored to flank John on his final mission.
Valerie thought she would move back to Windber to raise her girls near her parents, so she chose to have John buried there instead of in the country's heroes' resting place, Arlington National Cemetery. After the memorial service at Pope, everyone traveled en masse to the small Pennsylvania town. Many of John's childhood friends made the seven-hour drive from Connecticut to say their final "Goodbye." Three of them—Brian Topor, David Wrabel, and Michael Toce—traveled together, laughing, crying, and reminiscing about their time with John. By the time they reached Windber, they had decided that the funeral " _can't_ be it; this _can't_ be forever for John."
Windber, with a population of 4,000, was even smaller than John's hometown, but it had the same "circle the wagons" mentality as Windsor Locks. Word spread quickly that John would be laid to rest there, and townsfolk rallied to welcome his family and friends. As mourners, quite literally, flooded the town, they were greeted by friendly townspeople and American flags lining the streets.
One thousand people passed by John's open casket at William Kisiel Funeral Home while Gendron and Toner took turns standing rigid and solemn next to him. In the outer rooms of the funeral home, and later in the confines of a hotel bar, childhood friends were meeting John's 24 brothers for the first time, and they bonded over memories of Chappy. Countless CCT, family, and friends gathered at the hotel's bar, sharing stories of John, raising a glass, and toasting the nation's newest hero, eventually running the bar dry. Brian Topor was one of the throng, and he remembers, "The night before the funeral, we went to a hotel and a bunch of the guys [from the 24] were there, and that was our introduction to Combat Control, to John's other brotherhood. It was overwhelming for me because these guys were...They're the cream of the crop and they treated us great. The neat part is that these guys are your friends, somebody else's brother, and even though they may be ordinary people, they are _extraordinary_ in what they do. They're a different breed, and I saw in them what I saw in John—he had no fear, he was bright...He was _very_ smart...confident. He wasn't arrogant, he wasn't reckless. Yeah, he took risks, but there's a difference between risky and reckless. He didn't fail." David Wrabel's takeaway from meeting John's 24 teammates was, "It became obvious by listening that he was the exact same Chappy that we knew and loved in childhood."
The next morning, over four hundred people pressed into St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church for John's funeral service, including another sea of red berets. John's younger sister, Tammy, spoke to the congregation about her brother, ending with, "John has always been my hero. Now he's your hero too." There weren't enough tissues to go around as Kevin also spoke about growing up with John, how proud he was of him, and how much he'd miss him. Topor and Wrabel gave the eulogy. "As young kids, we often played Army (or Air Force) and dreamed of one day being Green Berets (or Combat Controllers) and becoming heroes. After we found out John was a member of the 24, we were able to, once again, relive our dreams through him." At the pulpit, Brian recalled, "I remember a conversation I had with him when he spoke of going to Texas for some training. He was always vague when talking about CCT, so when I asked him, 'What kind of training?' he responded, 'Military training.' I always hoped that, after retirement, we'd sit back with a few beers and I could coax more stories from John."
As the miles-long procession serpentined to Saint Mary Byzantine Catholic Church Cemetery, Wrabel recalls, the military's "sense of their community was forever burned in our minds. We saw an elderly man, obviously a veteran, standing in his front yard by his American flag, saluting John as he traveled to his final resting place." People came out to wave flags and show their respect all along the route to the cemetery. As mourners watched the Air Force Honor Guard slowly bring John's casket graveside, a missing-man formation flyover by Air Force A-10 Thunderbolts roared overhead. Valerie sat solemnly in the front row, flanked by Madison and Brianna, as Colonel Rodriguez presented her, in honor of John's sacrifice, with the tightly folded flag that had covered her husband's casket. Gene and Terry sat sobbing as they each accepted the flags he presented, listening to him thank them for their sacrifice. They were officially part of a club no one wants to join and from which there is no escape.
As family and friends passed John's casket for their final farewell, some placed flowers, some placed coins. Terry kissed the casket before turning away. Gene held his hand on top as he silently said goodbye. A handful of John's CCT brothers lingered at his side one last time, not wanting to leave. Those tough, hardened warriors hugged and cried before leaving coins and a beret pin on the casket lid, leaning on each other as they turned away.
John is buried only twenty miles from Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Shanksville is the tragic resting place of United Flight 93, the fourth and "missing" plane on 9/11, the day that brought the call for John and his brothers to fight terror in Afghanistan, the beginning of the end for John. Before leaving Windber, Gene spoke with Valerie's father, Jim, about John's gravesite. Jim, who loved John like his own, lives a short walk down the hill from Saint Mary's Cemetery, and he promised Gene that he would take care of John's plot. To this day, he takes his daily walk to the cemetery where he tends John's grave. Anyone searching for it need only look for the greenest and best-kept site, thanks to Jim Novak and a promise between two dads.
The trip back to Connecticut proved therapeutic and productive for John's three friends, Brian, David, and Michael. Since they had decided on the way to Windber that the funeral couldn't be the end of it for John, they used the trip home to brainstorm about what to do. Determined to keep John's memory from fading into yesterday's news, David recalls, "We tossed around so many ideas—renaming the airport or a street or a stretch of highway—we were all over the place. Then we finally settled on _where_ John's memorial should be, and that led us in the direction of _what_ it should be. It was most fitting to be at Windsor Locks High School, by the soccer field where we had all played." Brian adds, "We thought that keeping the memorial in town was the most meaningful, but we also thought, since Chappy wasn't buried in Windsor Locks, or even close by, we wanted a place for people to go and remember him. And we did it for his mom too."
In the end, they accomplished in only seven balls-to-the-wall months what seasoned organizers couldn't do in a year. David remembers with pride, "For a bunch of unorganized guys, it impressed me what we _could_ do, what a group of people can do—grass roots—when we put the effort together." Brian added, "When you have people that have a common bond, such strong feelings for John, you get it done no matter what. I put more work into that, at that time, than I did at my job!" David agreed: "Yup, me too. And I was new to my job!" Michael nodded in agreement as Brian said, "If we weren't working our jobs, we were working on the memorial." Michael quipped, "It almost cost us our jobs _and_ our marriages!" though the latter part was just to emphasize how much time the men put into the memorial. In reality, their wives were totally supportive, because they knew what this project meant—what John meant—to their husbands.
John's memorial was dedicated on 19 October 2002—ironically, the same date as the first ground deployments of Operation Enduring Freedom the previous year. It sits at the corner of the soccer field at Windsor Locks High, beside a grove of hardwood trees. The design is simple—a thirty-foot-tall flagpole topped with a golden eagle that roosts high above a large boulder. On the boulder is a bronze plaque that reads:
IN MEMORY OF
John A. Chapman
"Chappy"
WLHS Class of 1983
You Will Never Be Forgotten
Fellow Student, Dedicated Athlete, Loyal Friend, Committed Family Man, True Patriot
Members of the 24 came, including Kenny Longfritz and another support teammate, Master Sergeant Mike Rizzuto. Kicking off the ceremony, Rizzuto slowly raised the American flag as Longfritz unfurled it from its triangle. Standing next to the flagpole, hands over their hearts, were John's childhood friends, their upward gaze locked on the flag as it rose over their heads. Their dream, their blood, sweat, and tears, their tribute to John, had come to glorious fruition. As the flag met the golden eagle and the last notes of "The Star-Spangled Banner" faded, Brian Topor stepped to the podium to dedicate the memorial. "Those who never met John will only know him as an American hero. But in school, he was 'Chappy,' a fellow classmate, a student, a teammate, and a friend. He had a wonderful zest for life and a firm commitment to teamwork." In dedicating the memorial, Brian stated, "Having this here is fitting, so people can come to talk, laugh, or cry out loud. Without individuals like John, we would not be able to sleep peacefully at night."
In a moving tribute, childhood and high school friend Bill Brooks credited John for changing the course of his life with unconditional friendship and encouragement. "I was a painfully shy kid, even throughout most of high school. I couldn't talk to _anyone_." Over time, John coaxed Bill into believing in himself, so much so that he went on to be a chef who travels the world, speaking to large groups. "I don't know if he even knew he was helping me all those years ago, but he helped me get to where I am now. After high school, we kind of went in and out of each other's lives, but the times that he came back into my life are the times that I needed him there. I can't imagine how my life would have been without John in it."
Colonel Ken Rodriguez then took the podium to offer his tribute to John, closing with, " _This_ is what it's all about, this great American town. This is what John was fighting for." The ceremony ended with a lone bagpiper, Pipe Major Patrick Whelan of the Connecticut State Police Pipes and Drums Unit, standing behind the memorial, his pipes echoing "Amazing Grace" over the fields.
At that point in 2002, the Chapman family didn't know the truth of what happened on Takur Ghar, but each one of them had a sixth sense that there was much more to the story than they had been told. The Navy had immediately added John's name, the only non-SEAL, to their Wall of Honor in Virginia Beach. Why, the family wondered, would they do that if he'd merely played a minor role on the mission? And why were there debates within the Air Force as to the level of medal they would award him? Air Force Cross? Medal of Honor? Ultimately, he was posthumously awarded the Air Force Cross on 10 January 2003, but the debate over the award level created more questions for the family.
* * *
Time passed, and though John's family continued to mull over trickles of new information, life pushed them forward. In early 2005, they received word that the Navy was going to rename a ship after John. The MV _Merlin_ , a 670-foot cargo container and roll-on/roll-off ship, owned by Sealift Inc. and leased by the Navy's Military Sealift Command, was renamed MV _TSgt John A._ _Chapman_ in a sunny ceremony on 8 April 2005 at the Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina. It was fitting that the ship—a munitions vessel—would be named for John, a Combat Controller whose profession, among all the elite of special operations, relied on those munitions to change the course of battles and lives.
The publication of this book will be the latest in a long line of honors bestowed upon John and his legacy. On 14 June 2006, during the sixtieth anniversary celebration at Lackland AFB honoring enlisted heroes, Terry attended the unveiling of the Chapman Training Complex, home of the 326th Training Squadron. Many more honors have come, including a nephew namesake (John Chapman Longfritz), multiple renamings of streets, an FOB (forward operating base), and a score of tattoos. John's three childhood friends were right...The funeral _wasn't_ "it" for him, his name, and his legacy.
Chapter 25
John's original Air Force Cross would have remained just that, the nation's second-highest award for selfless action and heroism, had it not been for chance. Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James strolled across her office, enjoying a few free moments in an otherwise busy daily schedule that was blocked out in ten-minute increments, controlled more by her handlers than herself. The fifteenth of May 2015 was a beautiful spring morning, and the windows of her office on the fourth floor of the Pentagon's desirable E wing afforded million-dollar views of the nation's capital and monuments. She liked to joke that the Air Force sat above the secretary of defense's office, directly below on the third floor.
Dressed in a vibrant red business suit (she felt a bit of color added to the muted tones of most Pentagon staffers), she chanced to pick up a copy of the _Air Force Times_ , the service's weekly newspaper, and sat down to check the voice of "her people." "The press is a great source of information and gauge of what people are thinking," she reminded those who viewed journalists as the enemy. Savoring the momentary respite, she leafed through the pages, and an article caught her eye. Titled "He saved 80 lives: Why not the Medal of Honor?" it recounted the story of two Combat Controllers. The first was Senior Airman Dustin Temple, who delivered eighty Americans and Afghans from death the previous September while exposing himself repeatedly to direct enemy fire as he killed eighteen enemy combatants. The other was Staff Sergeant Robert Gutierrez, who saved the life of his wounded Green Beret team leader during an ambush, only to be shot in the chest himself. His lungs collapsed, yet he refused to get off the radio and stop calling airstrikes, some within thirty feet of his location, thereby saving his entire Special Forces team. Instead, a Green Beret medic jammed a syringe into his chest to reinflate his lungs...twice. The article asked a valid but pointed question: What does it take for an airman to get the Medal of Honor?
Looking up from the article, Secretary James was struck by the sentiment. _That's a damn good point_ , she thought. As her next meeting swept into her office, she tore out the page, scribbled in the margin "What does it take?" and gave the paper to her aide, an Air Force colonel, instructing him to have her staff look into the matter. Thus began the three-year journey of the most thoroughly investigated and documented Medal of Honor in history.
When the secretary of the Air Force asks a question, an army of staffers activates immediately. With a bit more guidance from the SECAF, the task morphed into a review of all Air Force Silver Stars and Air Force Crosses awarded since 9/11 to see if any might be worthy of upgrade based on new information. After months of investigation across the entire force, her query was answered. Late that summer she received a call from Lieutenant General Brad Heithold, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC). He had one case, the only one in the Air Force that met her criteria for reinvestigation. "There may be some injustice here," he told the Air Force's most senior civilian leader. "He was alive and we have technical proof that he was."
"Great," she told him. "Let's do this."
At Heithold's direction, AFSOC's 24th Special Operations Wing (responsible for all Special Tactics squadrons and Combat Control) established a dedicated team to investigate the Air Force's first potential Medal of Honor since Vietnam. The team consulted Air Force targeting (including the Air Force's chief targeter on duty during the battle) and intelligence analysts and submitted their video assessment to the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the nation's foremost imagery experts, who validated the team's findings. They also pulled from Anaconda after-action reports, JSOC's official investigation into the events of 3–4 March 2002, witness statements, John's autopsy (consulting the doctor who conducted the original autopsy in addition to a forensic pathologist), and new interviews with surviving AFO members. It provided Lieutenant General Heithold an airtight case—John had earned the nation's highest award. Concurrently, JSOC held a special awards board and also endorsed an upgrade for John's medal, starting a separate but equally important chain of decisions within the special operations community that would end with US Special Operations Command's endorsement of his upgrade. Throughout the year that followed her tasking, "I kept asking about progress on John." When AFSOC's recommendation finally arrived on Secretary James's desk on 9 June 2016, she signed it and forwarded her recommendation to the secretary of defense the same day.
Still, for the next two years, AFSOC and the Air Force continued investigating and validating their findings while simultaneously fighting with certain leaders from SEAL Team Six, who could not abide the fact they'd left a man for dead. The contestation rose to senior levels of the Navy and represented the first time in the history of the medal that one service attempted to obstruct the submission of another, according to experts on the Medal of Honor. For two men, the need to protect the unit's image overrode the facts of John's having survived after the SEALs retreated. Two officers drove the Navy's contestation, the (at the time) current commander of ST6, a man known by the initials JW, and Admiral Tim Szymanski, now head of all naval special warfare. Szymanski was the man both Pete Blaber and Jimmy Reese contend was the root source of the mission's botched planning and execution.
In the course of time and politics, Air Force Secretary James was replaced when the new administration swept into office in January 2017. Her pledge to see John's medal come to fruition was taken up by others, among them and notably Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work. By summer 2017, it was clear that Chapman's medal was headed for the White House. In one of his final emails as the DepSecDef, Bob Work wrote to new Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson and Chief of Staff General David Goldfein. Dated 12 July 2017 and titled "White Smoke," it stated:
Team Air Force,
I'm happy to inform you that the Secretary has approved the upgrade of TechSgt Chapman's AF Cross to the Medal of Honor, citing both material finding one and two. As previously agreed, material finding two will be discussed only in the classified portion of the award; the citation will make mention that Chappie fought on until he succumbed to his wounds.
After extensive analysis, the FBI concluded that a firefight continued on the top of the hill for an hour after the Team exfiled down the mountain. Although they could not conclusively determine whether it was blue on red or a red on red engagement, the Secretary concluded it was blue on red based on the following factors:
1. The team (SEALs) never conclusively determined Chappie was dead.
2. TechSgt Chapman's body was found in a different location than indicated by the team.
3. He was wounded seven times and had expended almost all of his ammo, indicating an extended fight.
4. The last part of the engagement occurred in daylight, and close ranges. The Secretary noted the reports of an M4 and AK47 are distinctly different, and therefore does not find the explanation of an extended red-on-red firefight plausible.
We are working the package now. Thanks for your patience and perseverance. May TechSgt Chapman and his family rest more peacefully once they are told. Aim High!
Best, Bob
He retired two days later, a stalwart for John's full actions to the end.
On 24 October 2017, the Office of the Secretary of Defense informed the chief of staff and secretary of the Air Force that John's Medal of Honor had been forwarded to the president of the United States. Finally, on 26 March 2018, President Trump called Valerie with the news. It was her birthday.
Chapter 26
22–24 August 2018
THE WHITE HOUSE, PENTAGON HALL OF HEROES,
AND AIR FORCE MEMORIAL—THROUGH LORI'S EYES
Sixteen years ago, I knew. I knew that my brother John's actions were greater than we were told. I knew he didn't die right away. My intuition was finally validated when John was awarded the Medal of Honor at the White House. It's been a long and emotional roller coaster, these last sixteen years, but to witness my brother being awarded our nation's highest military honor left me speechless. To think it all began when then Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James asked a simple question, "What _does_ it take for an airman to receive the Medal of Honor?" The answer took more than two frustrating years of intense investigation, culminating in a week of extraordinary celebrations of John's life, the first of which was the 22 August 2018 White House ceremony.
I was struck by the elegance of the East Room. The white walls, golden curtains, and crystal chandeliers made it regal, the perfect room for a special honor. Soft light filling the room through the front windows of the White House lent a timeless air. Row after row of gold chairs curved around the stage, each one with a beautifully crafted program laid upon its white cushioned seat. The silence of the room was solemn, but not sad. The small stage was equally fitting, with another golden curtain serving as the backdrop for three flags: our American flag, the congressional flag, and that of our United States Air Force.
As our family gathered, the mood became more celebratory when the realization set in that we were finally going to see John honored appropriately. We talked and laughed, nervous excitement pouring from us. Tears filled my eyes as I stole a moment to take in the entire space. Dozens of media cameras stood silently on tripods at the back, poised to capture this historic event. White House staff and Air Force protocol were buzzing around, making sure everything was perfect. And as the guests started filing in, I could feel the energy in the room rise as each person found a seat and chatted excitedly with those around them. The room was filled with people John loved; people who loved him back. So many of his childhood friends came to watch him be honored, marveling that the little boy they grew up with, the young man they shared laughter, tears, and secrets with, was an American hero. His Special Tactics brothers were there en masse. Men in blue dress uniforms—the Controllers obvious in their parachute wings and rows of medals—and former CCT in crisp dark suits sat shoulder to shoulder, just as they had when they served with John at one time, a lifetime ago. They, more than many, understood the magnitude of what was about to happen.
I sat between my son, John, and husband, Kenny, in the front row to the left of center stage and kept checking my watch, excited for the ceremony to begin. I looked back at my brother, Kevin. He and his wife, Connie, were beaming with anticipation while my nephew and niece, Jake and Sierra, smiled with moistened eyes, eager to be witness to their uncle's honor.
As I turned toward the front, my mom, Brianna, Madison, and Val were escorted to their seats. They had just met with President Trump and their smiles spoke volumes. (Mom later told Kenny she was ecstatic that the president had signed the medal certificate and the citation in front of them, and after Val presented him with the photo of John and the Afghan girl, he looked at the photo, then at Mom, and said, "He looks like you." Those four little words meant the world to her.) The first notes of "Hail to the Chief" signaled for all to rise as the president's arrival was announced. My heartbeat quickened as I rose. It wasn't the president who spurred my heart, but the knowledge that his presence beckoned John's medal ever closer. When he stepped onstage and turned to the audience, I was in awe, being only feet away from him, the man who signed John's Medal of Honor package and who was about to present what I knew John earned. President Trump stood at the podium and spoke in soft, soothing tones. I dropped my gaze. I knew the story he would tell; I knew how John's citation would read; and I didn't want to hear it again...not then. My mind drifted off to happy times with John; fun times that I hold dear in my heart; times when the four of us got silly; times when I thought we would all grow old together and reminisce. It was a quick interlude, but one that filled me with happiness and peace. I felt John with us in that room. As the reading of the citation came to an end, I released those memories to the Heavens so I could be present in the moment of the presentation.
Watching Valerie accept John's Medal of Honor did not make me any prouder of him than I already was, but it was a moment that filled me with immense delight and satisfaction after sixteen years of wanting it to happen. It felt surreal. There we were...in the White House...witnessing my brother being honored by the president, his actions fully acknowledged. What I'd wanted and fought for was finally happening! At times, I couldn't focus on what was being said; it was somewhat a blur, but I watched with a jubilant heart. Val was gracious as she accepted John's medal and thanked the president, who motioned for Madison, Brianna, and my mom to join them on the stage. Every guest rose for a standing ovation, but they weren't standing for those onstage; they were standing for John, for what _he_ earned...and they were standing because he couldn't. The applause, the standing ovation, and the gratitude were all for John and what he meant to each one of us.
I was joyous at having witnessed my brother being awarded our nation's highest military honor. As his sister, I wanted his actions acknowledged; I wanted people to know that he died how he lived...selflessly. John was a hero to countless unnamed people throughout his life, but it was his actions on 4 March 2002 that propelled him into American hero status. I've always been his proud big sister, but 22 August 2018 wasn't about pride in him, it was about being grateful that his selfless actions on that fateful day had finally and forever been recognized. He wouldn't have cared about recognition, but **_I_** do. I care because of my mom; I care because it's right; and I care because of truth.
Witnessing John being awarded the Medal of Honor gave me the greatest satisfaction, but it was the ceremonies at the Pentagon's Hall of Heroes and the Air Force Memorial that deeply touched me emotionally, because they were to _celebrate_ John, not just acknowledge his actions. At John's induction ceremony into the Hall of Heroes on 23 August, I saw countless men who trained and worked with John, men who were there because they wanted to see him being honored the way they have honored him all these years. I was thrilled to finally be able to talk about John—about my brother—and when my mom and I spoke, I saw how our words affected them all. As my husband said afterward, many of them must have been passing around an onion, because there were quite a few tears filling the eyes of those tough men, and it touched my heart that they care so deeply about John.
The 24 August ceremony at the Air Force Memorial was even more incredible. As our motorcade made its way to the memorial, I saw countless people, many in uniform, hurrying to get there on time. One officer stopped and saluted as we passed...an _officer_! It made me cry to see such respect and honor. The Air Force had expected seven hundred airmen and other military personnel to attend the ceremony, and I later found out there were over 1,200 in attendance. As I turned to look behind me, the sea of red berets, blue uniforms, and excited faces extended past my line of sight. And when John's name was unveiled on the memorial wall—the _sole_ name listed for Afghanistan—my heart burst with pride and I couldn't hold back the tears. What I wouldn't give to have _him_ there instead of his name, but I am so proud.
As if the previous honors weren't enough, after John's name was unveiled, the ceremony continued as he was posthumously promoted to the rank of Master Sergeant. He would be humbled. And as the ceremony concluded, the throng of John's military brothers and sisters made their way to the foot of the Air Force Memorial to perform not only the very first memorial push-ups at that location but also probably the largest contingent. The mass of brave men and women were, quite literally, side by side by side as they rose and fell to the called cadence. Who would have thought the boy I grew up with would someday be honored in so many ways?
If John were alive today, he would quietly say, "I was just doing my job, what had to be done." Well, my dear brother, you went above and beyond "just doing your job." You deserve this honor. You _earned_ it. It makes me sad that we won't be able to sit around when we're old and gray, beers in hand, talking about things you couldn't tell us, but I am honored to have grown up with you, one of the Chapman Four. Echoing Tammy's words at your funeral: You have always been my hero; now you're America's hero too. And though I'm in no hurry, I look forward to seeing you again so we can finally have that talk. My heart aches as I miss you every single day. I love you forever.
Epilogue
John Chapman's quest for challenge lit upon one of the most selective, and certainly most unique, special operations forces in the world. And like most young men entering an SOF discipline, he was not fully aware of how unique his chosen field was until after he was a full-fledged member. When he cross-trained in 1989 there were fewer than three hundred Combat Controllers in the world. Over the course of America's longest-running war, CCT has grown to nearly six hundred operators, still only a fraction of sister-service SOFs such as the Green Berets, Rangers, and SEALs, who number in the thousands, yet the ratios are appropriate. Controllers continue to operate as lone warriors among the teams of men they join and protect in war.
For those aspiring to become a Combat Controller, the pipeline has evolved as well, just as twenty-first-century warfare itself has advanced. What was essentially a year plus of hell and trial by fire from day one for John Chapman and the others of his day has morphed into a two-and-a-half-year journey, including an entire year of advanced skills training after graduation from Combat Control School. The sophistication of instruction and the preparation of candidates for the challenges ahead of them are some of the improvements, yet attrition remains 75 percent due to the punishing nature of the training and exacting standards demanded.
* * *
Despite its name and combat focus, there is a second and arguably more valuable role Combat Control fulfills—that of humanitarian. With this secondary mission, CCT is the only deliberately dual-role SOF force. In 1978, three Panama-based CCT were given a no-notice task to hop a plane for Guyana in late November, only to find themselves amid the evil and senseless carnage of the Jonestown massacre. As the only men capable of single-handedly spearheading the body recovery and providing situational awareness to the highest levels of government back in the US, they spent their Thanksgiving among the hundreds of dead in order to return the 918 victims to their loved ones on American soil.
CCT has gone on to reprise this role as the world's first-of-the-first responders time and again. For Americans, this was most evident during Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when CCT from both Air National Guard Special Tactics squadrons led the rescue, staging, and recovery effort for thousands of homeless and desperate Louisianans, turning Interstate 10 into a major heliport and surging small Zodiac boats to isolated victims. CCT then repeated the feat during hurricanes Rita and Ike in 2005 and 2008, respectively.
In the Indian Ocean shortly after Christmas turned to Boxing Day in 2004, the third largest earthquake ever recorded unleashed a tsunami that devastated multiple countries. John Chapman's former unit, the 320th Special Tactics Squadron, responded to the worst-affected and most remote Indonesian province of Aceh to deliver aid and assist with rescues where the massive quake-generated wave crested a hundred feet and washed away entire villages.
The most significant humanitarian Combat Control operation, however, took place closer to home and earned a distinction no other US military enlisted person has ever received. Tony Travis, a career CCT master sergeant at Hurlburt's 23rd Special Tactics Squadron, was called into work on the evening of 12 January 2010 after a 7.0 earthquake rocked and devastated the impoverished island nation of Haiti. Two million people were affected in the capital of Port-au-Prince alone.
Packed and ready to go within hours, Tony led the first forces on the ground, arriving at 1536 the next day. Their mission: Secure, open, and control Toussaint Louverture International Airport. Eight Combat Controllers, equipped with only their portable radios and two ATVs, cleared and established control within twenty-eight minutes, meeting the self-imposed CCT standard and launching their first plane with two minutes to spare (Tony started his stopwatch the instant he stepped onto Haitian soil). From their ATVs and a scavenged folding table, the men ran the airport amid international chaos for the next thirteen days (when they were relieved by Air Force air traffic controllers). Armed with a personal letter from President René Garcia Préval granting Tony personal control of all Haitian airspace, CCT landed the more than 250 aircraft converging daily from fifty-plus nations, exceeding the expected capacity of the airfield by 1,400 percent. The expert austere airfield operators managed to shoehorn planes and helicopters onto every inch of the airport with zero incidents. Additionally, when more CCT arrived, they surveyed, established, and controlled thirty remote landing and drop zones for aerial delivery of 150,000 pounds of humanitarian supplies. A man with extensive combat experience, including an unfortunate knife kill ("I fucked up clearing a building and was forced to go to my knife when I couldn't get to my secondary pistol"), he was profoundly impacted by his experiences in Haiti. "You do a lot of things in combat but never see the results. In Haiti the positive feedback was immediate." For him, delivering global first responders, sending out the injured, and bringing order to the chaotic airfield was the essence of Combat Control. "It's what we do. Go in, set up, and control airspace. I don't believe any other organization in the world can do that without advance notice." For leading the effort to establish a beachhead amid the anarchy of a global response converging on a single ill-equipped and devastated runway in one of the most impoverished nations in the world, Tony Travis was recognized as one of _Time_ magazine's 100 most influential people of the year.
Like Tony Travis, John Chapman was already one of the most elite warriors in the world, but chose to take another, ultimate step toward being _the_ best, placing himself in the top 10 percent of all CCT. And as with the select handful of Green Berets and Rangers who try out for Delta Force, or their counterparts in the Navy, drawn from the ranks of the "vanilla" SEAL teams, who volunteer to join Team Six, John successfully ascended to the most elite unit in the Air Force—by some measures, the world—and joined "the 24."
Throughout its history, CCT has accomplished unique "firsts" in and out of combat, particularly using parachutes, their favored means of insertion. In 1955 and '56, America was building a presence in Antarctica and used Air Force aircraft to airdrop and land on the continent. During this expansion, the first site to be built up was situated on the precise South Pole. Staging from Christchurch, New Zealand, USAF C-124 Globemasters ferried equipment and supplies to the austere environment. When the uncontrolled cargo parachute drops began failing and missing their target drop zones (DZs), damaging significant portions of critical and specialized equipment, the call went out for someone with expertise in precision airdrops. In stepped Technical Sergeant Richard J. Patton, an airman with merely thirty-one parachute jumps. At exactly 0154 hours, Greenwich Mean Time, Sunday, 25 November 1956, at an altitude of 2,000 feet, he jumped from a C-124 christened the _State of New Jersey_. One minute later, he drifted to the ice to become the first person to make or even attempt a jump at the South Pole. Within hours, he established and operated a DZ and delivered near 100 percent accuracy. For his actions, Dick Patton earned a Distinguished Flying Cross and presidential citation.
Five years later, another Combat Controller, James A. "Jim" Howell, successfully became the first "human subject" to eject live while testing the upward rotational supersonic "B" ejection seat. From an F-106B slicing through the air at 560 knots and 22,060 feet over Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, he was fired into the atmosphere, giving new meaning to the term "test dummy." The intrepid Combat Controller stayed with the rocket-powered seat for forty-three seconds until he passed through 14,000 feet, then separated and opened his parachute without incident, successfully capping a nearly five-year test program.
Forty years later and a world away, a much younger Combat Controller set a different kind of record on 14 November 2001. It was a frozen night over Afghanistan, the temperature at altitude was in excess of minus 80 degrees Fahrenheit, and Staff Sergeant Mike Bain, a member of the 24, conducted the first-ever combat HALO tandem cargo bundle parachute drop. Also executing this historic first were Delta Force sergeants major Kris and Bill (the same two operators who would accompany Jay Hill on Anaconda and witness John Chapman's one-man stand), each with their own bundles. Mike was pushed off the ramp of an MC-130 Combat Talon at 18,500 feet, strapped on top of a three-foot-diameter, eight-foot-long, 528-pound tube crammed with his Delta team's rucksacks. Bill carried the team's food and water, and Kris more equipment. No surprise, their mission was to call airstrikes on a Taliban-controlled pass. It was a daring feat of courage. As audacious as it was, what Mike did after his parachute opened 6,500 feet above the enemy could be drawn from the pages of James Bond. Under canopy on his radio, Mike received his first strike aircraft, a flight of two F-15s, and managed to work up his first three targets by writing with a grease pen on the compass navigation board mounted on his chest. Also talking with his ISR platform, a Navy P-3, he was ready to destroy targets passed to him from the P-3 before he even hit the ground. Mike had the imagination, foresight, and expertise to plan for the possibility, an unprecedented innovation and application of airpower. To many fellow "black" operators, it was the most impressive combat parachute jump in history. To a layman it simply sounds unbelievable.
The men landed in an isolated high-elevation mountain valley, with Mike hitting the intended impact point dead center. Mike and his Delta team then spent the next twenty-four hours climbing across two mountain summits with their hundred-pound rucks. The enemy, knowing the mountainous terrain was inaccessible, assumed their passage was safe from American eyes and bombs. They were wrong. The team, with Mike on the radio (naturally), destroyed ammunition and fuel trucks on the first day of operations. That night, Mike had an AC-130 crater the road to slow traffic so the team could ensure they struck only Taliban forces. For three days, the Delta team and Mike denied all Taliban reinforcements between Kandahar and Kabul along their key supply route.
Sixty-six years into its history, CCT is just beginning to reach full potential. It's come a long way from Jim Stanford standing on the wing of a puddle jumper in the middle of enemy territory, pumping his own gas, to John Chapman fighting to save the lives of his five remaining SEAL teammates and another eighteen men he'd never met. Yet they share a common brotherhood: an Air Force no one knew or even suspected existed.
John's life and this book both end on the battlefields of Afghanistan in 2002. In the seventeen years since those events, the three to six hundred Combat Controllers that have comprised the force have earned hundreds of Bronze Stars with Valor, thirty-five of the Air Force's seventy-five Silver Stars, six of its nine Air Force Crosses, and its only Medal of Honor. From a uniformed force of approximately 500,000, Combat Control comprises 0.1 percent of the Air Force yet accounts for nearly half of its Silver Stars and two-thirds of its highest award, the Air Force Cross. Those heroics are for chronicling in another volume of Combat Control's history. What is significant at the conclusion of this book is the impact this deadly shadow force has had on the Air Force and the nation. The future promises more of the same.
In discussing that future, Brigadier General Mike Martin, the former commander of the 24th Special Operations Wing, the most decorated wing in the modern Air Force, explained why it's critical for CCT to continue to push into new frontiers:
No one is tasked or organized to exploit and manage space into the battlefield. We are. You'd expect SEALs to own the maritime domain, but they don't. Same with [Army] Special Forces. I don't think anyone exploits those multiple domains more so than CCT.
The contested nature of future environments will likely change what we do. Combat Control's abilities in denied and degraded environments allow us maneuverability unavailable to others. This in turn allows us to inform and shape the air and even space kinetic strike missions that will be required. Going forward, if I can put a [Special Tactics team] in suborbital low earth orbit, I can infiltrate it within forty-five minutes globally. Using Operation Anaconda as an example, the forces supporting CCT in conducting those strikes, the kinetics, hypersonics and the like, must be able to keep up with our "First There" forces. B-52s, a weapon Combat Control used extensively, can't keep up with that kind of rapidity.
Regardless of future advances, today's Combat Controllers remain the deadliest individuals to walk a battlefield in the history of warfare, with the power and expertise to orchestrate the destruction of key strategic targets or hundreds of enemy at a time on any battleground onto which they step, as exemplified by Joe O'Keefe's stunning 688,000 pounds of bomb tonnage at Tora Bora. At the same time and using their unique expertise—blending the world's mightiest air force with unequalled battlefield acumen and three-dimensional awareness—they are the first to deliver hope and salvation to suffering masses anywhere in the world, at a moment's notice.
* * *
Regarding the fight for Takur Ghar, it is proportionally the most valorous battle in the history of the United States military. Of the twenty-five men on the mountain at sunrise, thirteen would receive Silver Stars, one a Navy Cross, and two the Air Force Cross. And finally, two ultimately received Medals of Honor. But a battle sometimes referred to as Roberts Ridge (for the SEAL who inadvertently fell from a helicopter) more accurately centered on John Chapman, the man abandoned for dead and who became the fulcrum by which the two opposing forces levered the larger fight.
During his final hour, John was the deadliest man on the mountain summit battlefield on which he found himself—the lone Combat Controller—not because of airpower but by virtue of his spirit in the tradition of the American fighting man: a solitary warrior, one of his nation's finest, fighting as CCT have always done even when integrated into a team, as a man with the burden of the lives of many others in his hands. After saving the lives of his five SEAL teammates at the cost of two mortal wounds, he held two dozen enemy fighters at bay for more than an hour, until in his final moments, in excruciating pain, his body ravaged by sixteen gunshot and shrapnel wounds and battered from hand-to-hand combat, he chose self-sacrifice over self-preservation and with his last breath delivered eighteen comrades he'd never met into salvation.
# Acknowledgments
Dan Schilling
I did not want to write this book. Having retired from the military in September 2016, I was interested in spending time with my wife, writing fiction, and skiing and climbing mountains, roughly in that order. So when my friend and fellow CCT Kyle Stanbro approached me a week into retirement about helping Lori write John's story I turned him down, agreeing only to help her shape a proposal and connect her with my agent. However, thirty years of military service taught me that missions often come our way whether we feel prepared for them or not. Over the next two weeks I realized I was in the unique position not only to write John's story but also to share the remarkable stories of his Combat Control brothers, of whom I am fortunate to count myself among their ranks. So I called Lori back and told her I'd commit myself fully to the project, which turned out to be two full years of effort. The result is this book.
To Lori: Thank you for trusting me with John's legacy and working together over those two years. It was a momentous occasion to witness John's Medal of Honor ceremony in the White House, and as I looked across his many friends and family in attendance, I was happiest for you. I extend my thanks to John's entire family for their faith in me to help Lori bring John's life to the public. To Valerie Novak Chapman Nessel, who survived the loss not only of John but also her next husband, and whom I think of as a dear friend, thank you for your trust and openness. You inspire so many with your indomitable spirit.
I'd like to thank the following CCT whom I interviewed while writing this book. I apologize that so many amazing stories of your prowess and courage failed to make it onto the pages; there simply was not enough room in this particular volume. Some are my mentors, others fellow veterans of combat operations, and a few I feel privileged to have instructed at the Combat Control School, but all are brothers. Any mistakes that may appear in these pages are my fault alone. In no particular order: Jay Hill, Andy Martin, Gabe Brown, Mike Stockdale, Mike Lamonica, Jeff George, Joe O'Keefe, Calvin Markham, Ben Miller, Dink Dalton, David Netterville, Mike Lampe, Wayne Norrad (who, along with his lovely wife, Tracy, has always provided a home away from home, exceptional wine, and cigars at Hurlburt), Jim Hotaling, Bob Bieber, Jack Teague, Gene Adcock, Bob Azeltine, Chris Baradat, Bart Decker, Ron Mann, Alan Yoshida, Don Stevens, Bruce Dixon, Ed Priest, Dave Gendron, Greg Pittman, Mike Snyder, Joe Maynor, Bruce Barry, Pat Elko, John Wylie, Phil Freeman, Scott Light, Kyle Stanbro, John Koren, Tony Travis, Mike Bain. The following STOs were also interviewed and/or contributed: John Carney, Ken Rodriguez, Mike Martin, Spence Cocanour, Mike Fazio. Thanks to the STOs and CCT who wished to remain anonymous and anyone I've failed to list. Thanks also to PJ Keary Miller and Mike Rizzuto (who single-handedly runs the 724th STG).
There were many who were involved in Operation Anaconda and/or the investigation of John's actions who assisted me. Pete Blaber, friend, former Delta commander, and leader of AFO in Anaconda, thanks for your insight and honest input. The same goes for Delta officers Jimmy Reese and Tom DiTomasso (fellow veteran of Operation Gothic Serpent); Delta operator "Ironhead," one of the great operators I've known; AC-130 pilot D. J. Turner; and sensor operator Chris Walker. Greg Daly, friend and former commander of the Australian Special Air Service Regiment, thanks for the Aussie perspective.
To STO Mike Wendelken, who dedicated nearly two years to the investigation of John's actions and who knows more about that time than anyone else, special thanks for your commitment to the truth and constant willingness to be interrupted with last-minute questions as I researched the events for myself. Also thanks to STO Kyle Whittier and public affairs officers Katrina Cheesman and Jackie Pienkowski at the 24th Special Operations Wing, and AFSOC public affairs officer Pete Hughes for critical assistance in gaining official USAF approval to conduct research. To Tim Brown at the historian's office and Dr. Forrest Marion at the Air Force Historical Research Agency. Dan Chykirda at DoD Prepublication and Security Review marshaled the manuscript through the review process needed for a book of this nature. Thanks to former JAG Mike Smidt for his expertise on esoteric classification matters.
At Grand Central: Ben Sevier, publisher of Grand Central, who personally acquired and then edited our book, thanks for immediately recognizing the value of this story and your no-nonsense approach in shaping it. I'm very grateful for your commitment despite many demands on your time. Jonathan Valuckas and Elizabeth Kulhanek in Ben's office for coordinating efforts. Brian McLendon, Joseph Benincase, Karen Torres, and Amanda Pritzker for their expertise in marketing and sales, the backbone of a book's success. Matthew Ballast, Jimmy Franco, Brittany Lowe, and Alli Rosenthal in publicity for promoting the book across America. Our senior production editor, Mari Okuda, copy editor, Rick Ball, and proofreaders Kristin Roth Nappier and Kristin Vorce Duran corrected much and smoothed all. Thanks to Elece Green and Ghenet Harvey for the audio version production, and to Jeffrey L. Ward for creating the maps.
Exceptional author Jim DeFelice, on whom I originally attempted to foist this project and who told me unequivocally, "No. You need to write this," thanks for your mentorship, feedback, and steadfast belief (also cigars). To the honorable Debbie James, former secretary of the Air Force, thank you for starting John's medal on its journey and facing down all opposition.
My agents Larry Weissman and Sascha Alper, thanks for all your career management, encouragement, and expertise, especially Larry's demand that I stop all else and write this book. You are both more friends than agents.
Finally, my wife, Julie, who served as my first editor, believes in my writing, and always said yes when I'd announce, "Well, they're asking me to do this one more thing..." You are the center of my existence and words cannot express my love and admiration.
Lori Chapman Longfritz
Above all, I want to thank my husband, Kenny Longfritz, for your patience, support, and encouragement. Without you, I may not have had the confidence to finally take the first step after years of hesitation. You have been my untiring sounding board and confidant. When I had doubts, you were there to push me onward, and when we learned more of the truth, you shared my pain, wiped my tears, and soothed my anger. You knew John as his First Sergeant and know him better now as family. He brought us together, and now, _because of you_ , I can share John's heroism and legacy with the world. I love you!
Thanks to my son, John Chapman Longfritz, for understanding in your adolescent brain that I needed to spend time behind closed doors. My hope is that this book will help you understand more about your uncle and why it is such an honor for you to be his namesake. I love you to infinity and beyond! Rachel McQueeney Smith, my smart daughter, thank you for your support and for reminding me that it's okay to say "No" to my littles when they wanted to see me. It's hard to deny them anything! I love you all to the moon and back!
Thank you, Ben Goettler and Kyle Stanbro, for stepping forward to help as only CCT can. Though none of us knew what the hell we were doing, you were willing to muddle through figuring out how to write and publish a book with me. We were essentially the blind leading the blind, until Kyle's lunch with Dan "to catch up" turned into something bigger than any of us could have foreseen! Were it not for you two, _Alone at Dawn_ would never have been written.
What can I say, Dan Schilling?! When you offered to help, I immediately trusted the pairing because in addition to being a published author, you were Combat Control. My original book idea morphed into a masterpiece because of your vision to include Combat Control; you understand what it takes to become the most lethal human weapon in our military arsenal, and you therefore brought a more dynamic military narrative to the book. You tirelessly gathered information I didn't even know existed and your guidance and encouragement were selfless: Though you penned our military narrative, you also encouraged my newfound joy of editing. Thank you for putting your retired life with Julie on hold to commit two years and counting to this book! I am happy to call you my friend and wish you nothing but continued success in your future writing projects! Julie Schilling, thank you for graciously postponing your life plans with Dan. Your support and interest in John's story means so very much. Dan owes you a really long vacation!
Mike Wendelken: You are an amazing man and humble hero whose brain works on a level way above my comprehension. For two years you painstakingly stitched together two videos of the battle on Takur Ghar. The end result uncovered the facts of the battle, and revealed John's heroism to his last breath. Without you, your team, and your collective determination, the absolute truth may never have become known. I thank you from the bottom of my heart, along with Wolfe Davidson, Mike Martin, Bruce Dixon, and so many others who helped prove John's actions.
Many thanks to our literary agents, Larry Weissman and Sascha Alper of Larry Weissman Literary LLC. Your dedication in helping us create a powerful and dynamic book proposal, coupled with your invaluable creative ideas and absolute enthusiasm for John's story, resulted in our book being picked up by the best publisher we could hope to have. Thank you for believing in us and for all you've done in the representation and promotion of us and our book.
Heartfelt thanks to Ben Sevier, publisher at Grand Central Publishing, for your expertise and belief in Dan and me! You immediately understood the importance of telling this story, took on our project, and offered sage insight into the direction and composition of _Alone at Dawn_. That guidance helped us focus more narrowly, resulting in the page-turning truth of what really happened on Takur Ghar, while offering a fine-tuned glimpse into Combat Control.
I have so much appreciation for Grand Central Publishing and those who were part of this journey. Elizabeth Kulhanek, as Ben's assistant, you were always available to help me. Senior director of publicity, Jimmy Franco, you calmed my nerves and helped me focus on how to represent myself and our book. Matthew Ballast, publicity director, and publicity assistants Brittany Lowe and Alli Rosenthal were instrumental in coordinating how our book was promoted. Dear editors and proofreaders, especially Rick Ball and Mari Okuda, thank you for your expertise and your research to confirm every detail. I know there are many others I've not met who have helped _Alone at Dawn_ be the best book possible, including Flag, Kristen Lemire, Tom Louie, Sean Ford, Dan Lynch, and Laura Eisenhard, and I thank you all!
Kevin Chapman and Connie Russo, Tammy and David Klein: Your encouragement was priceless to me. Tess Chapman (my stepmom), through your recollections and Dad's letter to the 24 STS after John died, I was able to shed light on some very important stories. Thank you for being willing to relive those memories! I wish Dad were here to read the truth, but he already knows now, doesn't he? Valerie Nessel, you were open to sharing your precious memories of your time with John—even the difficult ones—and I am grateful for that. And Madison, though you were so very young when your dad gave his life, what you _did_ remember was valuable! I love you all!
There are many members of the Special Tactics family who were gracious enough to spend time sharing memories and laughs about Chappy. Special thanks to: Tony Baldwin, Randy Blythe, Kurt Buller, Ron and Ann Childress, Steve Coronato, Bruce Dixon, Rob Donlan, Pat Elko, Bob Holmes, Mike Lamonica, Kenny Longfritz, Wayne Norrad, Ken Rodriguez, Billy Sasser, Jeremy Shoop, Summa Stelly, Mike West, and Travis Woodworth. Every word, every memory helps, whether in this book, in another, or in my heart. I am happy to share John with you and grateful that you are willing to share your memories with me. To you and every member of our military, past, present, and future, thank you for your service!
John's hometown friends: You gave me your precious time and memories, and I hung on your every word. You are testament that John chose his friends well: Tom and Diane Allen, Brian Topor and David Wrabel (John's "brothers from other mothers"), Stanley Topor (John's second dad), Mike Toce, Michael DuPont, Dan Walsh, Bill Brooks, Dan Tracey, Kelly Cray Savery, Kathy Toce, Lynn Noyes Klein (high school friend John adored), Suzy Lindberg Brinegar, Mark Nolan, and Suzanne Giaccone Roberts and Karen Starr Giannelli (special friends who opened their homes to me when I visited Windsor Locks). Thank you all for your time and memories!
Lastly, I personally want to dedicate this book to my mom, Terry Chapman. You supported my efforts and were willing to open the floodgates of tears and laughter to help me remember stories about John. Emotions be damned, Mom, you came through for me, endured countless calls asking you to relive memories big and small, and never swayed from helping me get it right. This is for _you_...because you deserve to finally know the truth. I love you lots!
**Discover Your Next Great Read**
Get sneak peeks, book recommendations, and news about your favorite authors.
Tap here to learn more.
# Selected Bibliography
## Books
Beckwith, Charlie A., and Donald Knox. _Delta Force: The Army's Elite Counterterrorist Unit_. New York: Avon Books, 2000.
Berntsen, Gary, and Ralph Pezzullo. _Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda; A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander_. Reprint ed. New York: Three Rivers Press, 2006.
Blaber, Pete. _The Mission, the Men, and Me: Lessons from a Former Delta Force Commander_. Reprint ed. New York: Dutton Caliber, 2010.
Carney, John T., Jr., and Benjamin F. Schemmer. _No Room for Error: The Covert Operations of America's Special Tactics Units from Iran to Afghanistan_. New York: Ballantine, 2002.
Churchill, Jan. _Classified Secret: Controlling Airstrikes in the Clandestine War in Laos_. Manhattan, KS: Sunflower University Press, 2000.
Coll, Steve. _Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001_. New York: Penguin, 2004.
Fury, Dalton. _Kill Bin Laden: A Delta Force Commander's Account of the Hunt for the World's Most Wanted Man_. New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 2009.
Haney, Eric L. _Inside Delta Force: The Story of America's Elite Counterterrorist Unit_. New York: Dell, 2003.
MacPherson, Malcolm. _Roberts Ridge: A Story of Courage and Sacrifice on Takur Ghar Mountain, Afghanistan_. New York: Bantam Dell, 2006.
Marion, Forrest L. _Brothers in Berets: The Evolution of Air Force Special Tactics, 1953–2003_. Maxwell Air Force Base, AL: Air University Press, Curtis E. LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education, 2018.
Naylor, Sean. _Not a Good Day to Die: The Untold Story of Operation Anaconda_. New York: Berkley Caliber, 2005.
Naylor, Sean. _Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command_. New York: St. Martin's, 2015.
Rasimus, Ed. _When Thunder Rolled: An F-105 Pilot over North Vietnam_. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Books, 2003.
Robbins, Christopher. _The Ravens: The Men Who Flew in America's Secret War in Laos_. New York: Pocket Books, 1989.
Stanton, Doug. _Horse Soldiers: The Extraordinary Story of a Band of U.S. Soldiers Who Rode to Victory in Afghanistan_. New York: Scribner, 2009.
## Government Documents
"Executive Summary of the Battle of Takur Ghar." Released through the Department of Defense, 24 May 2002.
Fleri, Major Edgar, Colonel Ernest Howard, Jeffrey Hukill, and Thomas R. Searle. _Operation Anaconda Case Study_. Maxwell Air Force Base, AL: College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Education, 2003.
Milani, Colonel Andrew N. "Pitfalls of Technology: A Case Study of the Battle on Takur Ghar Mountain, Afghanistan." Carlisle Barracks, PA: US Army War College, 2003.
## Internet Sites
Cole, Matthew. "The Crimes of SEAL Team 6." _The Intercept_ , 10 January 2017. theintercept.com/2017/01/10/the-crimes-of-seal-team-6/.
Cole, Matthew. "With Medal of Honor, SEAL Team 6 Rewards a Culture of War Crimes." _The Intercept_ , 22 May 2018. theintercept.com/2018/05/22/medal-of-honor-navy-seal-team-6-britt-slabinski/.
Naylor, Sean D. "The Navy SEALs Allegedly Left Behind a Man in Afghanistan. Did They Also Try to Block His Medal of Honor?" _Newsweek_ , 7 May 2018. http://www.newsweek.com/2018/05/18/navy-seals-seal-team-6-left-behind-die-operation-anaconda-slabinski-chapman-912343.html.
Naylor, Sean D., and Christopher Drew. "SEAL Team 6 and a Man Left for Dead: A Grainy Picture of Valor." _New York Times_ , 27 August 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/world/asia/seal-team-6-afghanistan-man-left-for-dead.html.
"Operation Anaconda or Operation Giant Mongoose?" Bangladesh.com Discussion Forum. _Bangladesh.com Bangladesh Channel_ , 27 August 2002. www.bangladesh.com/forums/religion/10948-operation-anaconda-operation-giant-mongoose.html.
## Magazines and Journals
Ehrlich, Richard S. "Afghanistan: An American Graveyard?" _Laissez Faire City Times_ , 29 October 2001.
# About the Authors
A thirty-year special operations and Combat Control veteran, **DAN SCHILLING** has had numerous combat and clandestine deployments around the world, including the operation popularly known as Black Hawk Down, where he is credited with saving the lives of a Ranger and SEAL under fire. He later founded and then served as the first commander of two special operations squadrons. An adrenaline enthusiast, he holds the Guinness World Record for most BASE jumps in twenty-four hours and is a mountain speed wing flyer and ski instructor at Wasatch Adaptive Sports. He and his wife live in the alpine town of Alta, Utah. Visit him at DanSchillingBooks.com.
* * *
**LORI CHAPMAN LONGFRITZ** is the second of four children born to Gene and Terry Chapman and shares the "middle child" slot with John. She was a longtime advocate for his Medal of Honor and is proud to share the story of her brother, who stood out from the ordinary long before he ever put on a uniform. Lori lives with her husband and their son, John, in the "Forever West" town of Cheyenne, Wyoming.
# ALSO BY DAN SCHILLING
_The Battle of Mogadishu_ (co-edited with Matt Eversmann)
# Photos
John Chapman in 1968 with a World War I veteran. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
John with his friend Mary Tersavich. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
Airstrike called in by Jim Stanford in northern Laos. (Images of airstrikes would later become emblematic of Combat Control.) _Courtesy of Catherine Bond_
CCT Jim Stanford and his O-1 Bird Dog in Laos, 1966. _Courtesy of Catherine Bond_
John at diving practice, 1981. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
A young Airman Chapman with his prized Le Mans in 1986. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
The Desert One CCT of Brand X just prior to the ill-fated mission, 1980. _Courtesy of Mike Lampe_
John Chapman after graduating from OL-H indoctrination in 1989. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
John and fellow pipeline survivor Joe Maynor, CCS graduation day, 1990. _Courtesy of Joe Maynor_
Mr. and Mrs. John and Valerie Chapman on their wedding day, 1992. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
24 STS Green Team 1996 conducting urban warfare training. John is front row left. Keary Miller, who would later recover John's body, is back row second from left. Pat Elko is back row third from left. _Courtesy of Pat Elko_
Calvin Markham spotting targets for airstrikes in Afghanistan, 2001. _Courtesy of Calvin Markham_
Combat Controllers Bill White, Marcus Millard, and Calvin Markham in front of the still shuttered US embassy, Kabul, 2001. _Courtesy of Calvin Markham_
Joe O'Keefe (right) and two Delta personnel on a Soviet MiG, Bagram Airfield, 2001. _Courtesy of Joe O'Keefe_
Mike Stockdale and two Delta personnel inside a Taliban arms depot tunnel, Tora Bora, December 2001. _Courtesy of Mike Stockdale_
Airstrike by Combat Controllers during the hunt for Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora, December 2011. _Courtesy of Joe O'Keefe_
John, Val, and the girls on their annual vacation to Virginia Beach, summer of 2001. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
John on his cot in Bagram. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
John and baby inside the Afghan home the team was placed in during the Mullah Omar mission. The photo would go on to become the iconic image of his life, juxtaposing the war-rior with the compassionate humanitarian underneath. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
John in an Afghan village while on patrol. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
After the storm in the mountains. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
SEALs and CCT mov-ing by foot into the mountains in pursuit of Omar. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
Andy Martin mak-ing a SATCOM call while John looks dubiously at their mules. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
More fortress than resi-dence, the Gardez safe house. _Courtesy of Jay Hill_
Testing and probing the areas surround-ing Gardez prior to AFO infiltrating the mountains. _Courtesy of Jay Hill_
Jay Hill on his ATV in enemy territory. _Courtesy of Jay Hill_
The enemy camp as captured by Mako-31. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
Early morning airstrike using airburst ordnance against enemy troops in the open. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
The Australian OP with CCT Jim Hotaling targeting enemy positions. _Courtesy of Jim Hotaling_
Andy Martin in Mako-31's second OP. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
One of the Apaches that nearly mistook the team for enemy forces as it rolls in on a target for Andy Martin. _Courtesy of Andy Martin_
Jay Hill next to his spotting scope during J Team's nonstop onslaught. _Courtesy of Jay Hill_
The summit of Takur Ghar mountain. _Department of Defense_
Razor-03's crash site shortly after the mission and before the aircraft was destroyed in place. _Department of Defense_
Bunker 2 on Takur Ghar. _Department of Defense_
The DShK position atop Takur Ghar Chapman prevented from destroy-ing the QRF. _Department of Defense_
The Special Tactics CSAR team of (from left to right) PJ Keary Miller, PJ Jason Cunningham, and CCT Gabe Brown days before their fateful mission. _Courtesy of Gabe Brown_
Takur Ghar as seen from overhead shortly after the battle. Razor-01 would later be destroyed in place by AC-130 fire like Razor-03. _Department of Defense_
An airstrike on the Whale during Anaconda. _Department of Defense_
Bagram memorial for the seven men killed on Takur Ghar. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
Madison at the stern of the MV _TSgt John A. Chapman_ after its christening in 2005. _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
The SEAL Team Six memorial where John was the first non-SEAL to be added. (His name is at the bottom of the left column.) _Courtesy of Lori Longfritz_
Valerie between coauthors Dan Schilling and Lori Longfritz at the White House with John's Medal of Honor. _Courtesy of Dan Schilling_
The PAST must be administered by a qualified CCT, Special Tactics Officer, or certified Air Force recruiter, in the following order: 500-meter surface swim (maximum time 15:00 minutes), chin-ups (minimum six), sit-ups (minimum fifty), push-ups (minimum forty-two), a 1.5-mile run (maximum time 11:30). If a volunteer stops, rests, or otherwise fails to continue until muscle failure during any of the calisthenics, the test is halted at that point and they are failed. Minimum numbers are frowned upon and typically indicate the volunteer is an unlikely graduate of the two-year training pipeline.
The unit's actual naming conventions were Brand X, 1977–June 1981; Det 1 MACOS, June 1981–June 1983; Det 4 NAFCOS, July 1983–April 1987; 1724th Combat Control Squadron, May 1987–September 1987; 1724th Special Tactics Squadron, October 1987–March 1992; 24th Special Tactics Squadron (informally known as "the 24"—pronounced "the two-four"), March 1992–present.
Delta selection is open to any soldier regardless of background, whereas SEAL Team Six, like the 24, only takes volunteers from within the ranks of its "white" SOF teams. For CCT, that was every other Special Tactics squadron.
The same unit that augmented the 24 for the Panama invasion.
The first two ODAs to enter Afghanistan went in the same night, but their initial effects through airpower could not have been more divergent. ODA 555, with Calvin Markham, put bombs on target beginning with his first strike, as outlined in this chapter. ODA 595 (the team featured in the Hollywood movie _12 Strong_ ), electing to go without a CCT, was so unsuccessful in airstrikes that the 5th Special Forces Group commander, Colonel John Mulholland, directed a CCT, Matt Lienhard, along with a Tactical Air Control Party (TACP), to be attached to them even though they were already in the field. According to Bart Decker, one of the "Horse Soldiers" in Doug Stanton's book of the same name and the man in the most circulated photo of their exploits, "They were 'yard-saleing' bombs all over the place." From his location with their field commander, Major Mark Mitchell, he helped coordinate Lienhard's insertion, recognizing that 595 needed the Controller if they were to succeed and not kill friendlies. "Major Mitchell was a smart commander and a great guy," recalls Decker. On 22 October the two airpower experts joined ODA 595. It was not an easy assignment. "Toughest job in the world is to try and integrate into an ODA that doesn't want you," adds Decker. But Lienhard and the TACP performed flawlessly, dividing themselves into separate 595 elements and calling numerous "danger close" airstrikes with surgical precision.
A B-52 can carry as many as fifty-one 500-pound bombs and thirty 1,000-pounders distributed inside its cavernous bomb bay and slung from its wings. A B-1's payload (all of it internal) is 5,000 pounds more than the venerable 1950s-era B-52's, but it enjoys a sleeker design and a reputation for speed of delivery.
Stockdale is known as "the Admiral" inside Delta Force for his name's resemblance to the Vietnam naval Medal of Honor recipient's. All Delta Force operators use a personalized call sign to identify themselves. Tom Greer, the team leader, was Redfly and would go on to write the story of Delta's and Stockdale's Tora Bora mission in the book _Kill Bin Laden_ under the pseudonym Dalton Fury. The Delta A Squadron sergeant major also there to lead the mission was a man whose inexhaustible courage, resilience, and leadership on the Tora Bora mission remain legend in Delta. His Delta call sign: Ironhead. The names are bestowed by group consensus and not chosen by the individual.
Barely a year later, the Iraqi army would circulate copies of the movie _Black Hawk Down_ as a primer on how to defeat US forces.
Haqqani's prediction appeared in the _Laissez Faire City Times_ in an article titled "Afghanistan: An American Graveyard?" by Richard S. Ehrlich.
All enemy excerpts describing their participation in and impressions of Operation Anaconda originated on the Taliban website www.azzam.com and were generated by at least three individuals. Originally posted in 2003, they inevitably and eventually took on a predictable propagandist cast as the site was revised over the years. However, the author was able to corroborate original (2003) versions with friendly and enemy sources of information, such that the passages appearing on these pages most closely reflect eyewitness accounts by enemy combatants at the time. However, no passage should be read as accurate reporting of battle events but rather as insight into the disposition and mindset of enemy combatants.
The cave complex, as it came to be known, would later be revealed to have housed Osama bin Laden before his relocation to Tora Bora in December 2001. Kris's after-action report supported the notion: "Based on all the security positions overwatching the cave, all the mule feces and signs of occupation, I would say there was a good chance of this being true."
Based in part on Operation Anaconda, the Royal Australian Air Force, recognizing the need for a comparable capability Down Under, initiated the creation of its first Combat Control Team in 2006. Designated B Flight, No. 4 Squadron RAAF, it now operates from RAAF Base Williamtown, deploying Aussie CCT in support of Australian SOF worldwide.
D. J. Turner's crew would play a critical role in the coming hours and days. For Haas's men and the ATF, they would be involved in a friendly-fire incident less than an hour after striking the DShK. But as events developed on Takur Ghar forty-eight hours later, it was Turner who would find himself over the mountain when the battle there unfolded.
Every Combat Controller used the same "fires" frequency for strikes in the Shahi Khot. Not only did this allow for sequencing and handoffs, it crucially prevented fratricide. Despite the coming battles and dozens of "danger close" airstrikes conducted by CCT during Anaconda, not one instance of friendly fire took place under their control.
The nine-line brief is used by all US, NATO, and allied fighters and bombers to receive information from the individual controlling the strike or bomb drop on the ground. It is conducted upon first contact, usually over a predetermined geographic point known as the Initial Point but referred to as IP.
The guidon-fielding commander observed by J Team would turn out to be none other than Maulawi Saif-ur-Rahman Nasrullah Mansoor, who had refused to consider his subordinate's request for reinforcements.
This actually happened to Jay and Delta during the insertion of the main 101st forces earlier in the morning, when a flight of two AH-64 Apaches turned on J Team's OP, lining up for a gun/rocket run. Jay recalls all of them at the OP reflexively shouting "No! No!" as he grabbed for the handset and radio, rapidly switching to 243 MHz (the Guard frequency, used by all aircraft for emergencies and always monitored during operations), and called them off at the last second, saving the team and preventing a tragedy.
In light of events and the passage of time, there is no definitive answer as to which SEAL officer actually gave the implied order. Official accounts vary, as do the recollections of individuals involved, and nowhere are any names given. However, there are only two possibilities—Captain Kernan, the SEAL Team Six commander, or his operations officer, Commander Szymanski. Individuals with firsthand knowledge believe it was most likely Szymanski. In the official TF-11 JOC log, the call from Razor-03 on Slab's behalf received no official answer. The call sign acknowledging the call was Shark-78, the operations officer. Later, TF-Blue officers attempted to place the transmission's responsibility on the enlisted sailor manning the radio, but the Joint Operations Center log clearly shows the call as Shark-78, the TF-Blue operations officer, Szymanski.
Reporting on the enemy's disposition, or even its occupation of Takur Ghar prior to Razor-03's insertion of Mako-30, is a study in contradictions. Slab maintains they would never have inserted if informed about enemy forces. However, Glenn, the Delta intel analyst, claims to have briefed the threat. Additionally, members of both J Team and Mako-31 have stated they reported Takur Ghar's occupation by Al Qaeda. It is impossible to say where the critical disconnect was, but it was most likely within the SEALs' separate chain of command. It was another consequence of the SEAL senior leadership failure to communicate and coordinate their intentions and actions. What _is_ clear: Mako-30 was not aware before insertion.
This scenario resolves several conflicting theories put forth in other accounts and after-action reports, and Slab's own statements. Slab remains confident he checked a body. However, Slab's own testimony in various interviews, historical recordings, and witness statements is not consistent on the matter, some versions contradicting others. Fifteen years later, in the course of the Air Force's Medal of Honor investigation, the five surviving SEALs would change their stories further, countering their original witness statements widely circulated and used in awarding Chapman's Air Force Cross and confounding the Air Force's efforts. Later, Slab would claim to have moved across the Controller's feet and wondered why he didn't react if he was alive. But he never stopped to check a pulse or otherwise inspect the fallen man, who in reality was almost certainly Roberts.
Of Chapman's initial actions ahead of all the SEALs and in the face of an unknown and superior-positioned enemy, Slab would state unequivocally in his testimony, "I know if John hadn't engaged the first enemy position, it would have surely killed us all before we reached cover." Adding, "John died saving us from the enemy fire which was effective from three sides when he was killed," concluding with, "I feel privileged, honored to have known him and have called him my Friend. John deserves the highest medal we can get for him." These words, while expressing gratitude for the Combat Controller's bravery and audacity, would prove challenging to live by for some of Slab's higher-ups at SEAL Team Six in the years to come.
The following excerpt demonstrates the international composition of the enemy's forces: _With the first signs of night, [AC-130] planes arrived that carried machine guns similar in caliber to the DShK (12.7mm), although they were also able to fire missiles, and had night vision, which would allow vision for a distance of up to six kilometers away. We could do nothing but raise our hands and pray to Allah. Our brothers had dispersed, and were motionlessly positioned in trenches, for the enemy's weapons could detect any movement. Since the brothers had been engaged in battle until night, the planes found us to be easy night-targets and on that night, about twenty mujahideen were killed by their planes. Seven of them were Arabs, these being: Abul-Baraa Al-Maghribi (Morocco), Abul-Baraa Ash-Shami (Syria), Abu Bakr Al-Maghribi (Morocco), Abul-Hasan As-Somali (Somalia), Khalid Al-Islambooli Al-Ghamidi (Arabian Peninsula), Abu Bakr Azzam Al-Urduni (Jordan), and Abdus-Salam Ghazi Al-Misri (Egypt)._
The young Ranger officer had an embedded Air Force Tactical Air Control Party, but when Gabe and Self talked, the Ranger told him, "You're fires," thus settling any confusion as to who would be controlling airstrikes once the team hit the ground.
As with Mako-30, SEAL Team Six leadership rushed Mako-21 into the field, ill-prepared for their mission and leaving critical gear behind. Unbeknownst to AFO personnel in Gardez, they also established a separate line of communication with the TF-Blue TOC in Bagram, asking to be pulled from the mission. Ultimately they were extracted early without putting eyes on their objective or calling any airstrikes.
Attempts to claim that Bunker 1 is not occupied by the live Chapman are refuted by the fact that only those in Bunker 2 could have occupied Bunker 1. Only Gore-Tex Pants and the lone stalker from below came from elsewhere. Also, Bunker 2 had been attacking Bunker 1 repeatedly. Since that is the case, even if Gore-Tex Pants charging to hand-to-hand distance is a mistake, and then six minutes later the lone gunman does the same, the follow-on firefight that ensues (again) between the two bunkers is otherwise inexplicable. They'd know if it was fellow Al Qaeda at this point, having seen them and because they originally sent the forces to take the bunker in the form of the first flanker. Finally, it is now daylight.
The outcropping seen by Calvert was the same rock that the 60 gunner SEAL tumbled off when he got shot in the leg, just next to Bunker 1, which Chapman no doubt had just vacated.
The gunships above Operation Anaconda have sometimes received criticism for their failure to deliver results or remain on station. This is best refuted by D. J. Turner and his Grim-32 crew who remained on station overhead as the dawn broke, completely against AC-130 protocol and despite direct orders to return to base. As they flew north toward K2 airfield, headed for a severe "ass chewing" from Colonel Mulholland, the Task Force Dagger commander, the entire crew agreed it was the right thing to remain into daylight until fuel forced them from the battle. Gabe and the QRF had arrived at a coincidentally unfortunate time.
This was a second MH-47 with nothing but Rangers and the second part of the QRF. Diverted to Gardez until the situation stabilized or crystallized, it eventually landed at the base of Takur Ghar and disgorged thirteen more Rangers. Also aboard was Vic, the SEAL who left the safe house and hopped on the helicopter to get to Mako-30 without informing Blaber or anyone else. This would have far-reaching implications as the battle wore on.
Cory Lamoreaux survived to see his children. Greg Calvert kept his hand and, more remarkably, returned to full flight status and continued his career as a pilot.
According to the Pentagon's foremost Medal of Honor staffing expert, John Chapman earned not one but two Medals of Honor that morning. The first by charging and destroying the machine-gun bunker ahead of the SEALs and saving their lives and the second when he protected the CSAR helicopter. Each action rose to the level of the nation's highest honor, but the Air Force chose to pursue only a single medal, preferring (one presumes) to combine his actions into one irrefutable package.
For the first time in the history of air forces—any air force—the most decorated organization of a nation is not a flying unit. There are no pilots in the 24 SOW.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 5,427 |
@interface WaterFlowViewCell : UIView
@property (nonatomic,assign) NSString *ID;
@end
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 9,521 |
Queen Rock Montreal är ett livealbum av det engelska bandet Queen. Skivan släpptes 2007 som en dubbel-CD, och en trippelvinyl.
Skivan spelades in i Montréal i Québec, Kanada, på Forum de Montréal den 24 och 25 november 1981, exakt tio år innan sångaren i bandet Freddie Mercury dog av en följdsjukdom till AIDS.
Queen spelade Under Pressure live för första gången under de två konserterna.
Låtlista
Skiva ett
Intro (Taylor) - 1:59
We Will Rock You (May) - 3:06
Let Me Entertain You (Mercury) - 2:48
Play the Game (Mercury) - 3:57
Somebody to Love (Mercury) - 7:53
Killer Queen (Mercury) - 1:59
I'm in Love With My Car (Taylor) - 2:03
Get Down, Make Love (Mercury) - 4:45
Save Me (May) - 4:14
Now I'm Here (May) - 5:31
Dragon Attack (May) - 3:11
Now I'm Here (Reprise) (May) - 1:53
Love of My Life (Mercury) - 3:56
Skiva två
Under Pressure (Queen/Bowie) - 3:50
Keep Yourself Alive (May) - 3:29
Drum and Tympani Solo (Taylor) - 3:00
Guitar Solo (May) - 5:11
Flash (May) * - 2:11
The Hero (May) * - 1:51
Crazy Little Thing Called Love (Mercury) - 4:15
Jailhouse Rock (Leiber/Stoller) - 2:32
Bohemian Rhapsody (Mercury) - 5:28
Tie Your Mother Down (May) - 3:52
Another One Bites the Dust (Deacon) - 4:00
Sheer Heart Attack (Taylor) - 3:53
We Will Rock You (May) - 2:09
We Are the Champions (Mercury) - 3:27
God Save the Queen (tape) (arr. May) - 1:27
* tidigare osläppt
Medverkande artister
Freddie Mercury – sång, piano, akustisk gitarr i Crazy Little Thing Called Love
Brian May – gitarr, sång, piano i Save Me och Flash, synth i Flash
Roger Taylor – tummor, sång
John Deacon – bas
Joshua J. Macrae - mixproducent
Justin Shirley-Smith – mixproducent
Kris Fredriksson – pro tools hd
Reinhold Mack– inspelning
Kevin Metcalfe – redigering
Richard Gray – design
Livealbum 2007
Livealbum av Queen
Engelskspråkiga livealbum | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 8,564 |
package com.ctrip.xpipe.exception;
import com.ctrip.xpipe.AbstractTest;
import com.ctrip.xpipe.api.codec.Codec;
import com.ctrip.xpipe.api.codec.GenericTypeReference;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.core.JsonParseException;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.core.type.TypeReference;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper;
import org.junit.Assert;
import org.junit.Test;
import java.io.IOException;
/**
* @author wenchao.meng
*
* Aug 11, 2016
*/
public class ErrorMessageTest extends AbstractTest{
public enum ERRORCODE{
NET_EXCEPTION,
DB_EXCEPTION
}
public static class TestErrorMessage extends ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE>{
public TestErrorMessage(){}
public TestErrorMessage(ERRORCODE errorType, String errorMessage){
super(errorType, errorMessage);
}
}
@Test
public void testSubClass(){
TestErrorMessage testErrorMessage = new TestErrorMessage(ERRORCODE.DB_EXCEPTION, "hello");
String encode = Codec.DEFAULT.encode(testErrorMessage);
TestErrorMessage decode = Codec.DEFAULT.decode(encode, TestErrorMessage.class);
Assert.assertEquals(testErrorMessage, decode);
}
@Test
public void testSerializa() throws JsonParseException, JsonMappingException, IOException{
ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE> error = new ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE>(ERRORCODE.NET_EXCEPTION, "conntect refused");
String result = Codec.DEFAULT.encode(error);
logger.info("{}", result);
ObjectMapper om = new ObjectMapper();
ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE> desr = om.readValue(result, new TypeReference<ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE>>() {
});
Assert.assertEquals(error, desr);
desr = Codec.DEFAULT.decode(result, new GenericTypeReference<ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE>>() {
});
Assert.assertEquals(error, desr);
//test wrong message
try{
String wrong = "{\"errorType\":\"NET_EXCEPTION1\",\"errorMessage\":\"conntect refused\"}";
desr = om.readValue(wrong, new TypeReference<ErrorMessage<ERRORCODE>>() {
});
Assert.fail();
}catch(Exception e){
}
}
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 7,786 |
{"url":"https:\/\/cemulate.github.io\/solutions_massey\/e2-4-3.html","text":"Massey Exercise 2.4.3 Theorem: Suppose A is a retract of X, r: X \\rightarrow A is the retraction, and i : A \\rightarrow X is the inclusion. As usual, let i_* and r_* be the induced homomorphisms that operate on paths. If i_*\\pi(A) = \\im(i_*) is a normal subgroup of \\pi(X), then \\pi(X) is the direct product of \\im(i_*) and \\ker(r_*). Proof: First, note that \\ker(r_*) is necessarily a normal subgroup of \\pi(X) (r_* is a homomorphism so its kernel is a normal subgroup). The fact that \\im(i_*) is normal is a hypothesis. Second, note that \\ker(r_*) \\cap \\im(i_*) = 1. This is apparent from noting that any non-trivial element in \\im(i_*) would necessarily not be in \\ker(r_*). Now, we claim that (\\ker(r_*))(\\im(i_*)) = \\pi(X). Clearly, \\subseteq is trivial, so we show \\supseteq. Consider an arbitrary \\alpha \\in \\pi(X). Let \\beta = i_* r_* (\\alpha) \\qquad \\gamma = i_* r_* (\\alpha)^{-1} \\alpha Note that \\beta \\in \\im(i_*), trivially. To show that \\gamma \\in \\ker(r_*), we instead show that \\gamma^{-1} \\in \\ker(r_*). Note that: % And so, \\gamma^{-1} \\in \\ker(r_*) and \\gamma is as well. Then, simply observe that \\beta \\gamma = \\alpha. So, any element of \\pi(X) can be written as a product from \\ker(r_*) and \\im(i_*), and we\u2019ve shown the claim. So, we have two normal subgroups whose intersection is trivial, and whose product is all of \\pi(X). Therefore, we have \\pi(X) = \\ker(r_*) \\times \\im(i_*).","date":"2021-03-07 21:16:20","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 1, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.9999494552612305, \"perplexity\": 1919.3944629535292}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2021-10\/segments\/1614178378872.82\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20210307200746-20210307230746-00361.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
100 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, MA 02110, USA
100 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, MA 02110, USA Boston Massachusetts 02110 US
91 Summer St. Boston, MA 02110 0.76 mi
215 Charles Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA 1 mi
37 Stuart Street, Boston, MA 02116, USA 1.01 mi
26 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116, USA 1.17 mi
217 Stuart Street, Boston, MA 02116, USA 1.2 mi
Harborside Drive, Boston, MA 02128, USA 1.3 mi
161 East Berkeley Street, Boston, MA 02118, USA 1.46 mi
545 Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02116, USA 1.5 mi
Charles Street, Cambridge, MA 02141, USA 1.67 mi
The Shops at the Prudential Center, 105 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02199, USA 1.9 mi
1287 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 2.6 mi
1265 Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA 2.6 mi
92 Peterborough Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA 2.8 mi
900 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA 3 mi
The Brown Jug
1014 Revere Beach Parkway, Chelsea, MA 02150, USA 3.18 mi
http://brownjugrestaurant.com/
GF pizza available
Highland Kitchen
150 Highland Avenue, Somerville, MA 02143, USA 3.24 mi
http://www.highlandkitchen.com/
The Shops at Station Landing, 501 Fellsway, Medford, MA 02155, USA 3.28 mi
70 Woodside Avenue, Winthrop, MA 02152, USA 3.4 mi
http://www.lasiestarestaurante.com/
McKinnon's Market
620 Broadway, Everett, MA 02149, USA 3.48 mi
http://www.mckinnonsmarkets.com/ | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 9,954 |
Modelarstwo kolejowe – hobby, gałąź modelarstwa zajmująca się odwzorowywaniem obiektów związanych z transportem kolejowym.
Modelarstwo kolejowe tradycją sięga początków kolejnictwa. Modelarstwo kolejowe zyskało wielu zwolenników w Niemczech. Przyczyniła się do tego fabryka zabawek Märklin, która już w 1891 roku zaprezentowało pierwszy model kolejki elektrycznej. Większość modeli kolejowych jest zasilania elektrycznie, za pomocą transformatora. Wśród modelarzy kolejowych najbardziej typowe jest kolekcjonowanie modeli lokomotyw oraz wagonów masowo produkowanych przez przedsiębiorstwa. Powszechnie są również modele samodzielne wykonywane przez modelarzy. Wraz z kolekcjonowaniem modeli kolejowych modelarze zajmują się projektowaniem i budowaniem makiet kolejowych z zakupionych elementów lub samodzielne wykonanych. Makiety kolejowe stanowią odwzorowanie współczesnych lub dawnych historycznie kolei w wybranych krainach geograficznych. Rozmiar takiej makiety kolejowej uzależniony jest od wymaganej powierzchni.
Najbardziej rozpowszechnioną skalą w modelarstwie kolejowym jest skala H0, wywodząca się z Niemiec. Oprócz tej skali rozpowszechnione są również mniejsze skale w modelarstwie jak skala TT typowa dawniej dla Niemiec Wschodnich, skala N stworzona przez przedsiębiorstwo Minitrix oraz skala Z produkowana przez przedsiębiorstwo Märklin. Istnieją również większe skale w modelarstwie kolejowym jak skala 0 oraz skala 1 zaprezentowane przez zakład Märklin, ostatnia skala nadal jest produkowana przez to przedsiębiorstwo. Skale te mają jedynie nostalgiczne znaczenie, nie są obecnie masowo produkowane i rozpowszechnione ze względu na duże rozmiary. Wyjątkiem jest skala 2, znana bardziej jako kolejka ogrodowa odporna na warunki pogodowe i idealna do dużych ogrodów.
Zobacz też
Kolejki drewniane
Kolejki Piko
Kolejkowo - największa makieta kolejowa w Polsce
Bibliografia | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,502 |
We've one of the most advanced generation tools, experienced and qualified engineers and workers, recognized good quality manage systems and a friendly skilled product sales workforce pre/after-sales support for Injection Molding Parts , Plastic Injection Molding , injection molded cables , We sincerely welcome friends to negotiate business and start cooperation. We hope to join hands with friends in different industries to create a brilliant future.
We've been experienced manufacturer. Wining the majority on the crucial certifications of its market for Injection Molding Parts , Plastic Injection Molding , injection molded cables , Our company's main items are widely used all over the world; 80% of our products and solutions exported to the United States, Japan, Europe and other markets. All stuff sincerely welcome guests come to visit our factory. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 7,662 |
Sometimes being a "plein air" outdoor artist doesn't work out too well. Deb Baughman, Alliance Art Gallery's featured artist for April 2019, admits. "At one event," she ruefully recalls, I knocked over the easel and the painting went face down in the dirt." If that wasn't bad enough, she later laid the frame flat on the ground and sand blew over her art, basically ruining it.
Growing up without any school art classes, everyone in her family seemed talented in drawing or music. In college, she got a teaching degree that focused more on teaching than actual studio art. After teaching art for 33 years, Baughman didn't find free time for her own explorations of watercolor and oil until she retired. She is drawn to industrial scenes. A train engine. A silo. A barn. Living in a town of 250 with fields all around, she often paints the barn across the way, often with sheep or cattle grazing. Whether using watercolor or oil, her work portrays Midwest industrial and rural warmth, a sense of home. "I think people need to look at things they do not think are artistic. There might be something there … if you look again.
An opening reception will be held on Saturday April 13 from 5 until 8:00 pm. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 6,922 |
The atomic complex : a worldwide political history of nuclear energy.
La Grange Park, IL : American Nuclear Society, 1982.
Add tags for "The atomic complex : a worldwide political history of nuclear energy.". Be the first.
<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/223296630> # The atomic complex : a worldwide political history of nuclear energy.
schema:about <http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/223296630> ; # The atomic complex : a worldwide political history of nuclear energy. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 252 |
@class NSArray, NSString;
@interface IDEGroupedSegmentedControlGroup : NSObject <NSCopying>
{
NSString *_identifier;
NSArray *_items;
unsigned long long _trackingMode;
}
@property(readonly) unsigned long long trackingMode; // @synthesize trackingMode=_trackingMode;
@property(readonly) NSArray *items; // @synthesize items=_items;
@property(readonly) NSString *identifier; // @synthesize identifier=_identifier;
- (void).cxx_destruct;
- (BOOL)isEqual:(id)arg1;
- (BOOL)isEqualToGroupedSegmentedControlGroup:(id)arg1;
- (unsigned long long)hash;
- (id)copyWithZone:(struct _NSZone *)arg1;
- (id)initWithIdentifier:(id)arg1 items:(id)arg2 trackingMode:(unsigned long long)arg3;
@end
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,288 |
{"url":"http:\/\/cogsci.stackexchange.com\/questions?page=4&sort=votes","text":"# All Questions\n\n1k views\n\n### What transient factors affect performance on IQ tests?\n\nWhile performance on intelligence tests aim to measure an underlying relatively stable trait, there are presumably a range of transient factors that could temporarily lower or possibly even raise ...\n82 views\n\n### Do safety features cause drivers to engage in more risky behavior than they otherwise would?\n\nIt seems to be generally assumed that making cars safer for the occupants will reduce death, injury, and damage from traffic accidents. What are some examples of significant empirical research on ...\n174 views\n\n### What is a reliable physiological measure (e.g., serotonin levels) of positive affect?\n\nIs there a reliable physiological measure or correlate to positive affect? What does research say on this? I thought that serotonin levels are correlated with self-reported happiness levels, but, ...\n306 views\n\n### What does \u201cveridicality\u201d mean in terms of psychology?\n\nI'm reading the paper \"Visual Space Perception and Visually Directed Action\" by Loomis, Da Silva, Fujita and Fukusima (1992; pdf). In this paper, the word 'veridicality' is used in several sentences. ...\n230 views\n\n### Is Behaviorism incompatible with Cognitive Psychology?\n\nBoth disciplines have historically been at each other's throats, and Radical Behaviorists like B.F. Skinner often completely reject cognitive psychology at a philosophical level. It seems that today ...\n14 views\n\n### Has there been any research done that contrasts point-based and achievement-based gamification methods?\n\nStack Exchange is a good example of these two methods of gamification: Reputation Badges I am curious as to whether there has ever been any research done that defines and contrasts these methods? ...\n342 views\n\n### Why might a stutterer not stutter when talking to themselves, whispering, or singing?\n\nBackground: I'm a stutterer myself and have always wondered what caused my stuttering. There have been reports of the effects of certain genes and environmental factors that causes stuttering. But ...\n915 views\n\n### Motivation vs Goal Oriented Behavior\n\nWhat's the difference between these two terms when used in the context of cognitive psychology? To the best of my knowledge, research on 'Goal Oriented Behavior' refers to the subset of motivation ...\n357 views\n\n### Why do people talk fast in presentations when nervous?\n\nI was at a professional development seminar today, and the presenter, while being interesting and knowing his subject admitted to being nervous and was speaking very fast. I know I do this when I am ...\n590 views\n\n### Why is Asperger Syndrome poorly recognised in France?\n\nAsperger Syndrome is quite well-known in psychiatric circles, as well as (to a lesser degree) the general public, in many countries the western world. However, in France, Asperger Syndrome is ...\n211 views\n\n### Is there any Personality theory that uses scientific methodology instead of subjective interpretations?\n\nBackground I have come across a number of Personality theories. There are even disciplines of personality theories, dividing these theories according to the assumptions they are based upon. The most ...\n154 views\n\n### Perception of probability of being right\n\nThe probability that people percept may be different from the real one due to a number of factors, including the form in which their are presented, their context and biases (due to misinformation or ...\n237 views\n\n### Does dream recall disturb the processes of memory consolidation?\n\nPsychology in the time of Freud was occupied with dreams. Relaying these to one's analyst was an important part of treatment. Fast-forward to less than 100 years later, and we know so much about the ...\n161 views\n\n### Is there any recent work on modeling how we rapidly acquire new knowledge?\n\nI work with neural network models of human cognition a lot, and one thing that bugs me about them is the timescale: they learn over thousands of trials whereas humans seem to learn after a couple ...\n342 views\n\n### Does the transcription method used (e.g., printing, handwriting, typing, voice recording, etc.) affect memory retention?\n\nWhen I was in high school, one of my teachers used to make us hand print copies of materials from transparencies on an overhead projector (I may be showing my age), with the reasoning that re-writing ...\n273 views\n\n### Under what conditions does 60hz video produce visual artifacts?\n\nThere are some important thresholds of frame rate in video playback that effect whether or not animation appears fluid. This wikipedia page about Visible Frame Rate suggests that a framerate of 60 ...\n302 views\n\n### Modern replacement for Panksepp's \u201cAffective Neuroscience\u201d book?\n\nJaak Panksepp's book (Amazon link here) is a phenomenal and highly readable systems-based introduction to not only affective neuroscience, but the neuroscience of motivation in general. The problem ...\n160 views\n\nI have a young daughter who I am teaching to read, and I was given a \"Your Baby Can Read\" DVD set by a friend. When discussing it with friends, several of my teacher friends frowned upon the use of ...\n189 views\n\n### How can the success of Bayesian models be reconciled with demonstrations of heuristic and biased reasoning?\n\nIn recent years, Bayesian models of cognition have been used - with considerable success - to explain human reasoning in a variety of inferential tasks (Chater, Tenenbaum, & Yuille, 2006). These ...\n123 views\n\n### Images on personal computers - Which aspect of size to keep constant?\n\nFor various reasons we're doing a reaction time study involving images that runs on unstandardized equipment: patients' personal computers (unless they don't meet certain requirements). It's not about ...\n92 views\n\n### Is a Hopfield network with a continuous activation variable and a discrete time variable possible?\n\nI've found plenty of resources on Hopfield networks that use either discrete variables for both activation level and time or continuous variables for both activation level and time. Is it possible to ...\n122 views\n\n### What constructs help explain limited cognitive processing and the cognitive effects of rules that limit decision making choices?\n\nSupposed that I'm a married man, and my wife asks me to pick out a paint color for our new house. It's not terribly mentally taxing. However, my wife starts to add rules. The color can't be too ...\n224 views\n\n### Sensory Immersion Research?\n\nSensory deprivation is a relatively common technique for medititation and general consciousness-exploration. However, I'm more interested in sensory immersion. That is, deliberate overstimulation as ...\n137 views\n\n### Predicting how long a task will take\n\nAs a software engineer I have always struggled with predicting how long a project would take by underestimating and I have noticed that all of my colleagues have the same problem. In this video at ...\n76 views\n\n### What is the effect of not sub-vocalizing on reading comprehension?\n\nSometimes when reading, text segments are not so important or relevant, when that happens I tend to read between lines in a visual manner, without sub-vocalizing or pronouncing the words in my mind. ...\n197 views\n\n### What causes laughter?\n\nI was looking at this video from VSauce: \"Why did the chicken cross the road?\", where several facts about this old joke are exposed and explained. At some point, (6:59) Michael explains that there is ...\n2k views\n\n### How to get rid of subvocalization?\n\nWhen I read a text written in latin alphabet and I want to understand what it means I usually transform each word into spoken word (internal speech) and then I transform it into meaning. I can't ...\n137 views\n\n### Measuring the adoption of norms\n\nI'm trying to make a survey and I'm having trouble to find a scale to measure the adoption of norms. The people who fill in the survey have to think about a situation in which they were ashamed. For ...\n154 views\n\n### Is dissociative identity disorder a medical condition or artifact of psychotherapy?\n\nThe popular media has offered such examples as \"Eve\" (based on Chris Costner-Sizemore) and \"Sybil\" (based on Shirley Ardell Mason) as sufferers of dissociative identity disorder (at one point known as ...\n130 views\n\n### What does cognitive science say about whether to learn mathematics top-down from research papers?\n\nThere is currently a popular question on math.SE on whether it is effective to learn math top-down. By top-down I mean finding a paper that interests you which is obviously way over your head, ...\n96 views\n\n### Have there been any studies which report a positive correlation between eating certain foods and reported sleep disturbances?\n\nThis Skeptics question touched on the subject, but I'm more focused on studies that have been conducted under highly controlled circumstances, like a university sleep lab. We've all heard these old ...\n137 views\n\n### At what point does a complex become pathological?\n\nI've a first question so I apologize if the format is completely awry. I'm reading Meeting the Shadow: The Hidden Power of the Dark Side of Human Nature and I came across this passage by Edward C. ...\n151 views\n\n### What structures in the brain are called upon to strengthen coupling between bilateral movements?\n\nIt is very difficult for the normally-coordinated person to be able to pat his\/her head and rub his\/her stomach at the same time (or pick a similar activity). It seems to be possible to maintain the ...\n259 views\n\n### Why do humans like being touched?\n\nI wonder why people like to be touched so much, why would it make sense from a evolutionary perspective. I know people enjoy hugs and company of opposite sex but even people from the same sex hug and ...\n72 views\n\n### Why a person may have a temptation to do something unrelated when doing especially important thing?\n\nI would like to know, why a person may have a temptation to do something unrelated (or slightly related to his current task) when doing particularly important job? Like, when preparing for an ...\n94 views\n\n### How does daily amount of sleep vary within and between healthy adults?\n\nI'm interested in research that has employed the following or similar research design: Measure the daily amount of sleep every day for an for an extended period (e.g., more than a month) in a ...\n147 views\n\n### What is the effect of Social Proof on Conversion Rate?\n\nI'm wondering to what extent Social Proof helps the Conversion Rate of websites and marketing. Specifically I'm wondering what effect Social Proof would have on Conversion Rate for a sample task in ...\n121 views\n\n### Human behaviour in one-shot perfect information games\n\nBackground A one-shot game is one where two participants have some set of actions $\\{1, ... , n\\}$, they make their decision on which option to take (without knowing the decision of their partner, or ...\n84 views\n\n### Does self-directed speech help or hurt a blind subject's auditory recognition?\n\nRecently, it was found that self-directed speech was helpful to sighted subjects engaging in a visual search task: Participants searched for common objects, while being sometimes [sic] asked to ...\n323 views\n\n### What are the key examples of the use of computational methods in the study of biological neural networks?\n\nIn an upcoming postdoc, I'm going to be looking through biological neural network data in the hopes of finding some interesting \"patterns\". I'm coming at this field from a mathematics\/computer ...\n236 views\n\n### Why do teenagers take the internet and cyberbullying so seriously?\n\nBackground: I saw this post on the daily Mirror: A girl committed suicide because some users bullied her on ask.fm. I signed up to see what that site is, and it was some Q&A site. So she committed ...\n439 views\n\n### How is motivation influenced by chance of reward?\n\nSometimes, I work on a project where there is a chance that the whole project will become irrelevant before it is finished. I have noticed that even though I believe that the risk of this happening is ...\n155 views\n\n### If people did not have to work, what would motivate them to work?\n\nIn industrialized countries around the world, \"work\" appears to be something that most people try to avoid as much as they can, dreaming of winning a lottery so they will never have to work again -- ...\n338 views\n\n### Why are mind maps recommended for study and recap?\n\nIn both my last year of high school and my freshmen year at the university, I got strong recommendations to study using mind maps - especially because this is apparently better to cope with large ...\n3k views\n\n### Can we smell in dreams?\n\nI'm interested in whether people can smell in their dreams. Do people really experience smell in their dreams? For example, if I dream of smelling a flower, will I feel the smell, too? Is there any ...\n7k views\n\nCan a person become dependent on sleeping (more than they otherwise physically need) in a way that fits the definition of addiction, in the same way some psychology professionals may describe a person ...\n191 views\n\n### Can experience alter one's preferences for beauty?\n\nMy friend (a woman) is convinced that all men who find those posters of \"women scantily clad in their bathing suits or thongs and big breasts (often fake)\" attractive are simply brainwashed by ...\n202 views\n\n### Bias by which we tend to accept vague descriptions of ourselves\n\nThere's an effective strategy employed by horoscopes and \"psychics\" where they say vague statements like \"You like being with friends but you value your time alone\"; statements that basically \"cover ...","date":"2013-12-04 22:15:00","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.6591472029685974, \"perplexity\": 2647.045811005279}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2013-48\/segments\/1386163037568\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20131204131717-00084-ip-10-33-133-15.ec2.internal.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
\section{Introduction}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.77\linewidth]{figures/intro.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\textbf{Dense human body estimation with/without visibility modeling.} We propose to learn dense visibility to improve human body estimation in terms of faithfulness to the input image and robustness to truncation (top) or occlusions (bottom). We show the estimated meshes without/with visibility modeling in columns 2-3 and the vertex visibility labels in columns 4-5 (\textcolor{purple}{purple:visible}, \textcolor{orange}{orange:invisible}).}
\label{fig:intro}
\end{figure}
Estimating 3D human pose and shape from monocular images is a crucial task for various applications such as performance retargeting, virtual avatars, and human action recognition.
It is a fundamentally challenging problem due to the depth ambiguity and the complex nature of human appearances that vary with articulation, clothing, lighting, viewpoint, and occlusions.
To represent the complicated 3D human bodies via compact parameters, model-based methods like SMPL~\cite{loper2015smpl} have been widely used in the community.
However, SMPL parameters represent human bodies in a holistic manner, causing their limited flexibility to fit real-world images faithfully via direct regression.
More importantly, the regression-based methods tend to fail when a human body is not fully visible in the image, \emph{e.g.}, occluded or out of frame~\cite{kocabas2021pare}.
In this work, we aim to learn human body estimation that is faithful to the input images and robust to partial-body cases.
Instead of directly regressing SMPL parameters, we train a neural network to predict the coordinate heatmaps in three dimensions for each human joint and mesh vertex.
The dense heatmap-based representation can preserve the spatial relationship in the image domain and model the uncertainty of predictions.
It is shown to be effective in localizing visible joints/vertices and flexible to fit an input image faithfully~\cite{sun2018integral,moon2018v2v,moon2019camera,moon2020i2l}.
Nonetheless, the x and y-axis heatmaps are defined in the image coordinates, which cannot represent the out-of-frame (\emph{i.e.}, truncated by image boundaries) body parts.
In addition, occlusions by objects or the human body itself could cause ambiguity for depth-axis predictions.
Without knowing which joints/vertices are visible, the network tends to produce erroneous outputs on partial-body images.
To address this, we propose \emph{Visibility-aware Dense Body (VisDB)}, a heatmap-based dense representation augmented by visibility.
Specifically, we train a network to predict binary truncation and occlusion labels along with the heatmaps for each human joint and vertex.
With the visibility modeling, the proposed network can learn to make more accurate predictions based on the observable cues.
In addition, the vertex-level occlusion predictions can serve as a depth ordering signal to constrain depth predictions.
Finally, by using visibility as the confidence of 3D mesh prediction, we demonstrate that VisDB is a powerful intermediate representation which allows us to regress and/or optimize SMPL parameters more effectively.
In Figure~\ref{fig:intro}, we show examples of truncation and occlusions as well as the dense human body estimations with and without visibility modeling.
Considering that most existing 3D human datasets lack dense visibility annotations, we obtain pseudo ground-truths from dense UV estimations~\cite{guler2018densepose}.
Given the estimated UV map of an image, we calculate the pixel-to-vertex correspondence by minimizing the distance of their UV coordinates.
Each vertex mapped to a human pixel is considered visible, and vice versa.
Note that this covers the cases of truncation, self-occlusions, and occlusions by other objects.
We further show that the dense vertex-to-pixel correspondence provides a good supervisory signal to localize vertices in the image space.
Since dense UV estimations are based on part-wise segmentation masks which are robust to partial-body images, the dense correspondence loss can mitigate the inaccurate pseudo ground-truth meshes and better align the outputs with human silhouettes.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, we conduct extensive experiments on multiple human datasets used by prior arts.
Both qualitative and quantitative results on the Human3.6M~\cite{ionescu2013human3}, 3DPW~\cite{von2018recovering}, 3DPW-OCC~\cite{von2018recovering,zhang2020object}, and 3DOH~\cite{zhang2020object} datasets show that learning visibility significantly improves the accuracy of dense human body estimation, especially on images with truncated or occluded human bodies.
The main contributions of our work are:
\begin{itemize}
%
\item We propose VisDB, a heatmap-based human body representation augmented with dense visibility.
%
We train a neural network to predict the 3D coordinates of human joints and vertices as well as their truncation and occlusion labels.
%
We obtain pseudo ground-truths of visibility labels from image-based dense UV estimates, which are also used as additional supervision signal to better align our predictions with the input image.
%
\item We show how the dense visibility predictions can be used for robust human body estimation. First, we exploit occlusion labels to supervise vertex depth predictions. Second, we regress and optimize SMPL parameters to fit VisDB (partial-body) outputs by using visibility as confidence weighting.
%
%
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}
\noindent {\bf Model-based human body estimation.}
Most existing methods on human body estimation adopt a model-based representation.
For instance, SMPL~\cite{loper2015smpl} is a widely-used statistical human body model that maps a set of pose $\theta \in \mathbb{R}^{72}$ and shape $\beta \in \mathbb{R}^{10}$ parameters to a 3D human mesh $V \in \mathbb{R}^{6890\times3}$.
In SMPL, $\theta$ represents the axis-angle 3D rotations of 24 joints, and $\beta$ is the top-10 PCA coefficients of a statistical human shape space.
Early methods iteratively optimize the SMPL parameters to fit the estimated 2D keypoints~\cite{bogo2016keep} or silhouettes~\cite{lassner2017unite}.
Several recent works~\cite{kanazawa2018end,pavlakos2018learning,omran2018neural,pavlakos2019texturepose,kolotouros2019learning,kolotouros2021prohmr} train a deep neural network to directly regress SMPL parameters from an input image.
However, the SMPL representation is not always informative enough for a network to learn as it embeds the articulated body shapes in a low dimensional space.
The regression-based methods often fail on truncation and occlusion cases since the networks tend to make holistic predictions based on certain body parts only~\cite{kocabas2021pare}.
Instead, we show that localizing 3D vertices is a more suitable task to learn for such scenarios.
The network needs to learn the relationship between the parameters and the shape as well in order to estimate accurate SMPL parameters.
\noindent {\bf Dense human body representations.}
To fit the complicated shapes more faithfully, dense human body representations have been proposed, including volumetric space~\cite{varol2018bodynet}, occupancy field~\cite{saito2019pifu,saito2020pifuhd}, dense UV correspondence~\cite{alldieck2019tex2shape,zeng20203d}, and 3D mesh~\cite{kolotouros2019convolutional,choi2020pose2mesh,moon2020i2l,lin2021end,lin2021mesh}.
Among these methods, I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} proposes an efficient heatmap representation to estimate human joints and vertices in the image space and root-relative depth axis.
It can fit the input images accurately since heatmaps preserve the spatial relationship in image features extracted by a convolutional neural network (CNN).
Nonetheless, even when certain body parts are not visible in the image, this model is designed to localize all the joints and vertices within the image frame.
We show that it can negatively affect the model performance and emphasize the importance of additional visibility information.
\noindent {\bf Occlusion-aware methods.}
Several methods have been proposed to deal with the challenging scenarios where human bodies are partially truncated or occluded.
Muller~\emph{et al.}~\cite{muller2021self} and Hassan~\emph{et al.}~\cite{hassan2019resolving} introduce explicit modeling of human body self-contact and human-scene interactions, respectively.
These methods require ground-truth annotations which are hard to obtain.
Other methods leverage human-centric heatmaps, part segmentation masks, or dense UV estimations~\cite{guler2018densepose}, to increase the model robustness on truncated images~\cite{rockwell2020full}, crowded scenes (occluded by other people)~\cite{sun2021monocular} or general occlusions~\cite{xu2019denserac,guler2019holopose,zhang2020object,kocabas2021pare}.
Although effective in particular scenarios, most of them directly regress SMPL parameters which still suffer from the limited representation strength.
To the best our our knowledge, the proposed VisDB representation is the first to explicitly model dense human body visibility (including truncation and all occlusion scenarios), which is trained with pseudo ground-truth visibility labels from dense UV estimates.
\section{Approach}
We illustrate our overall framework in Figure~\ref{fig:framework}.
In Section~\ref{sec:prelim}, we describe a heatmap-based representation which we build our method upon.
Then, we introduce the proposed Visibility-aware Dense Body (VisDB) in Section~\ref{sec:visdb}.
Each human joint and mesh vertex is represented by 1) three 1D heatmaps (x, y, z dimensions) which define its 3D coordinate and 2) three binary labels indicating its visibility in three dimensions.
We train a network model to predict the dense heatmaps and visibility, which represents a partial body faithful to the input image.
The visibility estimations can be interpreted as depth ordering signals or prediction confidence.
In Section~\ref{sec:depth}, we design a visibility-guided depth ordering loss to self-supervise depth estimation.
In Section~\ref{sec:smpl}, we show that VisDB outputs can be used to fit SMPL models accurately and efficiently.
We train a regression network to estimate SMPL parameters based on the joint and vertex coordinates as well as their visibility labels.
During inference, we initialize the SMPL parameters by the regressor and further optimize them to align with the VisDB predictions.
Finally, in Section~\ref{sec:dense-uv}, we exploit dense UV correspondence to obtain robust pseudo labels of visibility and weakly supervise vertex localization in the image space.
\subsection{Preliminaries: Heatmap-based Representation}
\label{sec:prelim}
Given an input image, a prior heatmap-based method~\cite{moon2020i2l} estimates three 1D heatmaps $H=\{H^x, H^y, H^z\}$ for each human joint and mesh vertex.
The x and y-axis heatmaps $H^x, H^y$ are defined in the image space, and the z-axis heatmaps $H^z$ are defined in the depth space relative to root joint.
We denote the joint heatmaps as $H_J \in \mathbb{R}^{N_J \times D \times 3}$ and vertex heatmaps as $H_V \in \mathbb{R}^{N_V \times D \times 3}$, where $N_J$ is the number of joints, $N_V$ is the number of vertices, and $D$ is the heatmap resolution.
The heatmaps are predicted based on image features $F \in \mathbb{R}^{c \times h \times w}$ extracted by a backbone network as follows:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
H^x &= f^{\text{ 1D},x} (\text{avg}^y (f^\text{ up} (F))), \\
H^y &= f^{\text{ 1D},y} (\text{avg}^x (f^\text{ up} (F))), \\
H^z &= f^{\text{ 1D},z} (\psi (\text{avg}^{x,y} (F)))),
\end{split}
\label{eq:heatmaps}
\end{equation}
where $f^{\text{1D},i}$ is 1-by-1 1D convolution for the $i$-th axis heatmaps, $\text{avg}^i$ is i-axis marginalization by averaging, $f^\text{ up}$ denotes up-sampling by deconvolution, and $\psi$ is a 1D convolution layer followed by reshaping operation.
Finally, the continuous 3D coordinates of joints $J \in \mathbb{R}^{N_J \times 3}$ and vertices $V \in \mathbb{R}^{N_V \times 3}$ can be obtained by applying soft-argmax on the discrete heatmaps $H_J$ and $H_V$, respectively.
More details can be found in~\cite{moon2020i2l} and supplementary material.
\subsection{Visibility-aware Dense Body}
\label{sec:visdb}
Heatmap-based representations are shown effective in estimating human bodies in the image space.
However, they often fail when the human bodies are occluded or truncated since the predictions are based on spatial image features and limited by the image boundaries.
Without knowing which joints/vertices are invisible, fitting a SMPL model on the entire body tends to generate erroneous outputs.
To deal with more practical scenarios where only partial bodies are visible, we make the following adaptations to a heatmap-based representation:
1) To augment the x and y-axis heatmaps, we predict binary truncation labels $S^x,S^y$, indicating whether a joint or vertex is within the image frame,
2) For the z-axis heatmaps, we predict a binary occlusion label $S^z$ which specifies the depth-wise visibility.
The visibility labels are predicted in a similar fashion as the heatmaps in Eq.~\eqref{eq:heatmaps}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S^x &= \sigma (\text{avg}^x (g^{\text{1D},x} (\text{avg}^y (f^\text{ up} (F))))),\\
S^y &= \sigma (\text{avg}^y (g^{\text{1D},y} (\text{avg}^x (f^\text{ up} (F))))),\\
S^z &= \sigma (\text{avg}^z (g^{\text{1D},z} (\psi (\text{avg}^{x,y} (F))))),
\label{eq:visibility}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $g^{\text{1D}}$ is a 1-by-1 1D convolutional layer similar to $f^{\text{1D}}$ and $\sigma$ is a sigmoid operator.
We then concatenate the $\{S^x,S^y,S^z\}$ predictions to obtain joint visibility $S_J \in \mathbb{R}^{N_J \times 3}$ and vertex visibility $S_V \in \mathbb{R}^{N_V \times 3}$.
By applying the soft-argmax operators to the predicted 1D heatmaps, the final output of our network becomes $\{J, V, S_J, S_V\}$, referred to as Visibility-aware Dense Body (VisDB).
With the visibility information, the network model can learn to focus on the visible body parts and push the invisible parts towards the image boundaries.
In our experiments (Table~\ref{tab:ablation_heatmap}), we demonstrate that visibility modeling significantly reduces the errors of visible vertices.
Moreover, the visibility labels can be seen as the confidence of coordinate predictions, which are essential to mesh regularization and completion via SMPL model fitting as described in Section~\ref{sec:smpl}.
We denote the ground-truth VisDB as $\{J^*, V^*, {S_J}^*, {S_V}^*\}$ and train the network by using the following losses.
The joint coordinate loss $\mathcal{L}_{joint}$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{joint} = \|J - J^*\|_1 .
\label{eqn:joint}
\end{equation}
The vertex coordinate loss $\mathcal{L}_{vert}$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{vert} = \|V - V^*\|_1 .
\label{eqn:vertex}
\end{equation}
We also regress the joints from vertices using a pre-defined regressor $W \in \mathbb{R}^{N_V \times N_J}$ and calculate a regressed-joint loss $\mathcal{L}_{r-joint}$:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{r-joint} = \|WV - J^*\|_1 .
\label{eqn:r-joint}
\end{equation}
Similar to~\cite{moon2020i2l}, we apply losses on the mesh surface normal and edge length as shape regularization.
The normal loss $\mathcal{L}_{norm}$ and edge loss $\mathcal{L}_{edge}$ are:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{norm} &= \sum_f \sum_{\{v_i,v_j\} \subset f}
\Big| \Big\langle \frac{v_i - v_j}{\| v_i - v_j \|_2}, {n_f}^* \Big\rangle \Big| , \\
\mathcal{L}_{edge} &= \sum_f \sum_{\{v_i,v_j\} \subset f}
\Big| \|v_i - v_j\|_2 - \|{v_i}^* - {v_j}^*\|_2 \Big| ,
\end{align}
where $f$ is a mesh surface, $n_f$ is the unit normal vector of f, and $v_i,v_j$ are the coordinates of vertex $i$ and $j$, respectively.
Finally, we define the joint and vertex visibility loss $\mathcal{L}_{vis}$ with binary cross entropy (BCE):
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{vis} = \text{BCE}(S_J, {S_J}^*) + \text{BCE}(S_V, {S_V}^*) .
\end{equation}
The VisDB prediction is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:framework} (left).
\subsection{Resolving Depth Ambiguity via Visibility}
\label{sec:depth}
Vertex-level visibility can not only be seen as model confidence for SMPL fitting but also provide depth ordering information.
Intuitively, visible vertices should have lower depth value compared to the invisible vertices projected to the same pixel.
We observe that VisDB network generally predicts accurate 2D coordinates and visibility, but sometimes fails at depth predictions when the human body occludes itself and the pose is less common in the training datasets.
To resolve the depth ambiguity in self-occlusion cases, we propose a depth ordering loss $\mathcal{L}_{depth}$ based on vertex visibility as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{depth} = \sum_x \sum_y \text{ReLU} \Big( \max_{v \in Q(x,y)} v^z - \min_{\overline{v} \in \overline{Q}(x,y)} \overline{v}^z \Big) ,
\end{equation}
where $Q(x,y)$ is the set of vertices projected to a discretized image coordinate $(x,y)$ which belong to the front (occluding) part, and $\overline{Q}$ contains the vertices of the back (occluded) part(s).
The definition can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Q(x,y) &= \Big\{ v \big| v\mapsto(x,y) \wedge P(v) = p^*(x,y) \Big\}
\\
\overline{Q}(x,y) &= \Big\{ v \big| v\mapsto(x,y) \wedge P(v) \neq p^*(x,y) \Big\} ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mapsto$ denotes the discrete projection and $P(v)$ is the part label of vertex $v$ defined in DensePose~\cite{guler2018densepose}.
We define the front part $p^*(x,y)$ by finding the vertex with highest z-axis visibility score $s^z$ as:
\begin{equation}
p^*(x,y) = P \Big(\argmax_{v\mapsto(x,y)} {s_v}^z \Big) .
\end{equation}
$\mathcal{L}_{depth}$ is designed to push the self-occluded part(s) $\overline{Q}$ to the back and non-occluded part $Q$ to the front, where the occlusion information is given by the z-axis visibility.
Note that we compare the maximum depth (back side) of $Q$ and the minimum depth (front side) of $\overline{Q}$, and thus $\mathcal{L}_{depth}$ will be nonzero if the depth ordering disagrees with occlusion prediction and zero if the parts do not overlap anymore.
Since this loss depends on accurate visibility estimations, we only apply it during the fine-tuning stage.
\iffalse
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/smpl.pdf}
\caption{A figure}
\label{fig:test1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/dense_uv.pdf}
\caption{Another figure}
\label{fig:test2}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\fi
\subsection{SMPL Fitting from Visible Dense Body}
\label{sec:smpl}
From the VisDB predictions, we can obtain the 3D coordinates and visibility of human joints and vertices.
While the partial-body outputs are faithful to the input image from the front view, they sometimes look abnormal from a side view or contain rough surfaces.
To regularize the body shape and complete the truncated parts, we perform model fitting on the visible dense body predictions.
Given the coordinates and visibility of joints and vertices, we train a regression network to estimate SMPL pose $\theta \in \mathbb{R}^{72}$ and shape $\beta \in \mathbb{R}^{10}$ parameters.
The regressed parameters are then forwarded to the SMPL model to generate the mesh coordinates denoted as $\text{SMPL}(\theta,\beta) \in \mathbb{R}^{N_V \times 3}$.
Unlike prior art~\cite{moon2020i2l} which regresses a SMPL model from all the joints regardless of their visibility, our VisDB representation allows us to fit the visible partial body only.
The training objectives of the SMPL regressor include SMPL parameter error, vertex error, joint error, and the negative log-likelihood of a pose prior distribution.
The SMPL parameter loss $\mathcal{L}_{smpl}$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{smpl} = \|\theta - \theta^*\|_1 + \|\beta - \beta^*\|_1 ,
\label{eqn:smpl}
\end{equation}
where $\theta^*$ and $\beta^*$ are the ground-truth pose and shape parameters.
The SMPL vertex loss $\mathcal{L}_{smpl-vert}$ and joint loss $\mathcal{L}_{smpl-joint}$ are defined similarly as in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:vertex} and ~\eqref{eqn:r-joint} but weighted by visibility $S_V,S_J$ as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{smpl-vert} = S_V \odot \|\text{SMPL}(\theta,\beta) - {V_c}^*\|_1 ,
\label{eqn:smpl-vert}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{smpl-joint} = S_J \odot \| W \text{SMPL}(\theta,\beta) - {J_c}^*\|_1 ,
\label{eqn:smpl-joint}
\end{equation}
where $\odot$ denotes element-wise multiplication, and $({V_c}^*,{J_c}^*)$ are the ground-truth root-relative coordinates of vertices and joints in the camera space.
Ideally, the VisDB network makes more confident predictions on the clearly visible joints and vertices.
Hence, we see the visibility labels as prediction confidence and use them to weight the coordinate losses.
In addition, we apply a pose prior loss $\mathcal{L}_{prior}$ using a fitted Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) provided by~\cite{pavlakos2019expressive}:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{prior} = - \text{log} \Big( \sum_i G_i(\theta) \Big) ,
\label{eqn:prior}
\end{equation}
where $G_i$ is the $i$-th component of GMM.
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figures/smpl.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\textbf{Comparing VisDB and SMPL outputs.} We observe that VisDB prediction (middle) is faithful to the input image (left) but the mesh surfaces are sometimes rough. The optimized SMPL mesh (right), on the other hand, is regularized and smooth.}
\label{fig:smpl}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
We observe that the regressed SMPL meshes roughly capture the human pose and shape but do not always align with the VisDB predictions in details.
Therefore, we use the regressed parameters as initialization and propose efficient test-time optimization to further optimize the SMPL parameters against VisDB predictions.
For this optimization, we apply similar losses as in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:smpl-vert}-\eqref{eqn:prior}, except that the ground-truths $\{{V_c}^*,{J_c}^*\}$ are replaced by the VisDB predictions converted into root-relative coordinates in the camera space.
Please refer to the supplemental material for details on estimating the root joint coordinate in the camera space.
Since we initialize the SMPL parameters by the regression network and the use strong supervisory signal, \emph{i.e.}, 3D joint and vertex coordinates, the test-time optimization only takes around 100 iterations to converge using an Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam}.
We illustrate the process of SMPL regression and optimization in Figure~\ref{fig:framework} (right).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figures/dense_uv.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\textbf{Dense UV correspondence and visibility labels.}
%
Given an input image, we obtain a fitted SMPL mesh and dense UV estimation from off-the-shelf algorithms.
%
To acquire the dense visibility labels for training, we identify the truncated vertices from the fitted mesh.
%
From the dense UV map, we calculate the pixel-to-vertex correspondence to obtain pseudo ground-truths of vertex occlusions as well as image-space coordinates for weak supervision.
}
\label{fig:dense_uv}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Exploiting Dense UV Correspondence}
\label{sec:dense-uv}
Most existing 3D human datasets do not provide joint visibility labels, and none annotates vertex visibility.
To train our VisDB network, we obtain pseudo ground-truths from the fitted SMPL meshes and dense UV estimations.
For x and y-axis truncation, we can simply identify the truncated joints/vertices by projecting the fitted mesh onto the image plane.
Occlusion, however, cannot be easily inferred from the input image or fitted mesh alone.
One can estimate self-occlusion by rendering a fitted mesh, but this does not capture occlusions by other objects.
More importantly, the fitting algorithm used to get the pseudo ground-truth meshes is not robust to partial-body cases.
To address this, we propose to exploit dense UV correspondence between the input image and a SMPL mesh.
Dense UV estimation provides the part-based segmentation mask of a human body as well as continuous UV coordinates of each human pixel, which are robust to truncation and occlusions.
We calculate the UV coordinate of each pixel by applying an off-the-shelf dense UV estimation method~\cite{guler2018densepose}.
For each human pixel $p$, we then find the corresponding mesh vertex $v$ whose UV coordinate is closest to the pixel.
The pixel-to-vertex $M_P$ and vertex-to-pixel $M_V$ mappings can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
M_P &= \big\{ p \rightarrow v \big| v = \text{argmin}_{v'} \big\| \text{UV}(v') - \text{UV}(p) \big\|_2 \forall p \big\} \\
M_V &= \big\{ v \rightarrow \{p'\} \big| M_P(p') = v \forall v \big\}.
\end{split}
\label{eqn:mappings}
\end{equation}
A vertex mapped to at least one pixel is labeled as visible or occluded otherwise.
Similar to~\cite{guler2019holopose,xu2019denserac,zeng20203d}, we also utilize the dense vertex-pixel correspondence as weak supervision for better alignment with the human silhouettes.
For each vertex $v$, we calculate the center of its corresponding pixels $M_V(v)$ and define a UV correspondence loss $\mathcal{L}_{uv}$ as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{uv} =
\sum_{v} {s_v}^z \Big\|v^{x,y} -
\sum_{p \in M_V(v)} \frac{p}{|M_V(v)|} \Big\|_1 ,
\label{eqn:uv}
\end{equation}
where $v^{x,y}$ is the 2D projection of vertex $v$ and ${s_v}^z$ is the binary occlusion label with ${s_v}^z=1$ indicating that the vertex $v$ is visible.
The UV correspondence loss can not only mitigate the inaccurate pseudo ground-truth meshes, but improve the faithfulness to human silhouettes since it is based on segmentation mask predictions.
We empirically discover that this direct vertex-level supervision is more efficient and effective for VisDB training compared to rendering-based losses~\cite{xu2019denserac,dwivedi2021learning}.
The proposed vertex-pixel correspondence and visibility labeling are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:dense_uv}.
\subsection{Model Training and Inference}
\label{sec:details}
We first train the VisDB network on 3D data with mesh annotations, then fine-tune it on all training data by adding the depth ordering and UV correspondence losses.
The regressor network is trained to estimate the SMPL parameters based on the estimated coordinates and visibility of joints and vertices.
During inference, we apply optional optimization on the regressed SMPL parameters to best align with the VisDB predicted mesh.
For the VisDB network backbone, we use a ResNet50~\cite{he2016deep} model pre-trained on the ImageNet dataset~\cite{deng2009imagenet}.
The weights are updated by the Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam} with a mini-batch size of 64.
We represent a human body by $N_J=30$ joints and $N_V=6890$ vertices, and the heatmap resolution $D=64$.
In addition, we use the ground-truth bounding boxes to crop the human region from an input image and resize it to 256$\times$256.
The bounding boxes of testing data are estimated by a pre-trained Mask R-CNN~\cite{he2017mask} model if not available in the dataset.
We apply common data augmentations such as random scaling (±25\%), rotation (±45°), horizontal flip, and color jittering (±20\%) during training.
Considering that truncation and occlusion examples are rare in most 3D human datasets, we include random occlusion masks and bounding box shifting (±25\%) as additional augmentations to increase the partial-body/whole-body ratio.
Our models are implemented with PyTorch~\cite{paszke2019pytorch} and trained with NVIDIA Tesla V100 GPUs.
More implementation details are presented in the supplemental material.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Datasets and Metrics}
Following most prior arts, we adopt mixed 2D-3D training on the MSCOCO~\cite{lin2014microsoft}, Human3.6M~\cite{ionescu2013human3}, MuCo-3DHP~\cite{mehta2018single}, and 3DPW~\cite{von2018recovering} datasets.
The pseudo ground-truth meshes of Human3.6M and MSCOCO are obtained by applying SMPLify-X~\cite{pavlakos2019expressive} to fit the joint annotations.
We evaluate our models on the Human3.6M, 3DPW, 3DPW-OCC~\cite{von2018recovering,zhang2020object}, and 3DOH~\cite{zhang2020object} testing sets.
Note that 3DOH is composed of images with object occlusions and 3DPW-OCC contains a subset of 3DPW sequences where the human bodies are partially occluded.
For quantitative evaluation, we calculate the common joint and vertex error metrics in the camera space and report them in millimeters (mm), including MPJPE (mean per-joint position error)~\cite{ionescu2013human3}, PA-MPJPE (Procrustes-aligned mean per-joint position error)~\cite{zhou2018monocap}, and MPVE (mean per-vertex error)~\cite{pavlakos2018learning}.
\iffalse
\begin{table}[!t]
\scriptsize
\begin{minipage}{.45\linewidth}
\centering
\caption{Human3.6M}\label{tab:first}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Method & MPJPE$\downarrow$ & PA-MPJPE$\downarrow$ \\
\midrule
GraphCMR~\cite{kolotouros2019convolutional} & - & 50.1 \\
Pose2Mesh~\cite{choi2020pose2mesh} & 64.9 & 47.0 \\
I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} & 55.7 & 41.1 \\
METRO~\cite{lin2021end} & 54.0 & 36.7 \\
Graphormer~\cite{lin2021mesh} & 51.2 & 34.5 \\
\midrule
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
%
\begin{minipage}{.54\linewidth}
\centering
\caption{3DPW}\label{tab:second}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\toprule
Method & MPJPE$\downarrow$ & PA-MPJPE$\downarrow$ & MPVE$\downarrow$ \\
\midrule
GraphCMR~\cite{kolotouros2019convolutional} & - & 70.2 & - \\
Pose2Mesh~\cite{choi2020pose2mesh} & 89.2 & 58.9 & 109.3 \\
I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} & 82.8 & 50.0 & 96.3 \\
METRO~\cite{lin2021end} & 77.1 & 47.9 & 88.2 \\
Graphormer~\cite{lin2021mesh} & 74.7 & 45.6 & 87.7 \\
\midrule
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\fi
\begin{table*}[!t]
\scriptsize
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Quantitative evaluations on Human3.6M~\cite{ionescu2013human3} and 3DPW~\cite{von2018recovering}.} To align the settings, we train our baseline, I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l}, on the same datasets, and denote it by I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$. Both our mesh and SMPL parameter outputs perform favorably against the prior state-of-the-arts.}
\setlength\tabcolsep{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
\toprule
& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Human3.6M} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{3DPW} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Method & Output & MPJPE$\downarrow$ & PA-MPJPE$\downarrow$ & MPJPE$\downarrow$ & PA-MPJPE$\downarrow$ & MPVE$\downarrow$ \\
\midrule
GraphCMR~\cite{kolotouros2019convolutional} & Mesh & - & 50.1 & - & 70.2 & - \\
Pose2Mesh~\cite{choi2020pose2mesh} & Mesh & 64.9 & 47.0 & 89.2 & 58.9 & 109.3 \\
I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} & Mesh & 55.7 & 41.1 & 93.2 & 57.7 & 109.2 \\
I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$~\cite{moon2020i2l} & Mesh & - & - & 84.5 & 51.1 & 98.2 \\
METRO~\cite{lin2021end} & Mesh & 54.0 & 36.7 & 77.1 & 47.9 & 88.2 \\
Mesh Graphormer~\cite{lin2021mesh} & Mesh & 51.2 & {\bf34.5} & 74.7 & 45.6 & 87.7 \\
VisDB (mesh) & Mesh & {\bf51.0} & {\bf34.5} & {\bf73.5} & {\bf44.9} & {\bf85.5} \\
\midrule
NBF~\cite{omran2018neural} & Param & - & 59.9 & - & - & - \\
HMR~\cite{kanazawa2018end} & Param & 88.0 & 56.8 & - & 81.3 & - \\
DenseRaC~\cite{xu2019denserac} & Param & 76.8 & 48.0 & - & - & - \\
I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} & Param & - & - & 100.0 & 60.0 & 121.5 \\
OOH~\cite{zhang2020object} & Param & - & 41.7 & - & - & - \\
SPIN~\cite{kolotouros2019learning} & Param & - & 41.1 & - & 59.2 & 116.4 \\
I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$~\cite{moon2020i2l} & Param & - & - & 88.0 & 55.5 & 102.3 \\
DSR~\cite{dwivedi2021learning} & Param & 60.9 & 40.3 & 85.7 & 51.7 & 99.5 \\
VIBE~\cite{kocabas2020vibe} & Param & 65.6 & 41.4 & 82.0 & 51.9 & 99.1 \\
TCMR~\cite{choi2021beyond} & Param & 62.3 & 41.1 & - & - & - \\
DecoMR~\cite{zeng20203d} & Param & 60.6 & 39.3 & - & - & - \\
PARE~\cite{kocabas2021pare} & Param & - & - & 79.1 & 46.4 & 94.2 \\
VisDB (param) & Param & {\bf50.0} & {\bf33.8} & {\bf72.1} & {\bf44.1} & {\bf83.5} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:sota}
\end{table*}
\iffalse
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Evaluations on partial-body images.} We report the performance on truncated examples in the 3DPW~\cite{von2018recovering} test set. The I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$~\cite{moon2020i2l} models are trained on the same datasets.}
\setlength\tabcolsep{5pt}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
& MPJPE & PA-MPJPE & MPVE \\
\midrule
I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$ (mesh) & 85.6 & 51.5 & 98.9 \\
VisDB (mesh) & {\bf75.4} & {\bf45.4} & {\bf88.1} \\
\midrule
I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$ (param) & 93.1 & 59.2 & 117.4 \\
VisDB (param) & {\bf74.0} & {\bf44.9} & {\bf86.6} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:partial-body}
\end{table}
\fi
\subsection{Quantitative Comparisons}
\noindent {\bf Human3.6M and 3DPW.}
In Table~\ref{tab:sota}, we compare the performance of our method and prior arts on the Human3.6M~\cite{ionescu2013human3} and 3DPW~\cite{von2018recovering} datasets.
For VisDB and I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l}, we report the results of both heatmap-based mesh outputs (mesh) and SMPL parameters (param).
Our SMPL parameters are obtained from regression and test-time optimization.
Note that each method uses different network backbone, human body representation, training datasets, and inference strategy.
For instance, METRO~\cite{lin2021end} and Mesh Graphormer~\cite{lin2021mesh} adopt a transformer-based~\cite{vaswani2017attention} network while the others use CNN backbones.
VIBE~\cite{kocabas2020vibe} and TCMR~\cite{choi2021beyond} are video-based approaches whereas the others only take images as input.
Despite these differences, VisDB performs favorably against prior methods in term of most evaluation metrics.
Particularly, our method achieves larger performance gains on the 3DPW dataset since it contains more truncation and occlusion cases.
The VisDB performance is most directly comparable with I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} as we adopt similar training settings.
For fair comparisons, we re-train its model on the same datasets and denote it as I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$.
The results demonstrate that our visibility learning improves both the mesh and SMPL outputs significantly.
In prior literature, SMPL parameters generally lead to higher errors compared to dense mesh outputs, which we conjecture is caused by the difficulty to directly regress low-dimensional parameters.
On the contrary, VisDB is a powerful intermediate representation that provides dense 3D information of visible partial body, allowing us to regress and optimize SMPL parameters more accurately.
In our experiments, we observe that VisDB (mesh) captures the human silhouettes better but VisDB (param) produces lower errors since the ground-truth meshes are also regularized by SMPL representation.
\begin{table*}[!t]
\scriptsize
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Quantitative evaluations on 3DOH~\cite{zhang2020object} and 3DPW-OCC~\cite{von2018recovering,zhang2020object}.} We compare VisDB with prior occlusion-aware methods to demonstrate its robustness on partial-body cases. For VisDB and I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$~\cite{moon2020i2l}, We report both the mesh and SMPL parameter (mesh/param) results.}
\setlength\tabcolsep{6pt}
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrr}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{3DOH} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{3DPW-OCC} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-3}\cmidrule(lr){4-6}
Method & MPJPE$\downarrow$ & PA-MPJPE$\downarrow$ & MPJPE$\downarrow$ & PA-MPJPE$\downarrow$ & MPVE$\downarrow$ \\
\midrule
OOH~\cite{zhang2020object} & - & 58.5 & - & 72.2 & - \\
I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$~\cite{moon2020i2l} & 67.0/69.3 & 46.3/47.9 & 96.5/98.0 & 61.0/62.6 & 120.2/127.0 \\
PARE~\cite{kocabas2021pare} & 63.3 & 44.3 & 91.4 & 57.4 & 115.3 \\
VisDB & {\bf62.1/60.9} & {\bf43.2/42.7} & {\bf90.3/87.3} & {\bf57.1/56.0} & {\bf114.0/110.5} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:partial-body}
\end{table*}
\noindent {\bf 3DPW-OCC and 3DOH.}
To emphasize the robustness on partial-body images, we further evaluate on two occlusion datasets: 3DPW-OCC~\cite{von2018recovering,zhang2020object} and 3DOH~\cite{zhang2020object}.
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:partial-body}, VisDB produces lower errors on both datasets compared to prior occlusion-aware methods.
While I2L-MeshNet$^\dagger$ performs considerably worse on these images, the errors by our model remain relatively low.
\subsection{Ablation Studies}
\begin{table}[!t]
\scriptsize
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Ablation studies of VisDB.} We compare the joint/vertex errors of VisDB mesh outputs on 3DPW~\cite{von2018recovering} with/without individual components. The results show that truncation modeling (${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{x,y}$), occlusion modeling (${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{z}$), depth ordering loss $\mathcal{L}_{depth}$, and UV correspondence loss $\mathcal{L}_{uv}$ each reduces the errors by a clear margin.}
\setlength\tabcolsep{6pt}
\begin{tabular}{cccc ccc}
\toprule
${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{x,y}$ & ${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{z}$ & $\mathcal{L}_{depth}$ & $\mathcal{L}_{uv}$ & MPJPE & PA-MPJPE & MPVE \\
\midrule
& & & & 84.5 & 51.1 & 98.2 \\
& \ding{51} & \ding{51} & \ding{51} & 79.4 & 47.8 & 91.1 \\
\ding{51} & & \ding{51} & \ding{51} & 75.8 & 45.5 & 88.0 \\
\ding{51} & \ding{51} & & \ding{51} & 77.3 & 46.3 & 88.9 \\
\ding{51} & \ding{51} & \ding{51} & & 74.9 & 45.6 & 87.1 \\
\ding{51} & \ding{51} & \ding{51} & \ding{51} & {\bf73.5} & {\bf44.9} & {\bf85.5} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:ablation_heatmap}
\end{table}
\noindent {\bf VisDB network training.}
To evaluate the contribution of individual components in our method, we perform ablation studies on the 3DPW dataset~\cite{von2018recovering}.
Table~\ref{tab:ablation_heatmap} shows the performance of VisDB mesh outputs with/without truncation modeling ${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{x,y}$, occlusion modeling ${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{z}$, depth ordering loss $\mathcal{L}_{depth}$, and dense UV correspondence loss $\mathcal{L}_{uv}$.
Without ${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{x,y}$, ${\mathcal{L}_{vis}}^{z}$, $\mathcal{L}_{depth}$, and $\mathcal{L}_{uv}$, the vertex error increases by 6.3mm, 3.1mm, 3.9mm, and 1.9mm, respectively.
These results show that both visibility modeling and depth ordering loss play a crucial role in VisDB training.
\noindent {\bf SMPL parameter fitting.}
In Table~\ref{tab:ablation_smpl}, we quantitatively compare the SMPL models obtained from different methods.
Given an estimated VisDB mesh, we can regress the SMPL parameters and/or optimize them during inference, and each process can be done with/without dense visibility weighting (Eq.~\eqref{eqn:smpl-vert} and~\eqref{eqn:smpl-joint}).
By using visibility, the mean vertex error of regressed SMPL models drops by 8.7mm.
With the proposed test-time optimization, we can further reduce the error by 3.8mm.
\begin{comment}
\noindent {\bf Visibility predictions.}
Finally, we evaluate the quality of our visibility predictions on the 3DPW dataset~\cite{von2018recovering}.
In Table~\ref{tab:ablation_vis}, we report the mean accuracy of vertex truncation in the x and y-axis as well as occlusion in the z-axis.
Note that the occlusion labels for both training and evaluation are pseudo ground-truths obtained from dense UV estimations as described in Section~\ref{sec:dense-uv}.
The results demonstrate that the VisDB network can effectively learn to predict accurate visibility labels with the proposed data augmentations with truncation and occlusion.
\end{comment}
\begin{table}[!t]
\scriptsize
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Ablation studies of SMPL models}. We report the performance of SMPL outputs on the 3DPW dataset~\cite{von2018recovering}, which shows the effectiveness of our optimization and the importance of visibility in both regression and optimization work flows.}
\setlength\tabcolsep{6pt}
\begin{tabular}{llccc}
\toprule
Regression & Optimization & MPJPE & PA-MPJPE & MPVE \\
\midrule
- & - & 73.5 & 44.9 & 85.5 \\
w/o vis & - & 79.0 & 48.8 & 96.2 \\
w/o vis & w/o vis & 77.6 & 47.0 & 93.9 \\
w/ vis & - & 74.9 & 45.3 & 87.3 \\
w/ vis & w/ vis & {\bf72.1} & {\bf44.1} & {\bf83.5} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:ablation_smpl}
\end{table}
\begin{comment}
\begin{table}[!t]
\scriptsize
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Quantitative evaluations of visibility predictions.} We report the accuracy of individual visibility prediction (x-axis truncation, y-axis truncation, and z-axis occlusion) on the 3DPW dataset~\cite{von2018recovering}. The results demonstrate that our data augmentation strategies effectively facilitate the visibility learning.}
\setlength\tabcolsep{6pt}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\toprule
Data augmentation & X-truncation & Y-truncation & Occlusion \\
\midrule
\ding{55} & 0.86 & 0.79 & 0.61 \\
\ding{51} & {\bf0.98} & {\bf0.94} & {\bf0.83} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:ablation_vis}
\end{table}
\end{comment}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\scriptsize
\centering
\setlength\tabcolsep{1pt}
\begin{tabular}[t]{cccccc}
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_bar_00_00480_crop.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW_meshnet/downtown_bar_00_00480_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_bar_00_00480_lixel.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_bar_00_00480_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_bar_00_00480_param_vis.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_bar_00_00480_param_vis2.jpg}
\\
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_stairs_00_00424_crop.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW_meshnet/downtown_stairs_00_00424_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_stairs_00_00424_lixel.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_stairs_00_00424_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_stairs_00_00424_param_vis.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_stairs_00_00424_param_vis2.jpg}
\\
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_rampAndStairs_00_00916_crop.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW_meshnet/downtown_rampAndStairs_00_00916_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_rampAndStairs_00_00916_lixel.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_rampAndStairs_00_00916_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_rampAndStairs_00_00916_param_vis.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_rampAndStairs_00_00916_param_vis2.jpg}
\\
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_walkBridge_01_01071_crop.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW_meshnet/downtown_walkBridge_01_01071_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_walkBridge_01_01071_lixel.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_walkBridge_01_01071_param.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_walkBridge_01_01071_param_vis.jpg} &
\includegraphics[height=20mm]{figures/3DPW/downtown_walkBridge_01_01071_param_vis2.jpg}
\\
Input & I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} & VisDB & VisDB & Visibility & Visibility
\\
& (param) & (mesh) & (param) & (front view) & (side view)
\end{tabular}
\caption{\textbf{Qualitative results on the 3DPW dataset~\cite{von2018recovering}.} For each example, we show the results of I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} SMPL model, our VisDB mesh, our optimized SMPL model, as well as visibility predictions in the front and side views (\textcolor{purple}{purple:visible}, \textcolor{orange}{orange:invisible}). When the human body is occluded (top two rows) or truncated (bottom two rows), both our VisDB output and optimized SMPL mesh capture the human silhouettes faithfully (\emph{e.g.}, the left hand in row 1 and the head region in rows 2,3,4).}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Qualitative Results}
Figure~\ref{fig:results} shows sample results by VisDB and I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} on the 3DPW dataset~\cite{von2018recovering}.
I2L-MeshNet~\cite{moon2020i2l} regresses SMPL parameters from the entire heatmap-based mesh output, which leads to erroneous output meshes on truncated or occluded examples.
VisDB predicts accurate vertex visibility labels, improving both the image-space dense body estimation and SMPL parameter optimization.
The results show that VisDB (mesh) outputs can fit the human silhouettes faithfully, and VisDB (params) further regularizes and smooths the mesh surfaces.
More qualitative results are shown in the supplemental material.
\section{Conclusions}
In this work, we address the problem of dense human body estimation from monocular images.
Particularly, we identify the limitations of existing model-based and heatmap-based representations on truncated or occluded bodies.
As such, we propose a visibility-aware dense body representation, VisDB.
We obtain visibility pseudo ground-truths from dense UV correspondences and train a network to predict 3D coordinates as well as truncation and occlusion labels for each human joint and vertex.
Extensive experimental results show that visibility modeling can facilitate human body estimation and allow accurate SMPL fitting from partial-body predictions.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 1,453 |
The same motorcycle does not have to be used.
Only harbours and lighthouses visited from 1 September 2011 will be eligible for this award.
Any number of harbours & lighthouses may be visited per trip, from home base and back.
The applicant must be a paid-up member of the Club in good standing, with a valid membership at the time of the ride(s) to each of the 15 harbours & 15 lighthouses.
2. Photographic proof, showing the motorcycle in question, rider, and the recognizable landmark must accompany the application. It has to be a clear image of rider/pillion & motorcycle at a sign depicting the lighthouse or harbour visited. If there is no recognizable landmark, a picture of the GPS with coordinates will also be accepted.
3. Planning your ride and riding your plan is at own risk. The Committee and Rides Committee take no responsibility whatsoever.
4. Submit your application form to the Committee for approval once you've visited all harbours & lighthouses according to the rules and regulations. The decision to make the award is entirely at the discretion of the Committee. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 7,336 |
\section{Introduction}
The discovery of neutrino masses and mixings marked a turning point in
our understanding of nature and brought neutrino physics to the focus
of attention of the particle, nuclear and astrophysics
communities~\cite{jung}. Recent neutrino oscillation observations and
experiments have allowed the determination of the differences of the
neutrino masses squared and the flavour mixing angles in the leptonic
sector. The solar~\cite{altmann,smy,ahmad,aharmim},
atmospheric~\cite{fukuda,Ashie:2005ik} and
reactor~\cite{bemporad,Araki:2004mb} experiments produced the
following results:
\begin{eqnarray}
7.1\times 10^{-5}(eV)^2 \leq \Delta^2m_{12} \leq 8.9\times 10^{-5}(eV)^2,\\
\nonumber\\
0.24 \leq sin^2\theta_{12} \leq 0.40,\\
\nonumber\\
1.4\times 10^{-3}(eV)^2 \leq \Delta^2m_{13} \leq 3.3\times 10^{-3}(eV)^2,\\
\nonumber\\
0.34 \leq sin^{2}\theta_{23} \leq 0.68,
\end{eqnarray}
at $90\%$ confidence level~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei,schwetz}.
The CHOOZ experiment~\cite{chooz} determined an upper bound for the flavour
mixing angle between the first and the third generation:
\begin{equation}
sin^{2} \theta_{13} \leq 0.046.
\end{equation}
Neutrino oscillation data are insensitive to the absolute value of neutrino
masses and also to the fundamental issue of whether neutrinos are
Dirac or Majorana particles. Hence, the importance of the
upper bounds on neutrino masses provided by the searches that probe
the neutrino mass values at rest: beta decay experiments~\cite{eitel},
neutrinoless double beta decay~\cite{eliot} and precision
cosmology~\cite{elgaroy}.
On the theoretical side, the discovery of neutrino masses and mixings
has also brought about important changes.
In the Standard Model, the Higgs and Yukawa sectors, which are
responsible for the generation of the masses of quarks and charged
leptons, do not give mass to the neutrinos. Furthermore, the Yukawa
sector of the Standard Model already has too many parameters
whose values can only be determined from experiment. These two facts,
taken together, point to the necessity and convenience of eliminating
parameters and systematizing the observed hierarchies of
masses and mixings, as well as the presence or absence of CP violating
phases, by means of a flavour or family symmetry under which the
families transform in a non-trivial fashion. Such a flavour symmetry
might be a continuous group or, more economically, a finite group.
In a recent paper, we argued that such a flavour symmetry, unbroken at
the Fermi scale, is the permutational symmetry of three objects,
$S_{3}$, and introduced a Minimal $S_{3}$-invariant Extension of the
Standard Model~\cite{kubo1}. In this model, we imposed $S_{3}$ as a
fundamental symmetry in the matter sector. This assumption led us
necessarily to extend the concept of flavour and generations to the
Higgs sector. Hence, going to the irreducible representations of
$S_{3}$, we added to the Higgs $SU(2)_{L}$ doublet in the
$S_{3}$-singlet representation two more Higgs $SU(2)_{L}$
doublets, which can only belong to the two components of the
$S_{3}$-doublet representation. In this way, all the matter fields in
the Minimal $S_{3}$-invariant Extension of the Standard Model - Higgs,
quark and lepton fields, including the right handed neutrino fields-
belong to the three dimensional representation ${\bf 1}\oplus{\bf 2}$
of the permutational group $S_{3}$. The leptonic sector of the model
was further constrained by an Abelian $Z_{2}$ symmetry.
The group $S_{3}$~\cite{Fritzsc1,pakvasa1,Fritzsc2,harari,Fritzsc3,yamanaka,kaus,Fritzsch4,Harrison} and the product
groups $S_{3}\times S_{3}$~\cite{Harrison,mondragon1,mondragon2,xing} and
$S_{3}\times S_{3}\times S_{3}$~\cite{hall,hall2} have been
considered by many authors to explain successfully the hierarchical
structure of quark masses and mixings in the Standard Model. However,
in these works, the $S_{3}$, $S_{3}\times S_{3}$ and $S_{3}\times
S_{3}\times S_{3}$ symmetries are explicitly broken at the Fermi scale
to give mass to the lighter quarks and charged leptons, neutrinos are
left massless. Some other interesting models based on the $S_{3}$,
$S_{4}$ and $A_{4}$ flavour symmetry groups, unbroken at the Fermi
scale, have also been proposed~\cite{koide,ma,ma2,babu,chen,grimus-la}, but in
those models, equality of the number of fields and the irreducible
representations is not obtained.
In this paper, we derive exact, explicit, analytic expressions for
the elements of the leptonic mixing matrix, $V_{PMNS}$, as functions
of the masses of the charged leptons and the neutrinos. By comparison
with the latest experimental data on neutrino mixings, we obtain
numerical values for the neutrino masses in good agreement with the
experimental bounds extracted from the precision observation of the
cosmic microwave background (CMB) and the neutrinoless double beta decay.
\section{The Minimal $S_{3}$-invariant Extension of the Standard
Model}
In the Standard Model analogous fermions in different generations have
completely identical couplings to all gauge bosons of the strong, weak
and electromagnetic interactions. Prior to the introduction of the
Higgs boson and mass terms, the Lagrangian is chiral and invariant
with respect to permutations of the left and right fermionic fields.
The six possible permutations of three objects $(f_{1},f_{2},f_{3})$
are elements of the permutational group $S_{3}$. This is the discrete,
non-Abelian group with the smallest number of elements. The
three-dimensional real representation is not an irreducible
representation of $S_{3}$. It can be decomposed into the direct
sum of a doublet $f_{D}$ and a singlet $f_{s}$, where
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
f_{s}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(f_{1}+f_{2}+f_{3}),\\
\\
f_{D}^{T}=\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(f_{1}-f_{2}),\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(f_{1}+f_{2}-2f_{3})\right).
\end{array}
\e
The direct product of two doublets ${\bf p_{D}}^{T} =(p_{D1},p_{D2})$
and ${\bf q_{D}}^{T}=(q_{D1},q_{D2})$ may be decomposed into the direct
sum of two singlets ${\bf r_{s}}$ and ${\bf r_{s'}}$, and one doublet
${\bf r_{D}}^{T}$ where
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lr}
{\bf r_{s}} = p_{D1} q_{D1} + p_{D2}q_{D2}, & {\bf r_{s'}} =
p_{D1}q_{D2} - p_{D2}q_{D1},
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
{\bf r_{D}}^{T}= (r_{D1},r_{D2})=(p_{D1} q_{D2} + p_{D2}q_{D1},p_{D1} q_{D1} - p_{D2}q_{D2}).
\end{equation}
The antisymmetric singlet ${\bf r_{s'}}$ is not invariant under $S_{3}$.
Since the Standard Model has only one Higgs $SU(2)_{L}$ doublet,
which can only be an $S_{3}$ singlet, it can only give mass to the
quark or charged lepton in the $S_{3}$ singlet representation, one in
each family, without breaking the $S_{3}$ symmetry.
Hence, in order to impose $S_{3}$ as a fundamental symmetry, unbroken
at the Fermi scale, we are led to extend the Higgs sector of the
theory. The quark, lepton and Higgs fields are
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Q^T=(u_L,d_L)~,~ u_R~,~d_R~,~\\L^T=(\nu_L,e_L)~,~e_R~,~
\nu_R~\mbox{ and }~H,
\end{split}
\e
in an obvious notation. All of these fields have three species, and
we assume that each one forms a reducible representation ${\bf 1}_S\oplus{\bf 2}$.
The doublets carry capital indices $I$ and $J$, which run from $1$ to $2$,
and the singlets are denoted by
$Q_3,~u_{3R},~d_{3R},~L_3,~e_{3R},~\nu_{3R}$ and $~H_S$. Note that the subscript $3$ denotes the
singlet representation and not the third generation.
The most general renormalizable Yukawa interactions of this model are given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_Y = {\cal L}_{Y_D}+{\cal L}_{Y_U}
+{\cal L}_{Y_E}+{\cal L}_{Y_\nu},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
{\cal L}_{Y_D} &=&
- Y_1^d \overline{ Q}_I H_S d_{IR} - Y_3^d \overline{ Q}_3 H_S d_{3R} \\
& & -Y^{d}_{2}[~ \overline{ Q}_{I} \kappa_{IJ} H_1 d_{JR}
+\overline{ Q}_{I} \eta_{IJ} H_2 d_{JR}~]\\
& & -Y^d_{4} \overline{ Q}_3 H_I d_{IR} - Y^d_{5} \overline{ Q}_I H_I d_{3R}
+~\mbox{h.c.} ,
\label{lagd}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
{\cal L}_{Y_U} &=&
-Y^u_1 \overline{ Q}_{I}(i \sigma_2) H_S^* u_{IR}
-Y^u_3\overline{ Q}_3(i \sigma_2) H_S^* u_{3R} \\
& & -Y^{u}_{2}[~ \overline{ Q}_{I} \kappa_{IJ} (i \sigma_2)H_1^* u_{JR}
+\eta \overline{ Q}_{I} \eta_{IJ}(i \sigma_2) H_2^* u_{JR}~]\\
& &
-Y^u_{4} \overline{ Q}_{3} (i \sigma_2)H_I^* u_{IR}
-Y^u_{5}\overline{ Q}_I (i \sigma_2)H_I^* u_{3R} +~\mbox{h.c.},
\label{lagu}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
{\cal L}_{Y_E} &=& -Y^e_1\overline{ L}_I H_S e_{IR}
-Y^e_3 \overline{ L}_3 H_S e_{3R} \\
& & - Y^{e}_{2}[~ \overline{ L}_{I}\kappa_{IJ}H_1 e_{JR}
+\overline{ L}_{I} \eta_{IJ} H_2 e_{JR}~]\\
& & -Y^e_{4}\overline{ L}_3 H_I e_{IR}
-Y^e_{5} \overline{ L}_I H_I e_{3R} +~\mbox{h.c.},
\end{array}
\label{lage}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lcl}
{\cal L}_{Y_\nu} &=& -Y^{\nu}_1\overline{ L}_I (i \sigma_2)H_S^* \nu_{IR}
-Y^\nu_3 \overline{ L}_3(i \sigma_2) H_S^* \nu_{3R} \\
& & -Y^{\nu}_{2}[~\overline{ L}_{I}\kappa_{IJ}(i \sigma_2)H_1^* \nu_{JR}
+ \overline{ L}_{I} \eta_{IJ}(i \sigma_2) H_2^* \nu_{JR}~]\\
& & -Y^\nu_{4}\overline{ L}_3(i \sigma_2) H_I^* \nu_{IR}
-Y^\nu_{5} \overline{ L}_I (i \sigma_2)H_I^* \nu_{3R}+~\mbox{h.c.},
\label{lagnu}
\end{array}
\e
and
\begin{equation}
\kappa = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
0& 1\\ 1 & 0\\
\end{array}\right)~~\mbox{and}~~
\eta = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
1& 0\\ 0 & -1\\
\end{array}\right).
\label{kappa}
\end{equation} Furthermore, we add to the Lagrangian the Majorana mass terms for
the right-handed neutrinos \begin{equation} {\cal L}_{M} = -M_1 \nu_{IR}^T C
\nu_{IR} -M_3 \nu_{3R}^T C \nu_{3R}.
\label{majo}
\end{equation}
Due to the presence of three Higgs fields, the Higgs potential
$V_H(H_S,H_D)$ is more complicated than that of the Standard
Model. This potential was analyzed by Pakvasa and Sugawara~\cite{pakvasa1} who
found that in addition to the $S_{3}$ symmetry, it has a permutational
symmetry
$S_{2}$: $H_{1}\leftrightarrow H_{2}$, which is not a subgroup of the
flavour group $S_{3}$, and an Abelian discrete symmetry that we will use
for selection rules of the Yukawa couplings in the leptonic sector. In
this communication, we will assume that the vacuum respects the
accidental $S_{2}$ symmetry of the Higgs potential and that
\begin{equation}
\langle H_{1} \rangle = \langle H_{2} \rangle.
\end{equation}
With these assumptions, the Yukawa interactions, eqs. (\ref{lagd})-(\ref{lagnu}) yield mass matrices,
for all fermions in the theory, of the general form
\begin{equation}
{\bf M} = \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
\mu_{1}+\mu_{2} & \mu_{2} & \mu_{5}
\\ \mu_{2} & \mu_{1}-\mu_{2} &\mu_{5}
\\ \mu_{4} & \mu_{4}& \mu_{3}
\end{array}\right).
\label{general-m}
\end{equation}
The Majorana mass for the left handed neutrinos $\nu_{L}$ is generated
by the see-saw mechanism. The corresponding mass matrix is
given by
\begin{equation}
{\bf M_{\nu}} = {\bf M_{\nu_D}}\tilde{{\bf M}}^{-1}({\bf M_{\nu_D}})^T,
\label{seesaw}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{{\bf M}}=\mbox{diag}(M_1,M_1,M_3)$.
\\
In principle, all entries in the mass matrices can be complex since
there is no restriction coming from the flavour symmetry $S_{3}$.
The mass matrices are diagonalized by bi-unitary transformations as
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rcl}
U_{d(u,e)L}^{\dag}{\bf M}_{d(u,e)}U_{d(u,e)R}
&=&\mbox{diag} (m_{d(u,e)}, m_{s(c,\mu)},m_{b(t,\tau)}),
\\
\\
U_{\nu}^{T}{\bf M_\nu}U_{\nu} &=&
\mbox{diag} (m_{\nu_1},m_{\nu_2},m_{\nu_3}).
\end{array}
\label{unu}
\end{equation}
The entries in the diagonal matrices may be complex, so the physical
masses are their absolute values.
The mixing matrices are, by definition,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
V_{CKM} = U_{uL}^{\dag} U_{dL},& V_{PMNS} = U_{eL}^{\dag} U_{\nu} K.
\label{ckm1}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the diagonal matrix of the Majorana phase factors.
\section{The mass matrices in the leptonic sector and $Z_{2}$
symmetry}
A further reduction of the number of parameters in the leptonic sector
may be achieved by means of an Abelian $Z_{2}$ symmetry. A possible set
of charge assignments of $Z_{2}$, compatible with the experimental
data on masses and mixings in the leptonic sector is given in Table I.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
$-$ & $+$
\\ \hline
$H_S, ~\nu_{3R}$ & $H_I, ~L_3, ~L_I, ~e_{3R},~ e_{IR},~\nu_{IR}$
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize {\bf Table I}. $Z_2$ assignment in the leptonic sector.}
\end{center}
These $Z_2$ assignments forbid the following Yukawa couplings
\begin{equation}
Y^e_{1} = Y^e_{3}= Y^{\nu}_{1}= Y^{\nu}_{5}=0.
\label{zeros}
\end{equation}
Therefore, the corresponding entries in the mass matrices vanish, {\it
i.e.}, $\mu_{1}^{e}=\mu_{3}^{e}=0$ and $\mu_{1}^{\nu}=\mu_{5}^{\nu}=0$.
\begin{center}{\it The mass matrix of the charged leptons}\end{center}
The mass matrix of the charged leptons takes the form
\begin{equation}
M_{e} = m_{\tau}\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
\tilde{\mu}_{2} & \tilde{\mu}_{2} & \tilde{\mu}_{5}
\\ \tilde{\mu}_{2} &-\tilde{\mu}_{2} &\tilde{\mu}_{5}
\\ \tilde{\mu}_{4} & \tilde{\mu}_{4}& 0
\end{array}\right).
\label{charged-leptons-m}
\end{equation}
The unitary matrix $U_{eL}$ that enters in the definition of the
mixing matrix, $V_{PMNS}$, is calculated from
\begin{equation}
U_{eL}^{\dag}M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag}U_{eL}=\mbox{diag}(m_{e}^{2},m_{\mu}^{2},m_{\tau}^{2}),
\end{equation}
where $m_{e}$, $m_{\mu}$ and $m_{\tau}$ are the masses of the charged
leptons, and
\begin{equation}
M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag}=m_{\tau}^2 \left( \begin {array}{ccc} 2|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^2+|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}&|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}&2|\tilde{\mu}_{2}||\tilde{\mu}_{4}|e^{-i\delta_{e}}\\\noalign{\medskip}|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}&2|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^{2}+|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}&0\\\noalign{\medskip}2|\tilde{\mu}_{2}||\tilde{\mu}_{4}|e^{i\delta_{e}}&0&2\,|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^{2}\end {array} \right).
\label{mmdag}
\end{equation}
Notice that this matrix has only one non-ignorable phase factor.
The parameters $|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|$, $|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|$ and
$|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|$ may readily be expressed in terms of the charged
lepton masses. From the invariants of $M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag}$, we get the
set of equations
\begin{equation}
Tr(M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag})=m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^{2}+m_{\tau}^{2}
=m_{\tau}^{2}\left[4|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^{2}+2\left(|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^{2}+|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}\right)
\right],
\label{trace}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\chi(M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag})&=&m_{\tau}^{2}(m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^{2})+m_{e}^{2}m_{\mu}^{2}\\
&=&4m_{\tau}^{4}\left[
|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^{4}+|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^{2}\left(|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^{2}+|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}\right)+|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^{2}|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2}
\right],
\end{array}
\label{chis}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
det(M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag})=m_{e}^{2}m_{\mu}^{2}m_{\tau}^{2}
=4m_{\tau}^{6}|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^{2}|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^{2}|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^{2},
\end{array}
\label{determinant}
\end{equation}
where {\small
$\chi(M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag})=\frac{1}{2}\left[(Tr(M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag}))^{2}-Tr(M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag})^2
\right]$}.
Solving these equations for $|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^2$, $|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^2$ and
$|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^2$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^2=\frac{1}{2}\frac{m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{2}}-\frac{m_{e}^{2}m_{\mu}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{2}(m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^{2})}+\beta.
\label{mu2beta}
\end{equation}
In this expression, $\beta$ is the smallest solution of the equation
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\beta^3-\frac{1}{2}(1-2y+6\frac{z}{y})\beta^2-\frac{1}{4}(y-y^{2}-4\frac{z}{y}+7z-12\frac{z^{2}}{y^{2}})\beta-
\\ \\
\frac{1}{8}yz-\frac{1}{2}\frac{z^{2}}{y^{2}}+\frac{3}{4}\frac{z^{2}}{y}-\frac{z^{3}}{y^{3}}=0,
\label{cubic4beta}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $y=(m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^2)/m_{\tau}^{2}$ and $z=m_{\mu}^2m_{e}^{2}/m_{\tau}^{4}$.\\
A good, order of magnitude, estimation for $\beta$ is obtained from
(\ref{cubic4beta})
\begin{equation}
\beta \approx
-\frac{m_{\mu}^2m_{e}^{2}}{2m_{\tau}^{2}(m_{\tau}^{2}-(m_{\mu}^2+m_{e}^{2}))}.
\end{equation}
The parameters $|\tilde{\mu}_{4}|^2$ and $|\tilde{\mu}_{5}|^2$ are,
then, readily expressed in terms of $|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^2$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\begin{array}{l}
|\tilde{\mu}_{4,5}|^2=
\frac{1}{4}\left(1-\frac{m_{\mu}^2+m_{e}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{2}}+4\frac{m_{e}^{2}m_{\mu}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{2}(m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^{2})}-4\beta
\right)\\ \\
\pm\frac{1}{4}\left(\sqrt{({\scriptsize 1-\frac{m_{\mu}^2+m_{e}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{2}}+4\frac{m_{e}^{2}m_{\mu}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{2}(m_{e}^{2}+m_{\mu}^{2})}-4\beta})^2-\frac{m_{\mu}^2m_{e}^{2}}{m_{\tau}^{4}}\frac{1}{|\tilde{\mu}_{2}|^2}}\right).
\end{array}
\end{split}
\e
Once $M_{e}M_{e}^{\dag}$ has been reparametrized in terms of the
charged lepton masses, it is straightforward to compute $U_{eL}$ also
as a function of the lepton masses.
Here, in order to avoid a clumsy notation, we will write the result to
order $\left(m_{\mu}m_{e}/m_{\tau}^{2}\right)^{2}$ and $x^{4}=\left(m_{e}/m_{\mu}\right)^4$
\begin{equation}
M_{e}\approx m_{\tau} \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{\tilde{m}_{\mu}}{\sqrt{1+x^2}} & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{\tilde{m}_{\mu}}{\sqrt{1+x^2}} & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \sqrt{\frac{1+x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}{1+x^2}} \\ \\
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{\tilde{m}_{\mu}}{\sqrt{1+x^2}} &-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{\tilde{m}_{\mu}}{\sqrt{1+x^2}} & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \sqrt{\frac{1+x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}{1+x^2}} \\ \\
\frac{\tilde{m}_{e}(1+x^2)}{\sqrt{1+x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}}e^{i\delta_{e}} & \frac{\tilde{m}_{e}(1+x^2)}{\sqrt{1+x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}}e^{i\delta_{e}} & 0
\end{array}
\right).
\label{emass}
\end{equation}
This approximation is numerically exact up to order $10^{-9}$ in units
of the $\tau$ mass.
The unitary matrix $U_{eL}$ that diagonalizes $M_{e}M_{e}^{\dagger}$ and
enters in the definition of the neutrino mixing matrix $V_{PMNS}$,
eq. (\ref{ckm1}), is
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
U_{eL}\approx \left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1& 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & e^{i\delta_{e}}
\end{array}\right) \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
O_{11}& -O_{12}& O_{13} \\
-O_{21}& O_{22}& O_{23} \\
-O_{31}& -O_{32}& O_{33}
\end{array}
\right)~,
\end{array}
\label{unitary-leptons}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
O_{11}& -O_{12}& O_{13} \\
-O_{21}& O_{22}& O_{23} \\
-O_{31}& -O_{32}& O_{33}
\end{array}
\right)=\\\\
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x
\frac{(
1+2\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+4x^2+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4+2\tilde{m}_{e}^2
)}{\sqrt{1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+5x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^6+\tilde{m}_{e}^2+12x^4}}&
-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{(1-2\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-2\tilde{m}_{e}^2)}{\sqrt{1-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2+6\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^6-5\tilde{m}_{e}^2}}
& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \\ \\
-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x
\frac{(
1+4x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-2\tilde{m}_{e}^2
)}{\sqrt{1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+5x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^6+\tilde{m}_{e}^2+12x^4}}
&
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{(1-2\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4)}{\sqrt{1-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2+6\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^6-5\tilde{m}_{e}^2}}
& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \\ \\
-\frac{\sqrt{1+2x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2-\tilde{m}_{e}^2}(1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2-2\tilde{m}_{e}^2)}{\sqrt{1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+5x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^6+\tilde{m}_{e}^2+12x^4}} & -x\frac{(1+x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2-2\tilde{m}_{e}^2)\sqrt{1+2x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2-\tilde{m}_{e}^2}}{\sqrt{1-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2+6\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^6-5\tilde{m}_{e}^2}} &\tilde{m}_{e}\tilde{m}_{\mu}\frac{\sqrt{1+x^2}}{\sqrt{1+x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}}
\end{array}
\right)~,
\label{unitary-leptons-2}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and where $\tilde{m_{\mu}}=m_{\mu}/m_{\tau}$,
$\tilde{m_{e}}=m_{e}/m_{\tau}$ and $x=m_{e}/m_{\mu}$.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\begin{center}{\it The mass matrix of the neutrinos}\end{center}
According with the $Z_{2}$ selection rule eq. (\ref{zeros}), the mass
matrix of the Dirac neutrino takes the form
\begin{equation}
{\bf M_{\nu_D}} = \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
\mu^{\nu}_{2} & \mu^{\nu}_{2} & 0
\\ \mu^{\nu}_{2} & -\mu^{\nu}_{2} &0
\\ \mu^{\nu}_{4} & \mu^{\nu}_{4}& \mu^{\nu}_{3}
\end{array}\right).
\label{neutrinod-m}
\end{equation}
\\
Then, the mass matrix for the left-handed Majorana neutrinos, obtained
from the see-saw mechanism, is
\begin{equation}
{\bf M_{\nu}} = {\bf M_{\nu_D}}\tilde{{\bf M}}^{-1}
({\bf M_{\nu_D}})^T
\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
2 (\rho^{\nu}_{2})^2 & 0 &
2 \rho^{\nu}_2 \rho^{\nu}_{4}
\\ 0 & 2 (\rho^{\nu}_{2})^2 & 0
\\ 2 \rho^{\nu}_2 \rho^{\nu}_{4} & 0 &
2 (\rho^{\nu}_{4})^2 +
(\rho^{\nu}_3)^2
\end{array}\right),
\label{m-nu}
\end{equation}
where $\rho_2^\nu =(\mu^{\nu}_2)/M_{1}^{1/2}$, $\rho_4^\nu
=(\mu^{\nu}_4)/M_{1}^{1/2}$ and $\rho_3^\nu
=(\mu^{\nu}_3)/M_{3}^{1/2}$; $M_{1}$ and $M_{3}$ are the masses of
the right handed neutrinos appearing in (\ref{majo}).
The non-Hermitian, complex, symmetric neutrino mass matrix $M_{\nu}$ may be brought
to a diagonal form by a bi-unitary transformation, as
\begin{equation}
U_{\nu}^{T}M_{\nu}U_{\nu}=\mbox{diag}\left(|m_{\nu_{1}}|e^{i\phi_{1}},|m_{\nu_{2}}|e^{i\phi_{2}},|m_{\nu_{3}}|e^{i\phi_{\nu}}\right),
\label{diagneutrino}
\end{equation}
where $U_{\nu}$ is the matrix that diagonalizes the matrix
$M_{\nu}^{\dagger}M_{\nu}$.\\
In order to compute $U_{\nu}$, we notice that $M_{\nu}^{\dagger}M_{\nu}$ has the same
texture zeroes as $M_{\nu}$
\begin{equation}
M_{\nu}^{\dagger}M_{\nu}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
|A|^2+ |B|^2 & 0 & A^{\star}B+B^{\star}D \\
0 & |A|^2 & 0 \\
AB^{\star}+BD^{\star} & 0 & |B|^2+|D|^2
\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
where $A=2 (\rho^{\nu}_{2})^2$, $B=2 \rho^{\nu}_2 \rho^{\nu}_{4}$, and $D=2 (\rho^{\nu}_{4})^2 +
(\rho^{\nu}_3)^2$.\\
Furthermore, notice that the entries in the upper right corner and lower left
corner are complex conjugates of each other, all other entries are
real. Therefore, the matrix $U_{\nu L}$ that diagonalizes
$M_{\nu}^{\dagger}M_{\nu}$, takes the form
\begin{equation}
U_{\nu}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1& 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & e^{i\delta_{\nu}}
\end{array}\right)\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\cos \eta & \sin \eta & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 \\
-\sin \eta & \cos \eta &0
\end{array}
\right).
\label{ununew}
\end{equation}
If we require that the defining equation (\ref{diagneutrino}) be
satisfied as an identity, we get the following set of equations:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
2 (\rho^{\nu}_{2})^2=m_{\nu_{3}},\\
\\
2 (\rho^{\nu}_{2})^2=m_{\nu_{1}}\cos^2 \eta + m_{\nu_{2}}\sin^2 \eta, \\
\\
2 \rho^{\nu}_2 \rho^{\nu}_{4}=\sin \eta \cos \eta (m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}})e^{-i\delta_{\nu}},\\
\\
2 (\rho^{\nu}_{4})^2 +
(\rho^{\nu}_3)^2=(m_{\nu_{1}}\sin^2 \eta + m_{\nu_{2}}\cos^2 \eta)e^{-2i\delta_{\nu}}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Solving these equations for $\sin \eta$ and $\cos \eta$, we find
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\sin^2\eta=\frac{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}}},\\
\\
\cos^2\eta=\frac{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}.
\end{array}
\label{cosysin}
\end{equation}
The unitarity of $U_{\nu}$ constrains $\sin \eta$ to be real and thus
$|\sin \eta|\leq 1$, this condition fixes the phases $\phi_{1}$ and
$\phi_{2}$ as
\begin{equation}
|m_{\nu_{1}}|\sin \phi_{1}=|m_{\nu_{2}}|\sin \phi_{2}=|m_{\nu_{3}}|\sin \phi_{\nu}.
\label{phase-condition}
\end{equation}
The real phase $\delta_{\nu}$ appearing in eq. (\ref{ununew}) is not
constrained by the unitarity of $U_{\nu}$.
Substitution of the expressions (\ref{cosysin}) for $\sin \eta$ and
$\cos \eta$ in (\ref{ununew}) allows us to write the unitary matrix
$U_{\nu}$ as
\begin{equation}
U_{\nu}=
\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1& 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & e^{i\delta_{\nu}}
\end{array}\right)\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\sqrt{\displaystyle{\frac{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}
{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}}&
\sqrt{
\displaystyle{\frac{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}} & 0\\
0&0&1\\
-\sqrt{
\displaystyle{\frac{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}} &\sqrt{\displaystyle{\frac{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}
{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}}&0
\end{array}
\right).
\label{unu-final}
\end{equation}
\\
Now, the mass matrix of the Majorana neutrinos, $M_{\nu}$, may be
written in terms of the neutrino masses; from (\ref{diagneutrino})
and (\ref{unu-final}), we get
\begin{equation}
M_{\nu} =
\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
m_{\nu_{3}} & 0 & \sqrt{(m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}})(m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}})}e^{-i\delta_{\nu}}
\\
0 &m_{\nu_{3}} & 0
\\
\sqrt{(m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}})(m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}})} e^{-i\delta_{\nu}} & 0 & (m_{\nu_{1}}+m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}})e^{-2i\delta_{\nu}}
\end{array}\right).
\label{m-nu2}
\end{equation}
The only free parameters in these matrices, other than the neutrino
masses, are the phase $\phi_{\nu}$, implicit in $m_{\nu_{1}}$,
$m_{\nu_{2}}$ and $m_{\nu_{3}}$, and the Dirac phase $\delta_{\nu}$.
\begin{center}
{\it The neutrino mixing matrix}
\end{center}
The neutrino mixing matrix $V_{PMNS}$, is the product
$U_{eL}U_{\nu}^{\dagger}K$, where $K$ is the diagonal matrix of the
Majorana phase factors, defined by
\begin{equation}
diag(m_{\nu_{1}},m_{\nu_{2}},m_{\nu_{3}})=K^{\dagger}diag(|m_{\nu_{1}}|,|m_{\nu_{2}}|,|m_{\nu_{3}}|)K^{\dagger}.
\end{equation}
Except for an overall phase factor $e^{i\phi_{1}}$, which can be
ignored, $K$ is
\begin{equation}
K=diag(1,e^{i\alpha},e^{i\beta}),
\end{equation}
where $\alpha=1/2(\phi_{1}-\phi_{2})$ and
$\beta=1/2(\phi_{1}-\phi_{\nu})$ are the Majorana phases. The neutrino mixing matrix $V_{PMNS}$, in the standard form advocated
by the $PDG$~\cite{PDG}, is obtained by taking the product
$U_{eL}^{\dag}U_{\nu}K$ and making an appropriate transformation of
phases. Writing the resulting expression to the same approximation as
in eq. (\ref{emass}), we ge
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
V_{PMNS}\appro
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
O_{11}\cos \eta + O_{31}\sin \eta & O_{11}\sin
\eta-O_{31} \cos \eta & -O_{21} e^{-i\delta} \\ \\
-O_{12}\cos \eta + O_{32}\sin \eta e^{i\delta} & -O_{12}\sin
\eta-O_{32}\cos \eta e^{i\delta} & O_{22} \\ \\
O_{13}\cos \eta - O_{33}\sin \eta e^{i\delta} & O_{13}\sin
\eta+O_{33}\cos \eta e^{i\delta} & O_{23}
\end{array}
\right
\times K,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\cos \eta$ and $\sin \eta$ are given in eq (\ref{cosysin}),
$O_{ij}$ are given in eq (\ref{unitary-leptons-2}) and $\delta=\delta_{\nu}-\delta_{e}$.
A comparison of this expression with the standard parametrization
allowed us to derive expressions for the mixing angles in terms of the
charged lepton and neutrino masses
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
\sin \theta_{13}=-O_{21}
, &
\sin \theta_{23}= \frac{O_{22}}{\sqrt{O_{22}^2+O_{23}^2}} & \mbox{and}
& \tan \theta_{12}=\frac{O_{11}\sin \eta-O_{31}\cos \eta }{O_{31}\sin \eta+O_{11}\cos \eta}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Keeping only terms of order $(m_{e}^2/m_{\mu}^2)$ and
$(m_{\mu}/m_{\tau})^4$, we get
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lr}
\sin \theta_{13}\approx -\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x
\frac{(
1+4x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4)}{\sqrt{1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+5x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4}}
, &
\sin \theta_{23}\approx \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\frac{1-2\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4}{\sqrt{1-4\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2+6\tilde{m}_{\mu}^4}}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\tan \theta_{12}= -\sqrt{\frac{\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}}{
\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}}\times \left(
\frac{\sqrt{1+2x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}(1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2)-
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x(
1+2\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+4x^2)
\sqrt{\frac{
\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}{\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}}}}{\sqrt{1+2x^2-\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2}(1+\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+x^2)+
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x(
1+2\tilde{m}_{\mu}^2+4x^2)
\sqrt{\frac{\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}}{
\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}}}
\right).
\end{array}
\label{tan}
\end{equation}
The dependence of $\tan \theta_{12}$ on the phase $\phi_{\nu}$ and the
physical masses of the neutrinos enters through the ratio of the
neutrino mass differences under the square root sign, it can be made
explicit with the help of the unitarity constraint on $U_{\nu}$,
eq. (\ref{phase-condition}),
\begin{equation}
\frac{\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{2}}-m_{\nu_{3}}}}{
\displaystyle{m_{\nu_{3}}-m_{\nu_{1}}}}
\frac{(|m_{\nu_{2}}|^2-|m_{\nu_{3}}|^{2}\sin^{2}\phi_{\nu})^{1/2}-|m_{\nu_{3}}|
|\cos
\phi_{\nu}|}
{(|m_{\nu_{1}}|^{2}-|m_{\nu_{3}}|^{2}\sin^{2}\phi_{\nu})^{1/2}+|m_{\nu_{3}}|
|\cos
\phi_{\nu}|}.
\label{tansq}
\end{equation}
Similarly, the Majorana phases are given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\sin 2\alpha=\sin(\phi_{1}-\phi_{2})=
\frac{|m_{\nu_{3}}|\sin\phi_{\nu}}{|m_{\nu_{1}}||m_{\nu_{2}}|}\time
\left(\sqrt{|m_{\nu_{2}}|^2-|m_{\nu_{3}}|^{2}\sin^{2}\phi_{\nu}}+\sqrt{|m_{\nu_{1}}|^{2}-|m_{\nu_{3}}|^{2}\sin^{2}\phi_{\nu}}\right),
\\
\\
\sin 2\beta=\sin(\phi_{1}-\phi_{\nu})
\frac{\sin\phi_{\nu}}{|m_{\nu_{1}}|}\left(|m_{\nu_{3}}|\sqrt{1-\sin^{2}\phi_{\nu}}+\sqrt{|m_{\nu_{1}}|^{2}-|m_{\nu_{3}}|^{2}\sin^{2}\phi_{\nu}}\right).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
A more complete and detailed discussion of the Majorana phases in the
neutrino mixing matrix $V_{PMNS}$ obtained in our model is given by
J. Kubo~\cite{kubo-u}.
In the present model, $\sin^{2} \theta_{13}$ and $\sin^{2} \theta_{23}$ are
determined by the masses of the charged leptons in very good
agreement with the experimental values~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei,schwetz,fogli1},
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
(\sin^{2}\theta_{13})^{th}=1.1\times 10^{-5}, &(\sin^2
\theta_{13})^{exp} \leq 0.046, \nonumber
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
(\sin^{2}\theta_{23})^{th}=0.499, &(\sin^2
\theta_{23})^{exp}=0.5^{+0.06}_{-0.05}.\nonumber
\end{array}
\end{equation}
thus, the experimental restriction $|\Delta
m^2_{12}|<|\Delta m^2_{13}|$ implies an inverted neutrino mass
spectrum, $|m_{\nu_{3}}|<|m_{\nu_{1}}|<|m_{\nu_{2}}|$~\cite{kubo1}.
As seen from eqs. (\ref{tan}) and (\ref{tansq}), the solar mixing angle is
sensitive to the neutrino mass differences and the phase $\phi_{\nu}$
but is only very weakly sensitive to the charged lepton
masses. Writing the neutrino mass differences
$m_{\nu_{i}}-m_{\nu_{j}}$ in terms of the differences of the mass
squared and one of the neutrino masses, say $|m_{\nu_{2}}|$, from
our previous expressions (\ref{tan}) and (\ref{tansq}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\begin{array}{lll}
\frac{m_{\nu_{2}}^{2}}{\Delta
m^2_{13}}&=&\frac{1+2t_{12}^{2}+t^{4}_{12}-rt^{4}_{12}}{4t^{2}_{12}(1+t^{2}_{12})(1+t^{2}_{12}-r
t^{2}_{12})cos^{2}\phi_{\nu}} - \tan^{2} \phi_{\nu} +
O\left(\frac{m_{e}^{2}}{m_{\mu}^{2}}\right)\\
\\
&\approx&
\frac{1}{\sin^{2}2\theta_{12}\cos^{2}\phi_{\nu}}-\tan^{2} \phi_{\nu}
~\mbox{ for }~ r << 1,
\end{array}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $t_{12}=\tan \theta_{12}$ and $r=\Delta
m^2_{21}/\Delta
m^2_{13}$.
The mass $|m_{\nu_{2}}|$ assumes its minimal value when $\sin
\phi_{\nu}$ vanishes, then
\begin{equation}
|m_{\nu_{2}}|\approx \frac{\sqrt{\Delta
m^2_{13}}}{\sin 2\theta_{12}}.
\end{equation}
Hence, we find
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
|m_{\nu_{2}}|\approx0.0507eV,\\ |m_{\nu_{1}}|\approx 0.0499eV,\\
|m_{\nu_{3}}|\approx 0.0193eV,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used the values $\Delta m^{2}_{13}=2.2^{+0.37}_{-0.27}\times
10^{-3}eV^{2}$ and $\sin^{2}\theta_{12}=0.31^{+0.02}_{-0.03}$ taken
from M. Maltoni et al.~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei}, T. Schwetz~\cite{schwetz} and
G. L. Fogli et al.~\cite{fogli1}.
With those values for the neutrino masses we compute the effective
electron neutrino mass $m_{\beta}$
\begin{equation}
\label{mb} m_\beta = \left[\sum_i|U_{ei}|^2m^2_{\nu_{i}}\right]^\frac{1}{2}=0.0502eV ,
\end{equation}
well below the upper bound $m_{\beta}<1.8eV$ coming from the tritium
$\beta$-decay experiments~\cite{eitel,fogli1,serra}.
\section{Conclusions}
By introducing three Higgs fields that are $SU(2)_{L}$ doublets in the
theory, we extended the concept of flavour and generations to the
Higgs sector and formulated a Minimal $S_{3}$-Invariant Extension of
the Standard Model~\cite{kubo1}. A well defined structure of the Yukawa
couplings is obtained, which permits the calculation of mass and mixing
matrices for quarks and leptons in a unified way. A further reduction
of redundant parameters is achieved in the leptonic sector by
introducing a $Z_{2}$ symmetry. The flavour symmetry group $Z_{2}
\times S_{3}$ relates the mass spectrum and mixings. This allowed us
to compute the neutrino mixing matrix explicitly in terms of the
masses of the charged leptons and neutrinos. In this model, the magnitudes
of the three mixing angles are determined by the interplay of the
flavour $S_{3}\times Z_{2}$ symmetry, the see-saw mechanism and the
lepton mass hierarchy. We also found that $V_{PMNS}$ has three CP
violating phases, one Dirac phase
$\delta=\delta_{\nu}-\delta_{e}$ and two
Majorana phases, $\alpha$ and
$\beta$, that are functions of the neutrino masses, and another phase
$\phi_{\nu}$ which is independent of the Dirac phase. The numerical
values of the reactor, $\theta_{13}$, and the atmospheric,
$\theta_{23}$, mixing angles are determined by the masses of the
charged leptons only, in very good agreement with the experiment. The
solar mixing angle $\theta_{12}$ is almost insensitive to the values
of the masses of the charged leptons, but its experimental value
allowed us to fix the scale and origin of the neutrino mass spectrum,
which has an inverted hierarchy, with the values $|m_{\nu_{2}}|=0.0507eV$,
$|m_{\nu_{1}}|=0.0499eV$ and $|m_{\nu_{3}}|=0.0193eV$.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We are indebted to Prof. C. S. Lam for calling our attention to some
typographical errors in the previous version of this paper. This work
was partially supported by CONACYT M\'exico under contract No 40162-F
and by DGAPA-UNAM under contract PAPIIT-IN116202-3.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 7,957 |
{"url":"https:\/\/cryptohack.gitbook.io\/cryptobook\/lattices\/lattices-of-interest","text":"Needs review.\n\n# Introduction\n\nIn this chapter we will study some specific types of lattices that appear in cryptography. These will help us understand how certain problems we base our algorithms on reduce to other hard problems. They will also give insight about the geometry of lattices.\n\nIntuitively, if we have a problem (1) in some lattice space we can reduce it to a hard problem (2) in another related lattice space. Then if we can prove that if solving problem (1) implies solving problem (2) then we can conclude that problem (1) is as hard as problem (2)\n\nUnderstanding this chapter will strengthen the intuition for the fututre when we will study what breaking a lattice problem means and how to link it to another hard lattice problem.\n\n# Dual lattice\n\nLet $L \\subset \\mathbb R^n$be a lattice. We define the dual of a lattice as the set of all vectors $y \\in span(L)$ such that $y \\cdot x \\in \\mathbb Z \\$for all vectors $x \\in L$:\n\n$L^\\vee = \\{y \\in span(L) : y \\cdot x \\in \\mathbb{Z} \\ \\forall \\ x \\in L\\}$\n\nNote that the vectors in the dual lattice $L^\\vee$ are not necessarily in the initial lattice $L$. They are spanned by the basis vectors of the lattice $L$.\n\nExamples:\n\n1. $(\\mathbb Z^n) ^ \\vee = \\mathbb Z^n$ because the dot product of all vectors in $\\mathbb Z^n$stays in $\\mathbb Z^n$\n\n2. Scaling: $(k \\cdot L)^\\vee = \\dfrac 1 k \\cdot L$ Proof: If $y \\in (kL)^\\vee \\Rightarrow y \\cdot kx = k(x \\cdot y) \\in \\mathbb{Z} \\ \\forall \\ x \\in L \\Rightarrow y \\in \\dfrac 1 k L^\\vee$ If $y \\in \\left (\\dfrac 1 kL\\right )^\\vee \\Rightarrow yv \\in L^\\vee \\Rightarrow ky\\cdot x = k(x \\cdot y) = y \\cdot kx \\in \\mathbb{Z} \\ \\forall \\ x \\ \\in L \\Rightarrow y \\in (kL)^\\vee$\n\nPlot: $2\\mathbb Z ^2$ - green, $\\dfrac 1 2 \\mathbb Z ^ 2$ - red\n\nIntuition: We can think of the dual lattice $L^\\vee$ as some kind of inverse of the initial lattice $L$\n\n## Basis of the dual lattice\n\nWe will now focus on the problem of finding the basis $B^\\vee$ of the dual lattice $L^\\vee$given the lattice $L$ and its basis $B$.\n\nReminder: We can think of the lattice $L$ as a transformation given by its basis $B \\in GL_n(\\mathbb R)$on $\\mathbb Z^n$.\n\nWe have the following equivalences:\n\nTherefore $L^\\vee = (B^{-1})^T \\cdot \\mathbb Z^n$so we have found a base for our dual lattice:\n\n$B^\\vee = (B^{-1})^T \\in GL_n(\\mathbb{R})$\nn = 5 # lattice dimension\u200bB = sage.crypto.gen_lattice(m=n, q=11, seed=42)B_dual = sage.crypto.gen_lattice(m=n, q=11, seed=42, dual=True)\u200bB_dual_ = (B.inverse().T * 11).change_ring(ZZ) # Scale up to integersB_dual_.hermite_form() == B_dual.hermite_form() # Reduce form to compare# True\n\nLet's look at some plots. With green I will denote the original lattice and with red the dual. The scripts for the plots can be found in in the interactive fun section\n\n## Properties\n\n1. ${L}_1 \\subseteq {L}_2 \\iff {L}^\\vee_2 \\subseteq {L}^\\vee_1$\n\n2. $({L}^\\vee)^\\vee ={L} =$The dual of the dual is the initial lattice (to prove think of the basis of $L^\\vee$)\n\n3. $\\det(L^\\vee) = \\det(L) ^{-1}$ (to prove think of the basis of $L^\\vee$)\n\n4. For $x \\in {L}, y \\in {L}^\\vee$consider the vector dot product and addition - $x \\cdot y \\in \\mathbb{Z}$ - $x + y$ has no geometric meaning, they are in different spaces\n\n## Successive minima\n\nWe've seen that we can find the basis of the dual lattice given the basis of the original lattice. Let's look at another interesting quantity: the successive minima of a lattice $L$ and its dual $L^\\vee$. Let's see what can we uncover about them.\n\nWe recommend to try and think about the problem for a few minutes before reading the conclusions.\n\nWhat is $\\lambda_1(2\\mathbb Z^2)$? What about $\\lambda_1((2\\mathbb Z^2)^\\vee)$? Can you see some patterns?\n\nReminder: We defined the successive minima of a lattice $L$as such:\n\n$\\lambda_i(L)=\\min\\left(\\max_{1\\leq j\\leq i}\\left(\\left\\lVert v_j\\right\\rVert\\right):v_j\\in L\\text{ are linearly independent}\\right)$\n\nClaim 1:\n\n$\\lambda_1(L) \\cdot \\lambda_1(L^\\vee) \\leq n$\n\nProof: By Minkowski's bound we know:\n\n$\\lambda_1(L) \\leq \\sqrt{n} \\cdot \\det(L)^{1 \/ n}$ and $\\lambda_1(L^\\vee) \\leq \\sqrt{n} \\cdot det(L^\\vee)^{1 \/ n} = \\dfrac {\\sqrt{n}} {\\det(L)^{1\/n}}$. By multiplying them we get the desired result.\n\nFrom this result we can deduce that the minima of the $L$ and $L^\\vee$have an inverse proportional relationship (If one is big, the other is small).\n\nn = 5 # lattice dimension\u200bB = sage.crypto.gen_lattice(m=n, q=11, seed=42)B_dual = sage.crypto.gen_lattice(m = n, q=11, seed=42, dual=True)\u200bl1 = IntegerLattice(B).shortest_vector().norm().n() l2 = IntegerLattice(B_dual).shortest_vector().norm().n() \/ 11\u200bprint(l1 * l2 < n)# True\n\nClaim 2:\n\n$\\lambda_1(L) \\cdot \\lambda_n(L^\\vee) \\geq 1$\n\nProof:\n\nLet $x\u2208L$ be such that $\\|x\\|=\u03bb_1(L)$. Then take any set $(y_1, . . . , y_n)$ of $n$ linearly independent vectors in $L^\\vee$. Not all of them are orthogonal to $x$. Hence, there exists an $i$ such that $y_i \\cdot x \\neq 0$ . By the definition of the dual lattice, we have $y_i \\cdot x \\in \\mathbb Z$ and hence $1 \\leq y_i \\cdot x \\leq \\|y_i\\| \\cdot \\|x\\| \\leq \\lambda_1 \\cdot \\lambda_n^\\vee$\n\nn = 5 # lattice dimension\u200bB = sage.crypto.gen_lattice(m=n, q=11, seed=42)B_dual = sage.crypto.gen_lattice(m = n, q=11, seed=42, dual=True)\u200bl1 = IntegerLattice(B).shortest_vector().norm().n() \u200bB_dual_lll = B_dual.LLL()lnd = 0for v in B_dual_lll: lv = v.norm() if lv > lnd: lnd = lvlnd = lnd.n() \/ 11\u200bprint(lnd * l1 > 1) # True\n\n\/\/ TODO\n\n# Q-ary lattices\n\nWe've seen that in cryptography we don't like to work with infinite sets (like $\\mathbb Z$) and we limit them to some finite set using the $\\bmod$ operation ($\\mathbb Z \\to \\mathbb Z\/ q\\mathbb{Z}$). We will apply the same principle to the lattices so let us define the concept of a q-ary lattice.\n\nDefinition:\n\nFor a number $q \\in \\mathbb{Z},\\ q \\geq 3$we call a lattice q-ary if\n\n$q\\mathbb{Z}^n \\subseteq {L} \\subseteq \\mathbb{Z}^n$\n\nIntuition:\n\n\u2022 $q\\mathbb{Z^n} \\subseteq \\mathcal{L}$ is periodic $\\bmod \\ q$\n\n\u2022 We use arithmetic $\\bmod \\ q$\n\nWe will now look at 2 more types of lattices that are q-ary. Let $A \\in (\\mathbb{Z}\/q\\mathbb Z)^{n \\times m}$ be a matrix with $m > n$. Consider the following lattices: $L_q(A) = \\{y \\in \\mathbb Z^m : y = A^Tx \\bmod q \\in \\text{ for some } x \\in \\mathbb{Z}^n \\} \\subset \\mathbb{Z^m}$ $L^\\perp_q(A) = \\{y \\in \\mathbb Z^m : Ay = 0 \\bmod q \\} \\subset \\mathbb{Z^m}$\n\nIntuition:\n\n\u2022 Think of $L_q(A)$ as the image of the matrix $A$, the matrix spanned by the rows of $A$\n\n\u2022 Think of $L_q^\\perp(A)$ as the kernel of $A$ modulo $q$. The set of solutions $Ax = 0$\n\nRemark: If the same matrix $A$ is used ($A$ is fixed ) then $L_q(A) \\neq L_q^\\perp(A)$\n\nClaim:\n\n$L_q(A)$ and $L_q^\\perp(A)$ are the dual of each other (up to scaling): $L_q(A) = \\dfrac 1 q L_q^\\perp(A)$\n\nProof:\n\nFirstly we will show $L_q^\\perp(A) \\subseteq q(L_q(A))^\\vee$\n\n\u2022 Let $y \\in L_q^\\perp(A) \\Rightarrow Ay \\equiv 0 \\bmod q \\iff Ay = qz$for some $z \\in \\mathbb{Z}^m$\n\n\u2022 Let $y' \\in L_q(A)\\Rightarrow y' \\equiv A^Tx \\bmod q \\iff y' = A^Tx + qz'$ for some $x \\in \\mathbb Z^n, \\ z' \\in \\mathbb Z^m$\n\nThen we have:$y \\cdot y' = y \\cdot (A^Tx + qz') = y\\cdot A^Tx + q (y \\cdot z') = \\underbrace{Ay}_{qz} \\cdot x + q(y \\cdot z') = qz \\cdot x + q(y \\cdot z')$\n\n$\\Rightarrow \\dfrac 1 q y \\cdot y' \\in \\mathbb{Z} \\Rightarrow \\dfrac 1 q y\\in L_q(A)^\\vee$\n\nThe second part is left as an exercise to the reader :D. Show $L_q^\\perp(A) \\supseteq q(L_q(A))^\\vee$","date":"2021-07-27 01:10:36","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 90, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.8718315958976746, \"perplexity\": 583.9137071045667}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2021-31\/segments\/1627046152168.38\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20210727010203-20210727040203-00455.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
/*
* File: CommandHandler.cpp
* Author: admin
*
* Created on March 13, 2015, 2:41 AM
*/
#include "CommandHandler.h"
CommandHandler::CommandHandler() {
}
void CommandHandler::parseCommandFromTXT(char* c){
}
void CommandHandler::parseCommandFromByte(unsigned char* c){
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 1,068 |
{"url":"https:\/\/forum.poshenloh.com\/category\/635\/module-2-day-14-challenge-part-2","text":"@The-Darkin-Blade This mini-question is trying to ask about what the important relationships in the picture are. In geometry problems, the information we are given is often not written out in sentences or equations, but it's implicitly hidden in the diagram. So, you have to look at the elements of the picture and notice things. This question is trying to help cultivate our ability to sense what the hidden information is, and how to use it effectively.\n\nIn the diagram for our Challenge explanation, it indeed looks like $$\\angle z = \\angle y,$$ and the mini-question starts off with this same picture. In this diagram, $$\\angle x = \\angle y = \\angle z.$$\n\nThis mini-question is asking about what influences the fact that $$\\angle x = \\angle y = \\angle z.$$\n\nThe possible answer choices here were:\n\ni.) Make $$\\angle EAC$$ not a straight line, but bent at $$A$$\nii.) Move $$B$$ (and its reflection point) closer to $$D,$$ keeping $$\\overline{EAC}$$ straight\niii.) Make $$\\angle x$$ a right angle\niv.) Tilt the whole diagram by $$30^{\\circ}$$\n\nWhich of these choices has an effect on whether or not we still $$\\angle x = \\angle y = \\angle z?$$\n\nFor choice ii.) if we move $$B$$ closer to $$D,$$ keeping the line $$\\overline{EC}$$ straight, we will still have that $$\\angle x = \\angle y = \\angle z.$$ The measure of each angle gets smaller, but they are still all equal to each other.\n\nFor choice iii.), if we make $$\\angle x$$ a right angle, then $$\\overline{AB}$$ will be perpendicular ($$\\perp$$) to line $$\\overline{AD}.$$ Point $$E$$ would coincide at the same place as point $$B.$$ Then, every angle will be a right angle, so $$\\angle x = \\angle y = \\angle z = 90^{\\circ}.$$\n\nFor choice iv.), if we tilt the whole diagram, this shouldn't change the relationship of the angles. All the angles would be exactly the same size.\n\n \n\nIf we follow choice i.) and make $$\\angle EAC$$ a bent line at point $$A,$$ then we get a diagram that looks like the one below. As you can see, we have found a change to the diagram that makes $$\\angle y \\neq \\angle z!$$\n\nBy making line $$EC$$ no longer a straight line, we have removed the \"X\" between lines $$D$$ and $$\\overline{EC},$$ which is the reason for $$\\angle y = \\angle z$$ from before.\n\nIn particular, the \"X\" formed by the two $$\\textcolor{red}{\\text{red}}$$ lines is what makes it true that $$\\angle y = \\angle z.$$","date":"2021-03-04 12:31:49","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.708800196647644, \"perplexity\": 343.6378915356724}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2021-10\/segments\/1614178369054.89\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20210304113205-20210304143205-00342.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
{"url":"https:\/\/msp.org\/agt\/2011\/11-1\/p06.xhtml","text":"Volume 11, issue 1 (2011)\n\n Recent Issues\n The Journal About the Journal Editorial Board Editorial Interests Subscriptions Submission Guidelines Submission Page Policies for Authors Ethics Statement ISSN (electronic): 1472-2739 ISSN (print): 1472-2747 Author Index To Appear Other MSP Journals\nA note on cabling and $L$\u2013space surgeries\n\nJennifer Hom\n\nAlgebraic & Geometric Topology 11 (2011) 219\u2013223\nAbstract\n\nWe prove that the $\\left(p,q\\right)$\u2013cable of a knot $K\\subset {S}^{3}$ admits a positive $L$\u2013space surgery if and only if $K$ admits a positive $L$\u2013space surgery and $q\u2215p\\ge 2g\\left(K\\right)-1$, where $g\\left(K\\right)$ is the Seifert genus of $K$. The \u201cif\u201d direction is due to Hedden [Int. Math. Res. Not. 2009 (2009) 2248\u20132274].\n\nKeywords\n$L$\u2013space, cabling, knot Floer homology, Heegaard Floer homology\nMathematical Subject Classification 2000\nPrimary: 57M27, 57R58","date":"2021-03-04 19:00:17","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 8, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.4730680286884308, \"perplexity\": 3348.6871491355846}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": false, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2021-10\/segments\/1614178369512.68\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20210304174506-20210304204506-00017.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
Q: How to change the Android Emulator's IP address on virtualbox? How to change the Android Emulator's IP address on virtualbox?
I couldn't get emulator's ip.
I was type this code:
but there is no emulator's ip?
I hope somoeone can help me.
Thanks!
A:
It is impossible to change IP address of emulator. Each emulator is in
one private network. The ip address 10.0.2.15 is only the private
network, and host identify each emulator with one different port from
others.
For example, you turn on 2 emulator, then host will connect to
emulator 1 with port 5554, to emulator 2 with port 5555. These 2
emulator still has its IP address 10.0.2.15
A: What you want to do is to set your network to Bridged Adapter. This should give your emulator a dhcp address from your router, so it will exist on the same network as your dev box.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 2,611 |
Q: How do you use numPerms to get the total number of unique permutations for a PERMANOVA? I am trying to calculate the number of unique permutations for a PERMANOVA using the R adonis2 function but I am getting stuck on defining my permutation scheme.
As suggested here I am using the numPerms function from the permute package to get the answer. However, I am getting stuck with how it works, even in simpler designs. Here is an example with an attempt:
# Create sample dataframe with counts for 3 species from 10 different locations
# Counts are randomly generated from 1-100
set.seed(2)
df = data.frame(
sp1 = sample(1:100, 10),
sp2 = sample(1:100, 10),
sp3 = sample(1:100, 10)
)
# Create a vector of data with 2 groups of 5.
myGroups = c(rep("A",5), rep("B", 5))
# Define the permutation scheme.
hh = how(blocks = as.factor(myGroups))
# My PERMANOVA would therefore be as follows with the permutation scheme specified (I think?)
adonis2(df~myGroups, perm = hh)
# Calculate number of permutations
numPerms(df, hh)
However, $2$ groups of $5$ should have $126$ unique permutations (e.g., see here), but this returns $14400$. What did I do wrong?
A: You did nothing wrong; {permute} doesn't know how to do permutations of the sort you want.
The permutation test you described via how() is a randomization test restricted by blocks, so there are 5! * 5! such permutations, which is what numPerms() returns.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 315 |
Orphan Girl
Naomi Kimbell
Essays / Number 86
The sky is coated with scurf the color of tin. Bands of haze hang at the fringe of the valley giving the impression that the mountains have receded into memory. The air is thick and full of grit. A mouthful chokes me. A good storm would clear it but the days are still and quiet as days often are under the bowl of winter; this air will be with us for a while. My perch on the bridge is fifty feet above the tracks where trains throttle up, censing diesel into stands of smog. They stretch the length of the valley from east to west sawing between empty and filled depending upon which direction they're traveling. The tracks are never bare. And perhaps some of the dirt I breathe is from the coal itself or a bit of the prairie it came from that lingers in the air as full trains flow to the west, a dark river made of dark matter that empties into the sea. Coal is Montana's second largest export. It rumbles under my feet, courses and booms through the valley as trains pulled to rolling bite their hitches, slam hook-and-eye one after the other, sounding like great inland waves made of metal. I feel a tremor in the girders and the bridge sheds its pigeons. Sunlight turns a bit of the sky from tin to pearl.
If I follow the tracks east they will lead me to my ancestors although copper, not coal, was the ore they worked. My great-grandfather mined it; my grandfather smelted it but they didn't tell many stories and it's hard to imagine the shafts and furnaces of their youth. I knew a man who worked in a mine called Orphan Girl three thousand feet in the ground but he only described the lights they carried and the bags that held the ore as if the darkness stood unseen. My grandfather told about heat and catwalks and a man who lost his foot in the copper but the story ended quickly, with a moral: the man was lucky he didn't lose more. I don't know if I'd call that luck and I can only imagine the deep drop, the darkness that laps the skin like an ocean with a drowning tow, or the fire that turns rock into pennies. What I know is the coal in the trains but the earth was stripped, not tunneled, to get it. Copper can be taken that way, too. Butte has a pit a mile long where part of the city once lay. A person can stand at the edge where they put a plaque and a painted rail and imagine falling 1600 feet to the poisoned waters below, blue, like the Caribbean when the sky is clear. Tricky. A goat thought he'd found a watering hole and shambled down the path; a stray dog lived at the edge for sixteen years like a ghost that couldn't cross. And late one fall, a flock of snow geese landed on it flying south and died. The water lures as if the metals that seep from the earth are magnets and I can just about sink through the air like a nickel on my pitch to join that flock of dead birds. Seems crazy to have taken my child there, but I did, and I clung to her body as we looked over the edge but whether to keep her from falling or me from jumping is a bottom I can't see.
I've felt like that before. From a bridge over a rushing river, from balconies overlooking ravines, from up on the roof shoveling snow, I'm filled with the idea I'm already falling, that the fall is inevitable. When I was little I'd look at the sky and spin then lie on the ground and could swear the earth turned right under me, feel it teeter on its own edge, loosen, open and let go. I'd close my eyes and move fast like the clouds. The looseness tickled then but now it's a sense akin to vertigo especially in a high place or at the edge of a deep one. I have never ridden the bucket-and-rope called a chippy hoist into the earth but sometimes manage, anyway, to lie at the bottom of a dark, shafted hole wondering if the pinprick of light above me could really be the sky; a point so far up that looking is another kind of fall.
Naomi Kimbell's site.
Naomi Kimbell earned her MFA in Creative Writing from the University of Montana in 2008. Her work has appeared in The Iowa Review, Black Warrior Review, The Indiana Review, Calyx, The Baltimore Review, Otis Nebula, Pithead Chapel, and The Rumpus. Her essay, "Whistling in the Dark," was shortlisted for Best American Essays 2010 and is anthologized in Blurring the Boundaries: Explorations to the Fringes of Nonfiction. She has taught creative nonfiction at the University of Montana and is the former creative nonfiction editor for Pithead Chapel, an online literary journal.
Image by Thomas Curryer | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 2,273 |
Broadway May Be Singing If I Could Turn Back Time With Cher Musical
Suzanna Bowling
Get ready for Cher: The Musical. I can see this totally making money and the critics having a hey day, while the audience thrills to the songs they know and love. Actually this has been in the gossip mills when Cher first announced plans for a Broadway musical based on her life and music in June of 2012. At that time, she revealed that the show would feature three actresses playing herself during different stages of her life. She expressed interest in playing a fourth iteration of herself, as a wise figure who gives advice to her younger versions. By 2015, veteran musical-theater writer Rick Elice was enlisted. Elice co-penned Jersey Boys, Peter and The Star Catcher and The Addams Family, as well as worked as a creative director at Serino Coyne. He was also married to the fabulous Roger Rees, who died of brain cancer in July 2015. His co-writer on Jersey Boys, Marshall Brickman is his collaborator.
On Thursday, Elice will present the first draft of his script to the show's producers Hamilton's Jeffrey Seller and Flody Suarez, TV producer on "The Blacklist" and well as several others. It was Suarez who talked Cher into the idea. Cher sees the script May 20, on her 70th birthday.
The show chronicles Cher's life as a child, wife of Sonny Bono and the women who won our hearts in "Mask" and "Moonstruck."
Born Cherilyn Sarkisian LaPiere near Los Angeles, her mother a struggling actress, aka waitress moved around, a lot. At one point she ended up in an orphanage. Cher always knew she wanted to be famous. In 10972 she was working as a backup singer in LA, when she met Sonny Bono, also a struggling singer. With the promoting skills of Sonny and the hit of "The Beat Goes On," they made it to the "The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour." After a bitter 1975 divorce, Cher reinvented herself, as a solo singer with such hits as "Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves," "Take Me Home," "Believe," "If I Could Turn Back Time" and "Walking in Memphis." As an actress Cher appeared on Broadway in 1982's in Robert Altman's "Come Back to the 5 and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean." Mike Nichols saw her and cast her in "Silkwood."
"Cher: The Musical" is only the working title.
In the 70's Cher performed all the roles in West Side Story for "The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour." We leave you with that memory.
Related ItemsCherCher MusicalJersey BoysMoonstruckNewSonny and CherSuzanna BowlingWest Side Story
Suzanna, co-owns and publishes the newspaper Times Square Chronicles or T2C. At one point a working actress, she has performed in numerous productions in film, TV, cabaret, opera and theatre. She has performed at The New Orleans Jazz festival, The United Nations and Carnegie Hall. She has a screenplay and a TV show in the works, which she developed with her mentor and friend the late Arthur Herzog. She is a proud member of the Drama Desk and the Outer Critics Circle and was a nominator. Email: suzanna@t2conline.com
More in Broadway
Suzanna BowlingJanuary 26, 2023
Will Swenson and The Cast of A Beautiful Noise, The Neil Diamond Musical Wished The Musical Icon Happy Birthday
The Outer Critics Circle Announces Dates and New Category Distinctions for the 72nd Annual Outer Critics Circle Awards
Theatre News: Room, Camelot, Between Riverside and Crazy, Bedlam and Hip Hop Cinderella
Kimberly Akimbo Will Take Over Wollman Rink To Celebrate Original Broadway Cast Recording
Theatre News: Lady Day At Emerson's Bar & Grill, Porgy & Bess, Days Of Wine and Roses and Funny Girl
Broadway Openings In February
Broadway's A Beautiful Noise Becomes The Robyn Hurder and Mark Jacoby Show
Theatre and Music News: Some Like It Hot, Into The Woods, Thelma & Louise, Kimberly Akimbo, Wicked, Patti LuPone and Little Shop of Horrors
Outer Critics Circle Nominations are Out
The Drama League 2016 Nominations | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 5,953 |
from django import forms
from django.utils.translation import ugettext_lazy as _
from i18nurl import settings
class LanguageSelectionForm(forms.Form):
"""Language selection form."""
language = forms.ChoiceField(
label=_('language'),
choices=settings.I18N_LANGUAGES,
)
next = forms.CharField(
label=_('next'),
required=False,
widget=forms.HiddenInput,
)
temporary = forms.BooleanField(
label=_('remember'),
required=False,
initial=False,
widget=forms.HiddenInput,
)
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 5,034 |
Myliobatis è un genere di pesci cartilaginei della famiglia Myliobatidae.
Tassonomia
Il genere comprende le seguenti specie:
Myliobatis aquila ()
Myliobatis australis
Myliobatis californica
Myliobatis chilensis
Myliobatis freminvillei
Myliobatis goodei
Myliobatis hamlyni
Myliobatis longirostris
Myliobatis peruvianus
Myliobatis ridens
Myliobatis tenuicaudatus
Myliobatis tobijei
Note
Altri progetti
Collegamenti esterni
Myliobatidae
Taxa classificati da Georges Cuvier | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 9,809 |
Produced by Distributed Proofreaders
Female Scripture Biography:
Including an Essay on What Christianity Has Done for Women.
By Francis Augustus Cox, A.M.
"It is a necessary charity to the (female) sex to acquaint them with their
own value, to animate them to some higher thoughts of themselves, not to
yield their suffrage to those injurious estimates the world hath made of
them, and from a supposed incapacity of noble things, to neglect the
pursuit of them, from which God and nature have no more precluded the
feminine than the masculine part of mankind."
The Ladies' Calling, Pref.
VOL. II.
BOSTON:
LINCOLN & EDMANDS.
1831.
Contents of Vol. I.
Essay
The Virgin Mary--Chapter I.
Section I.
Congratulation of the angel Gabriel--advantages of the Christian
dispensation--Eve and Mary compared--state of Mary's family at the
incarnation--she receives an angelic visit--his promise to her of a son,
and prediction of his future greatness--Mary goes to Elizabeth, their
meeting--Mary's holy enthusiasm and remarkable language--Joseph informed
of the miraculous conception by an angel--general remarks
Section II.
Nothing happens by chance--dispensations preparatory to the coming of
Christ--prophecy of Micah accomplished by means of the decree of
Augustus--Mary supernaturally strengthened to attend upon her new-born
infant--visit of the shepherds Mary's reflections--circumcision of the
child--taken to the temple--Simeon's rapture and prediction--visit and
offerings of the Arabian philosophers--general considerations
Section III.
The flight into Egypt--Herod's cruel proceedings and death--Mary goes to
Jerusalem with Joseph--on their return their Child is missing--they find
him among the doctors--he returns with them, the feast of Cana--Christ's
treatment of his mother when she desired to speak to him--her behaviour
at the crucifixion--she is committed to the care of John--valuable
lessons to be derived from this touching scene
Section IV.
Brief account of the extravagant regard which has been paid to the
Virgin Mary at different periods--the names by which she has been
addressed, and the festivals instituted to honour her memory--general
remarks on the nature and character of superstition, particularly that
of the Catholics
Elizabeth--Chapter II.
The angelic appearance to Zacharias--birth of John characters of
Elizabeth and Zacharias--importance of domestic union being founded on
religion, shown in them--their venerable age--the characteristic
features of their piety--the happiness of a life like theirs--the effect
it is calculated to produce on others--the perpetuation of holy
friendship through immortal ages--the miserable condition of the
irreligious
Anna--Chapter III.
Introduction of Anna into the sacred story--inspired description of
her--the aged apt to be unduly attached to life--Anna probably religious
at an early period--Religion the most substantial support amidst the
infirmities of age--the most effectual guard against its vices--and the
best preparation for its end
The Woman of Samaria--Chapter IV.
Account of Christ's journey through Samaria--he arrives at Jacob's
well--enters into conversation with a woman of the country--her
misapprehensions--the discovery of his character to her as a prophet her
convictions--her admission of his claim as the true Messiah, which she
reports in the city--the great and good effect--reflections
The Woman Who Was a Sinner--Chapter V.
Jesus and John contrasted--the former goes to dine at the house of a
Pharisee--a notorious woman introduces herself, and weeps at his
feet--remarks on true repentance and faith, as exemplified in her
conduct--surmises of Simon the Pharisee--the answer of Jesus the woman
assured of forgiveness--instructions deducible from the parable
The Syrophenician--Chapter VI.
Introductory observations--Christ could not be concealed the
Syrophenician woman goes to him on account of her daughter--her
humility--earnestness--faith--the silence of Christ upon her application
to him--the disciples repulsed--the woman's renewed importunity--the
apparent scorn with which it is treated--her admission of the
contemptuous insinuation--her persevering ardour--her ultimate
success--the necessity of being importunate in prayer--remarks on the
woman's national character--present state of the Jews: the hope of their
final restoration,
Martha and Mary--Chapter VII.
Bethany distinguished as the residence of a pious family, which
consisted of Lazarus and his two sisters--their diversity of
character--the faults of Martha, domestic vanity and fretfulness of
temper--her counterbalancing excellencies--Mary's choice and Christ's
commendation--decease of Lazarus--his restoration to life at the voice
of Jesus--remarks on death being inflicted upon the people of God as
well as others--the triumph which Christianity affords over this
terrible evil--account of Mary's annointing the feet of Jesus, and his
vindication of her conduct,
The Poor Widow--Chapter VIII.
Account of Christ's sitting over against the treasury--he particularly
notices the conduct of an obscure individual--she casts in two mites--it
is to be viewed as a religious offering--the ground on which it is
eulogized by Christ--the example honorable to the female sex--people
charitable from different motives--two reasons which might have been
pleaded as an apology for withholding this donation she was poor and a
widow--her pious liberality notwithstanding--all have something to
give--the most trifling sum of importance--the habit of bestowing in
pious charity beneficial motives to gratitude deduced from the
wretchedness of others, the promises of God, and the cross of Jesus,
Sapphira--Chapter IX.
Mixed constitution of the church of Christ--benevolent spirit of the
primitive believers at Jerusalem--anxiety of Ananias and Sapphira to
appear as zealous and liberal as others--Ananias repairs to the apostles
to deposit the price of his possessions--is detected in deception and
dies--similar deceit and death of Sapphira--nature and progress of
apostasy--peculiar guilt of Sapphira--agency of Satan distinctly
marked--diabolical influence ascertained--consolatory sentiments
suggested to Christians,
Dorcas--Chapter X.
Joppa illustrious on many accounts, particularly as the residence of
Dorcas--she was a disciple of Christ--faith described as the principle
of discipleship--the inspired testimony to the character of Dorcas--she
was probably a widow or an aged maiden--remarks on reproaches commonly
cast upon the latter class of women--Dorcas exhibited as a pattern of
liberality, being prompt in the relief she afforded--her charities
abundant--and personally bestowed: observations on the propriety of
visiting the poor--the charities of Dorcas often free and
unsolicited--wise and conducted upon a plan--the pretences of the
uncharitable stated and confuted--riches only valuable as they are used
in bountiful distribution,
Lydia--Chapter XI.
Account of Paul and his companions meeting with Lydia by the river-side
at Philippi--the impression produced upon her heart by the preaching of
Paul--the remarks on conversion, as exemplified in the case of this
disciple--its seat the heart--its accomplishment the result of divine
agency--the manner of it noticed: the effects of a divine influence upon
the human mind, namely, attention to the word of God and the ordinances
of the Gospel, and affectionate regard to the servants of
Christ--remarks on the paucity of real Christians--the multiplying power
of Christianity--its present state in Britain--efforts of the
Bible Society
Female Scripture Biography
Vol. II
The Virgin Mary.
Chapter I.
Section I.
Congratulation of the Angel Gabriel--Advantages of the Christian
Dispensation--Eve and Mary compared--State of Mary's Family at the
Incarnation--she receives an angelic Visit--his Promise to her of a Son,
and Prediction of his future Greatness--Mary goes to Elizabeth--their
Meeting--Mary's holy Enthusiasm and remarkable Language--Joseph informed
of the miraculous Conception by an Angel--general Remarks.
"HAIL, THOU THAT ART HIGHLY FAVOURED, THE LORD IS WITH THEE! BLESSED ART
THOU AMONG WOMEN!"
Such was the congratulatory language in which the commissioned angel
addressed the virgin of Nazareth, when about to announce the intention of
Heaven, that she should become the mother of Jesus; and such the strain
which we cannot help feeling disposed to adopt, while recording her
illustrious name, and contemplating this wonderful transaction.
On Mary devolved the blessing which the most pious of women had for a
long succession of ages so eagerly desired, and which had often created
such an impatience for the birth of children, in some of whom they
indulged the sublime hope of seeing the promised Messiah. In her offspring
was accomplished the long series of prophecy which commenced even at the
moment when the justice of God pronounced a sentence of condemnation upon
rebellious man; and which, like a bright track extending through the moral
night, and shining amidst the typical shadows of the Mosaic dispensation,
fixed the attention of patriarchs, and prophets, and saints, for four
thousand years:--and upon this otherwise obscure and insignificant female
beamed the first ray of that evangelical morning which rose upon the world
with such blissful radiance, and is increasing to the "perfect day."
Infidels may contemplate the manifestation with unholy ridicule or vain
indifference; but we will neither consent to renounce the evidence
afforded to the historic fact, nor cease to celebrate the mysterious
miracle. We will unite with the impassioned angel, at least in the
sentiment and spirit of his address; and join the high praises of the
midnight anthem, sung by descending spirits in the fields of Bethlehem:
"GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST, AND ON EARTH PEACE, GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN!"
In the course of Scripture history, we are now advanced to that period
which the apostle emphatically denominates "the last days," in which "God,
who at sundry times and in divers manners, spake in time past, unto the
fathers by the prophets," speaks to us "by his Son, whom he hath appointed
heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds." Let us hear his
voice, admit his claims, and bow to his dictates. As truth arises upon us
with greater splendour, we shall find that character is formed to greater
maturity under the immediate influence of "the ministration of
righteousness" which "exceeds in glory." By the unparalleled transactions
of this age we shall see the whole energy of the human mind drawn forth,
and furnished with ample scope for exercise; all the faculties become
ennobled and purified; and the female sex especially, from the days of
Elizabeth and Mary to the close of the sacred record, becomes marked with
a holy singularity. By the starlight of the former dispensation, we have
discovered many women of superior excellence, availing themselves of all
the means they enjoyed, and presenting a pre-eminence of character
proportioned to their comparatively few advantages and imperfect
revelation; but amidst the splendours of the "Sun of Righteousness" we
shall witness, in the females who adorned this new era, a greater
elevation of mind and advancement in knowledge.
Still it must be recollected, that the day only dawned, the shadows were
not at first entirely dispersed; and although the favoured inhabitants of
Judea and its vicinity saw the age of Christ, not like Abraham, "afar
off," but in its commencing glory, their prejudices and prepossessions did
but slowly melt away. Some degree of dimness remained upon the moral
sight; and we are called to observe, not so much the accuracy of their
conceptions as the fervour of their love.
The two most extraordinary women that ever appeared in this world were
unquestionably EVE, "the mother of all living," and MARY, "the mother of
Jesus Christ." They occupied respectively the highest stations and the
most critical points of time that ever fell to the lot of mortals; and
they exhibit an instructive contrast. EVE lived at the beginning, and
MARY at the "fulness of time."--EVE saw the glories of the new made world
after creative Wisdom had pronounced it all "very good," and before sin
had tarnished its beauty and disarranged its harmonies.--MARY beheld it
rising from the ruins of the fall, at the moment of its renovation and in
the dawn of its happiest day.--EVE was placed in the most glorious and
conspicuous situation, and fell into a state of meanness and
degradation.--MARY was of obscure origin and lowly station, but was
raised, by a signal appointment of Providence, to the highest
eminence.--EVE was accessary to the ruin of man--MARY instrumental in the
birth of him who came as the Restorer and Saviour of mankind--EVE beheld
the fatal curse first take effect, in overcasting the heavens with clouds,
in withering the blossoms of paradise, envenoming the spirit of the animal
creation, disordering the human frame, and ultimately destroying it, and
introducing all the nameless diversities of wo which fill up the tragedy
of human life.--MARY witnessed the beginning of that long series of
blessings which divine love has for ages dispensed to man "through the
redemption that is in Christ Jesus," and which will eventually replenish
the cup of existence with unmingled sweetness and perfect joy.--EVE
witnessed, with a trembling consciousness of guilt, the awful descent of
those mighty "cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to
keep the way of the tree of life," and which were placed "at the east end
of the garden of Eden." MARY, with feelings of ecstatic rapture, beheld
the angel Gabriel standing before her, with the smiles of heaven upon his
countenance, heard his benedictions, and held "communion sweet" with the
holy messenger. Wretched, wretched Eve! Happy, happy MARY!
The Jews have been always celebrated for their care in preserving their
genealogies: in consequence of which it providentially happened, that the
evangelists were able from their own authenticated records, to verify the
ancient predictions of the birth of Jesus Christ. Two of the inspired
historians have given a statement of his ancestry; the one tracing it from
Abraham, and the other ascending to Adam; the one pursuing the line of
Joseph, his reputed father, the other the line of Mary, his real mother;
both concurring in the most decisive evidence of his being the Son of
David and of Abraham, and the true Messiah of the prophets. [1]
Although in her distant ancestry Mary may justly be considered as of an
illustrious descent, yet at the period of the incarnation, this family was
in a very reduced state: the genealogical tree of David was cut down to
its very roots, when the ancient prediction was accomplished respecting
that great Personage who is represented "as a slender twig shooting out
from the trunk of an old tree, cut down, lopped to the very root, and
decayed; which tender plant, so weak in appearance, should nevertheless
become fruitful and prosper."
"But there shall spring forth from the trunk of Jesse,
And a cion from his roots shall become fruitful.
And the spirit of JEHOVAH shall rest upon him:
The spirit of wisdom and understanding,
The spirit of counsel and strength,
The spirit of knowledge, and the fear of JEHOVAH." [2]
But vain is the "boast of heraldry." It can avail nothing to elevate an
insignificant character to eminence, or screen a guilty one from contempt.
The evangelists have not recorded the lineage of Joseph and of Mary for
the purpose of emblazoning their names, but solely to authenticate the
prophetic declarations respecting Christ, to be connected with whom is
real honour and solid glory. Of past generations, how many names, great in
human estimation, have descended into oblivion, while those only will
obtain an imperishable memorial, who are "written in the Lamb's book
of life."
It must ever be deemed a noble distinction to have stood related to Christ
"according to the flesh;" more so than to have been the sons and daughters
of the mighty princes of mankind: but to have been his MOTHER was the sole
honour of one happy female; still, however, less happy on this account,
than because of the genuine humility with which she adorned her lowly
sphere, and the lively faith with which she recognized the character
of her Son.
In reference to the genealogical tables of Matthew and Luke, it has been
admirably remarked, "We observe among these ancestors of Christ, some that
were _heathens_; and others that, on different accounts, were of _infamous
character_: and perhaps it might be the design of Providence that we
should learn from it, or at least should on reading it take occasion to
reflect, that persons of all nations, and even the _chief of sinners_
amongst them, are encouraged to trust in him as their Saviour. To him,
therefore, let us look even from the ends of the earth; yea, from the
depths of guilt and distress; and the consequence will be happy beyond all
expression or conception." [3]
In the apostolic epistle to the Hebrews, it is intimated as a fact, of
pleasing notoriety, in the history of the church of God, that angels are
"ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs
of salvation." When appointed by the great Supreme to this service, they
usually adopted a human form and appearance, probably for the purpose of
securing that degree of familiarity which the nature of their
communications required, and which a more splendid manifestation would
have precluded; in the scriptural accounts, however, of these remarkable
visits to eminent saints in early ages, whether they appeared in numbers,
as to Abraham, or individually, as on other occasions, no distinct mention
is made of their names or order. But to impress a character of majesty and
dignity upon the message, and upon all the circumstances of the divine
communication to Mary, when an angel is commissioned to announce that she
was selected by the wonderful providence of God as the mother of the
Messiah, the name of the celestial messenger is recorded by the evangelist
in a marked and solemn manner. It was the angel GABRIEL [4] one, as we may
infer, of the highest order of those intelligences that "circle the throne
rejoicing;" and the same glorious spirit who so many ages before had been
sent to Daniel, to specify, in a prophetic enigma, the time of "MESSIAH
THE PRINCE," which he now came to announce as having actually arrived.
Never did even an angel before convey so important a message, or descend
to this earth with such rapturous sensations. It must ever, indeed, be
considered the felicity of an angel, as well as of a man, to do the will
of God, whether this obedience involve personal difficulty, or be
accompanied with circumstances of peculiar delight. It must have afforded
satisfaction to the mighty spirit who was despatched from heaven to eject
the first parents of our race from the bowers of Eden, and to stretch his
flaming sword across the path of access to the tree of life, as well as to
that favoured angel who now hastened to the cottage of the virgin of
Nazareth; because each was accomplishing a purpose in which he knew that
the divine perfections were pre-eminently displayed; but as, in executing
the will of God, the holiest of men must necessarily experience a
different kind and degree of satisfaction, according to the nature of the
service itself to which they are called; and as we have scriptural
evidence that the inhabitants of the invisible world have peculiar
sensations when sinners of the fallen race are converted to God; it is not
surely an inadmissible sentiment, that, as never spirit was honoured
before with such a message, Gabriel must have felt unusual joy upon
announcing the incarnation of the Son of God. His very language expresses
it. His address is full of pathos and congratulation. It breathes angelic
rapture. With it we commenced this subject, and in some measure
participating the bliss, we cite it again: "Hail, thou that art highly
favoured, the Lord is with thee! Blessed art thou among women!"
There is nothing in the narrative to induce us to think that the angel
assumed any extraordinary splendour of appearance on this occasion; and
judging from the usual mode in which blessed spirits visited the sons of
men in former times, as well as from a consideration of the tender age and
lowly station of Mary, it is probable that he entered the room where she
was, as an ordinary stranger. It is besides stated, that she was troubled
at his _saying_, not at his _appearance_.
This salutation excited in the virgin's breast a sensation of astonishment
mingled with apprehension. Among the Jews it was not lawful for a man to
use any salutation to a woman, not even by a messenger, or her own
husband; in addition to which, the panegyrical and congratulatory terms in
which she was addressed, might well lead her to "cast in her mind what
manner of salutation this should be."
The benevolent messenger at once relieved her from the embarrassment into
which he perceived she had been thrown, by familiarly calling her by name,
renewing the solemn assurances of divine favour, and predicting the future
glory of that illustrious Son whom she should bear, and whose description,
being, like all the Jews, well instructed in the prophetic Scriptures, she
would immediately recognize. These were his remarkable words: "Fear not,
Mary; for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shall
conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shall call his name
JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and
the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David. And he
shall reign over the house of Jacob forever: and of his kingdom there
shall be no end."
Her surprise was now raised to the highest pitch; and, incapable of
comprehending by what means such a declaration could be fulfilled in her
who was at present a virgin, she ventured to inquire of the angel, "How
shall this be?" It is worthy of observation, that she did not instantly
reject the testimony of her illustrious visiter as manifestly absurd and
impossible, but modestly requested an explanation of the mysterious
assurance. She was evidently one of those who "waited for salvation" in
Israel; and who well knew that it was the province of human reason to
submit, with implicit confidence, even to the most inexplicable statements
of revelation.
It is true, she could not conjecture by what miraculous conception the
angelic prediction would be verified; but she did not hesitate a moment to
allow the apparently incongruous facts of his being her son, and yet the
Son of the Highest, who should rise to the throne of David, and possess an
everlasting kingdom. Her reason was confounded, but her faith triumphed;
and though she knew not the _manner_, this was no sufficient evidence with
her against the probability of the declared fact. Upon how many inferior
occasions, and under far less mysterious circumstances have we been
incredulous, deeming even the plainest declarations improbable, because
they were unaccountable; and presuming to introduce some arbitrary
alteration into the record of heaven, or some far-fetched comment, rather
than humbly bow to supreme authority.
If, however, it were admitted that the question of Mary betrays at least a
momentary incredulity, this was soon dispersed by the angel's reply: "The
Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall
overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of
thee, shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elizabeth,
she hath also conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month
with her who was called barren. For with God nothing shall be impossible."
In the exercise of lively faith and joy she answered, "Behold the handmaid
of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed
from her."
Let us endeavour to imitate the spirit of Mary. She acknowledged the
power of God to accomplish the greatest, and, to her, the most
inconceivable designs; and with unaffected simplicity, blended with humble
and holy satisfaction, she received the divine word. Thus let us resign
ourselves to the will of God, and confide in his most wonderful
declarations. It is for mortals to believe, and not to cavil; when Jehovah
speaks, to hear and to obey. Let us beware of stumbling at the promises
through unbelief; and cherish increasing pleasure in the conviction, that
he who sent his Son into the world to be the Saviour of men, will freely
bestow upon his redeemed people all the blessings of time, and all the
riches of eternity.
It is observable, that on this occasion a young woman, though at first
overawed by the heavenly manifestation, at length displayed a faith which
shines with peculiar brightness, when brought into comparison with the
sentiments of the aged priest Zacharias, when the same angel appeared to
him a few months before, to communicate a prediction of far less apparent
improbability.
When this venerable man was burning incense on the golden altar before the
Lord, and therefore in circumstances peculiarly favourable to the most
elevated exercises of faith and devotion, Gabriel appeared to him, and gave
him assurance that his frequent prayer for the redemption of Israel was
heard, and that his aged partner should become in due time, the mother of
a distinguished son, to be named John, who should be "great in the sight
of the Lord," eminently useful in converting many of the children of
Israel, and preparing their minds for the speedy approach of the Messiah;
and yet it is stated, that Zacharias "believed not his words," in
consequence of which he was smitten with dumbness till the birth of the
child. But Mary, though so inferior in age, in situation, and in spiritual
advantages, glorified God by a full acquiescence in his declarations;
thus exemplifying what the grace of God can accomplish, even in the
youngest persons, and the weakest sex. It must not indeed, be overlooked,
that _at first_ the language of Mary indicated a certain degree of
hesitation and doubt, somewhat allied to the unbelief of Zacharias,
although she _eventually_ triumphed over every feeling of fear or of
unbelief; and yet no sign of divine displeasure was given. May we not,
therefore, take occasion to admire the discriminating goodness of God,
who, while he does not "willingly afflict or grieve the children of men,"
proportions his chastisements to the demerit of the individual, and the
circumstances of the case? The omniscience of the Searcher of hearts is
perfectly acquainted with the secret workings of the mind, and measures
with perfect discernment the exact delinquency of every thought and deed,
when we can judge only by the appearance or the words of the individual.
It is peculiarly gratifying to witness the beginnings of faith in the
young, and especially in young females. It becomes their age and sex. It
constitutes their best accomplishment, and their most shining ornament.
Beauty is a fading flower, wealth a perishable treasure, and admiration "a
puff of air;" but religion in the heart is an unfading inheritance. While
so many vain and inconsiderate young women value themselves upon exterior
charms and unmeaning flatteries, upon the symmetry of a face, the elegance
of a form, and the decoration of a ribbon, may every female reader of
these pages aspire after the nobler distinction of Mary, and by her
undissembled piety afford pleasure to her parents, to her friends, to the
church of God, and to those witnessing spirits, "in whose presence there
is joy at the repentance of a sinner!"
Immediately after the visit of the angel Gabriel to Mary, perhaps on the
same day [5], she hastened to her cousin Elizabeth, the wife of Zacharias,
who resided in that part of Judea called the hill-country, which extended
from Bethoron to Emmaus. The purpose of this visit was to congratulate her
pious relative on the singular mercy which she was informed by the angel
she had experienced, in the promise of a son at her advanced period of
life, and to communicate an account of the heavenly intercourse with which
she had herself been favoured.
"Now theirs was converse such as it behoves
Man to maintain, and such as God approves"--
worthy of the excellent characters who met, and calculated to confirm each
other's hopes, and awaken mutual gratitude:
"Christ and his character their only scope,
Their object, and their subject, and their hope."
If, when pious persons associate together, they have not to relate the
visits of angels, or the miraculous interferences of Providence, it is
surely in their power to diversify, enliven, and improve their social
interviews, by some allusions to experimental religion, and some
interchange of pious sentiment. The Christian world suffers incalculable
loss by neglecting suitable opportunities for such communications, which
might be eminently conducive to the great purposes of mutual comfort and
instruction; for
"------What are ages and the lapse of time,
Match'd against truths, as lasting as sublime?
Hearts may be found, that harbour at this hour
That love to Christ, and all its quickening power;
And lips unstain'd by folly or by strife,
Whose wisdom, drawn from the deep well of life,
Tastes of its healthful origin, and flows
A Jordan for the ablation of our woes.
Oh days of heaven, and nights of equal praise.
Serene and peaceful as those heavenly days,
When souls drawn upwards, in communion sweet,
Enjoy the stillness of some close retreat,
Discourse, as if releas'd and safe at home,
Of dangers past and WONDERS YET TO COME,
And spread the sacred treasures of the breast
Upon the lap of covenanted rest."
COWPER.
As soon as Mary had reached the residence of Elizabeth, and saluted her,
the babe, which the latter had conceived, leaped with unusual and
supernatural emotion; and she became so filled with the Holy Spirit, as
instantly to burst out in the most impassioned language, indicative of the
glorious discovery, that Mary was the long predestined mother of Messiah.
Although it seems probable that her husband, upon his return home, had
informed Elizabeth (perhaps by means of writing, for he was still
suffering that temporary dumbness which his unbelief had occasioned) of
the vision he had seen at Jerusalem, and of the promise of the angel that
he should have a son remarkably distinguished, especially as the precursor
of the Saviour; yet till this moment she had no suspicion that her beloved
relative was to be that illustrious mother, who should inherit the
blessing of all future ages. Now a ray from heaven breaks upon the
mysterious subject, and "the glory of the Lord" is risen upon this
venerable matron. She pours forth unusual benedictions upon Mary, and
congratulates herself upon the felicity of her own circumstances.
The generous nature of this joy is truly admirable, and worthy of
imitation. Exempt from that envious spirit which is so predominant in the
world, and so utterly subversive of the real interests and happiness of
those who cherish it, Elizabeth congratulated her young relative upon the
superior favour which Heaven had conferred upon her; and murmured not at
the will of Providence, in assigning her so unexpected a pre-eminence. Her
words were as follows: "Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the
fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord
should come to me? For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded
in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. And blessed is she that
believed; for there shall be a performance of those things which were told
her from the Lord."
The same spirit which dictated the language of Elizabeth, animated the
bosom of Mary with inspirations of a still higher order. Unable to
restrain the vehement enthusiasm of her mind, she thus began:--
MY SOUL DOTH MAGNIFY THE LORD, AND MY SPIRIT HATH REJOICED IN GOD MY
SAVIOUR.
The mother of Jesus here adopts the prophetic style, speaking of the
future character of her illustrious Son as though he were already born,
and had attained to that eminency to which he was predestined. She extols
him as "God her Saviour," more enraptured with the hope of salvation
through his name, than with the honour of her maternal connexion with him.
We need feel no surprise at her assigning this title to her anticipated
offspring, when we recollect that she was at the moment divinely inspired,
and that she had been previously informed by the angel Gabriel of his
being "the Son of the Highest." This was no doubt understood by the Virgin
Mary as expressive of his divine personality. He did not, indeed,
_become_ the Son of God by his miraculous conception; but it was the
reason of his being called so. Thus he is _called_ the Son of God as
raised from the dead, no more to return to corruption, but he was not
_constituted_ such by these events. It was a _declaration_ of what he was
antecedently to his conception by the overshadowing influence of the
Holy Spirit.
In Mary's exclamation, "magnifying the Lord," and "rejoicing in God her
Saviour," are used as convertible terms, denoting the same sentiment and
source of joy. And how rational and noble was this feeling! Where should
an immortal creature seek happiness, but in God the Saviour? What are all
the fleeting possessions and enjoyments of time, in comparison with the
"pleasures" which are at his "right hand for evermore?" How awfully
infatuated are those who aim to attain real felicity independently of the
sovereign good!--Mary continues,
FOR HE HATH REGARDED THE LOW ESTATE OF HIS HANDMAIDEN: FOR, BEHOLD, FROM
HENCEFORTH ALL GENERATIONS SHALL CALL ME BLESSED.
This is the language both of piety and inspiration. It implies that sense
of the divine condescension which characterizes humility, intimating the
unmerited nature of the mercy she had experienced, as well as her
unexpected elevation from the lowest condition. She states, that it is her
_happiness_, and not her _excellences_, for which she anticipated the
congratulations of succeeding times. She was conscious that the honour and
the glory belonged to God, and that the felicity of her circumstances, not
the merit of her character, deserved admiration. It was neither the glory
of her descent, nor the multitude or splendour of her virtues, that
attracted the regards of Heaven, and influenced the movements of
Providence in passing by the palaces of greatness to the cottage of Mary:
but "so it seemed good in his sight:" and while, with impious vanity of
spirit, many are flattering themselves that their imaginary virtue will
recommend them to the notice, and secure the favour of Omniscience, it
will be found, to their ultimate confusion, that "this" only "is life
eternal, to know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou
hast sent."
FOR HE THAT IS MIGHTY HATH DONE TO ME GREAT THINGS; AND HOLY IS HIS NAME.
There is a singular propriety, in thus introducing the sanctity of the
divine nature and character. In the production of that body which was
"prepared" for the Son of God, nothing of the infection of sin, which
attaches to the corrupt nature of man, was suffered to stain "the holy
child Jesus." He was, indeed, "in all things made like unto his brethren,
yet without _sin_." Although his miraculous conception did not exempt him
from human infirmities, it prevented the possibility of his being
contaminated by human guilt.
The _name_ of God is frequently mentioned in Scripture; and, in general,
we are to understand by it the revelation of his character, by whatever
methods, to his intelligent creation; and to _hallow_ or pronounce it
holy, is devoutly to adore every such discovery. His name is written on
the works of nature, but shines with pre-eminent lustre in the wonders of
redemption; and the spirit of ardent devotion traces all these
manifestations in order to pay a suitable homage to them. To pronounce the
name of God _holy_, is then virtually to attribute to the Supreme Being a
grandeur and a majesty perfectly unique, and which distinguishes him from
all other beings in the universe.
AND HIS MERCY IS ON THEM THAT FEAR HIM, FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION.
The spirit of Mary takes an elevated station, looking back upon past ages,
and anticipating the glory of future times. The incarnation of Christ is
represented as an act and an evidence of divine mercy, not only to her,
but to all who by the fear of God are interested in this new dispensation.
The promise of a Saviour was almost coeval with the world; and during the
long succession of ages which had since elapsed, and the infinite
diversity of events, so perplexing to the human eye and so apparently
fortuitous, the love of God was pursuing its high purpose. The frequent
intimations given to the ancient patriarchs, and to the prophets of
Israel, proved that the eternal Ruler of the universe was producing, by a
vast series of preparatory means, the last and best days of time, when the
"Sun of Righteousness" should rise upon the world "with healing beneath
his wings." An omnipotent arm was incessantly accomplishing the
determinations of an omniscient mind. No power could impede the march of
his mercy to the predestined point; no casualties defeat his great design;
and no lapse of years, or revolution of centuries, diminish the ardour of
infinite love, to secure the felicity of his people. The Lord was never
"slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness;" for it must
never he forgotten, in estimating the movements of eternal Providence,
that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years
as one day."
But this language is not merely, nor, perhaps, chiefly retrospective.
Those who fear God in all ages, participate the mercies dispensed to man
through an incarnate Redeemer. Under the Christian dispensation in
particular, they are fully communicated, and will enrich the people of
God to the end of time. The thousands and myriads of the human race, that
apply to "the fountain opened for sin and uncleanness," cannot diminish
its efficacy or exhaust its fulness; but the last preacher that exists
upon the earth previous to that final hour, when "the trumpet shall sound
and the dead shall be raised incorruptible," will be able to proclaim the
blood of Jesus Christ the Son of God, as cleansing "from all sin," with
equal confidence to that which inspired the first herald of these "glad
tidings to perishing sinners."
HE HATH SHOWED STRENGTH WITH HIS ARM; HE HATH SCATTERED THE PROUD IN THE
IMAGINATION OF THEIR HEARTS.
The omnipotence of God has been manifested in many remarkable instances
during past ages, but in no case so illustriously as in the birth of
Christ. All the other mighty operations of Jehovah are surpassed in this
unparelleled event. The haughty Jews, who fondly but foolishly cherished
the expectation, that the Messiah would be born of some one of the most
opulent families in Judea, and conduct them to conquest and dominion, will
be inexpressibly disappointed to find him the child of an obscure virgin,
betrothed to a carpenter, and an inhabitant of the contemptible town of
Nazareth in Galilee. So wonderfully "are the ways of God above our ways,
and his thoughts above our thoughts!"
HE HATH PUT DOWN THE MIGHTY FROM THEIR SEATS, AND EXALTED THEM OF LOW
DEGREE. HE HATH FILLED THE HUNGRY WITH GOOD THINGS, AND THE RICH HE HATH
SENT EMPTY AWAY.
The providence of God has been often displayed in the depression of the
most distinguished from their temporal elevations, and in the advancement
of the most despised to dignity and renown. The necessitous have been
liberally supplied: while those who have been possessed of the most ample
and enviable abundance, have sometimes, by unexpected reverses, become
destitute. This sovereign disposal of human affairs has been apparent,
both in temporal and spiritual concerns. The Virgin Mary was herself, as
she intimates a remarkable exemplification of such an interposal; while
those who in Israel were "hungering and thirsting after righteousness,"
beheld in her infant son, that child whose name was to be called
"Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, and the
Prince of Peace," and whose manifestation in the flesh afforded the
sublimest satisfaction to their waiting spirits.
HE HATH HOLPEN HIS SERVANT ISRAEL, IN REMEMBRANCE OF HIS MERCY; AS HE
SPAKE TO OUR FATHERS, TO ABRAHAM, AND TO HIS SEED FOR EVER.
All the true Israel of God are now admitted into his paternal protection,
whether Jews or Gentiles; for the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, and to David, of whose family was Mary, could never be forgotten by
him who "rejoiced in the habitable parts of his earth, and his delights
were with the sons of men." Never can the pious mind recur, without
emotions of the liveliest gratitude, to such predictions as the following,
which now seem to approach their glorious accomplishments; "I will make of
thee (Abraham) a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name
great; and thou shalt be a blessing. And I will bless them that bless
thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of
the earth be blessed.... And I will establish my covenant, between me and
thee, and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."
Mary prolonged her visit to her aged friend and relative, three months; a
period of their lives to which, no doubt, each would ever after recur with
peculiar satisfaction. The family of Zacharias was not dulled by the
formalities of ceremony, or disturbed by the riot of folly, but
delightfully animated by the cheerfulness of religion. Their time, we may
readily admit, was wisely employed; and their daily converse such as
befitted those favourites of Providence, who knew the truth of God, and
had enjoyed the honour of angelic visitations.
The improvement of time ought to be our great and immediate concern. To
this important duty we are urged by a consideration of the rapidity of its
flight--the impossibility of its return--the bright examples of its proper
use, which the records of inspiration furnish--the fatal consequences of
squandering it away in useless, frivolous and criminal pursuits--the voice
of reason--of conscience--of Providence--of Scripture--of disappointed
infidelity and of triumphant faith--and the vast interests of eternity,
with which the use of it is essentially connected. "Lord, so teach us to
number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom."
During all this time, Mary was only the betrothed wife of an obscure but
conscientious person, named Joseph. This was a circumstance which
occasioned _him_ extreme perplexity, but tended to exhibit the strength of
_her_ faith. Joseph was fearful of her reputation, and meditated some plan
of concealing what he supposed would be deemed the disgrace of his beloved
partner; for the Jews, whose laws of marriage were very precise,
considered infidelity to a betrothed husband in the light of adultery, and
as therefore subjecting the person to its usual punishment. [6]
It does not appear that Mary explained to him the manner or occasion of
her mysterious conception; but judging, perhaps, that it would seem
incredible, she leaves the whole affair in the hands of Divine Providence.
"Thus," as archbishop Leighton excellently remarks, "silent innocency
rests satisfied in itself, when it may be inconvenient or fruitless to
plead for itself, and loses nothing by doing so, for it is always in due
season vindicated and cleared by a better hand. And thus it was here; she
is silent, and God speaks for her."
This inexplicable mystery was revealed to Joseph in a dream. He was
assured by an angel, that Mary should bring forth a son, and commanded to
call his name JESUS, for he was to "save his people from their sins." His
apprehensions being immediately dispersed, he obeyed the heavenly
intimation, "to take unto him Mary his wife."
This miraculous conception has ever proved the stumbling-block of
infidelity; while, in the just convictions of Christians, it is to be
regarded as one of the most glorious and indispensable peculiarities of
our faith. Christianity is not answerable for those misrepresentations of
this doctrine which result from the weakness or the wickedness of mankind,
and which have so often exposed it to ridicule; but let the statement of
Scripture be taken simply as it is--plain, perspicuous, untangled with the
perplexities of controversy--and it will approve itself to the pious mind,
not only as a fact, but as one of prime importance and obvious utility.
In demanding an explication of the manner in which the divine and human
natures became united, or continue to subsist in indissoluble connexion in
person of the Son of God, reason claims a prerogative to which she is by
no means entitled; especially if the alternative be, either that reason
shall be satisfied, or the statements of Scripture rejected. There exist
facts relative to our own constitution as incomprehensible and
contradictory to what, independently of experience, we should be induced
to believe, as the miraculous conception and mysterious nature of Jesus
Christ. The soul and body, distinguished for properties not only peculiar
to each, but dissimilar, heterogeneous, and seemingly inconsistent, yet
constitute one person. A man is at once material and immaterial, mortal
and immortal.
It was expedient that the Son of God should become man, that he might set
us an example, sympathize with our griefs, vanquish our enemies, and
abolish death: and equally so that he should be coequal with God in order
to procure salvation for the lost world by the merit of his atonement;
otherwise his obedience must have been imperfect, his sufferings
unsatisfactory, and his mediatorial character, by which he was allied to
both parties, incomplete.
This doctrine is practical, and not an abstract speculation, or an article
of faith intended merely to fill up the outline of a system, and
unconnected with any moral results. It is calculated to awaken our
gratitude and kindle our love, by showing us the infinite goodness of God,
who "spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all"--"who made
him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the
righteousness of God in him." It should further engage us to cultivate
humility and patience. A view of the abasement of the Son of God should
impress upon us a sense of the insignificance of all earthly glory, and
the propriety of sustaining all the trials and deprivations of life with
unrepining fortitude. "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ
Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal
with God; but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of
a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion
as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the
death of the cross."
This view of the incarnation of Christ is adapted also to promote charity;
for, "though he _was_ rich, yet for our sakes he _became_ poor; that we,
through his poverty, might be rich;" and it tends to elevate us above the
meanness of temporal compliances, and the degradation of worldly lusts, by
pointing out the dignity to which our nature is advanced, through having
been assumed, and still being retained in its purified state by the Son of
God. Let a holy ambition prevail, to live as those who possess such a
relationship; and who, though at present disguised in the dress of
poverty, are born to an inheritance of which no enemy can prevent your
possession--"an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth
not away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God
through faith unto salvation."
Section II.
Nothing happens by Chance--Dispensations preparatory to the Coming of
Christ--Prophecy of Micah accomplished by Means of the Decree of
Augustus--Mary supernaturally strengthened to attend upon her new-born
Infant--Visit of the Shepherds--Mary's Reflections--Circumcision of the
Child--taken to the Temple--Simeon's Rapture and Prediction--Visit and
Offerings of the Arabian Philosophers--general Considerations.
Chance is a word which ought to be banished from the Christian vocabulary.
It is utterly contradictory to reason, opposed to experience, and
subversive of revelation. To suppose that he who created the world has
wholly and forever abandoned it, is improbable; and to imagine that the
regular movements of nature, and the course of events--the whole train of
causes, and the incalculable variety of dependent consequences, are merely
fortuitous, seems absurd as well as impious. Uncertain and confused as
were the opinions of the pagan nations of antiquity, few of them totally
denied some kind of superintending providence; and many of their ablest
writers reasoned in defence of it in the most forcible manner. "What,"
said the emperor Marcus Antoninus, "would it concern me to live in a world
void of God and without Providence?"
In order to form clear conceptions of this, and of every other subject
connected with the peace of our minds and the immortal interests of man,
we must apply to the Scriptures for information. Hope, conjecture,
plausibility--all became pleasingly absorbed in the splendour of truth;
which, with the brightness of a sun beam, writes upon the inspired page
the doctrine of an universal and particular providence. It appears,
indeed, so fundamental to the system of Christianity, and so consonant to
the wisdom and goodness of God, that if it were possible to adduce "solid
objections against its reality, one of the richest sources of consolation
to the human race would be forever lost--some of our dearest hopes would
be undermined, and despondency shed disastrous gloom over the whole scene
of life. It is the happiness of Christians to know, that nothing can
escape the eye, nothing can disarrange the schemes, or thwart the
purposes, of the eternal mind; and that the same general law which
regulates the flight of an angel, or the affairs of an empire, connects
even the fall of a sparrow with the plans of heaven. It is their privilege
to feel assured, that the events which appear contingent or accidental to
us, are equally ordained with those which seem the most orderly and
regular. The arrow may be shot at a venture, but the Supreme Ruler guides
it through the air. So sings the poet;
"Through all the various shifting scene
Of life's mistaken ill or good,
Thy hand, O God, conducts unseen
The beautiful vicissitude.
All things on earth, and all in heaven,
On thy eternal will depend;
And all for greater good were given,
And all shall in thy glory end."
These sentiments will receive additional illustration from the remarkable
facts respecting the birth of Christ, which it will be now proper to
notice. He who can imagine the correspondence observable between ancient
predictions and the occurrences which mark the singular history before us
to be mere casual or undesigned coincidences, must possess a mind
strangely perverted by prejudice or mean in its conceptions--he must in
reality believe greater miracles than he denies, and, in his zeal to be
thought rational, become enthusiastic and fanatical, in admitting the most
inconceivable absurdities. We hesitate not to say, that even upon the
principles of reason there are more difficulties in denying a providence
in all the circumstances connected with our Saviour's incarnation, than in
allowing its active agency; and that here, the doctrine which is most
consolatory is most true. Sophistry may attempt to poison or to stop the
streams of spiritual comfort, but they will nevertheless flow with
undiminished sweetness and abundance.
The whole period of the past time ought to be considered as a vast
preparatory dispensation; every circumstance in the history of the people
of Israel essentially depended on each previous occurrence, and stood
connected with each succeeding one. We perceive sometimes more distinctly
by a prophetic light, sometimes more obscurely through the hieroglyphical
characters of the Mosaic economy of types and shadows, a wonderful series
of events, that guides the devout inquirer to "God manifest in the flesh;"
and, if human penetration cannot always discover the bright concatenation,
we feel assured that it exists, and is regularly maintained by supreme
wisdom; as we infer from observing the commencement, or discovering some
parts of the course, which a mighty river pursues through provinces and
empires, that, although the whole may not be accurately ascertained, yet
each part, whether it traverses subterraneous passages or pathless
forests, is certainly and necessarily connected.
The links of this marvellous chain of providence become more distinctly
visible as we approach the last, and witness its glorious termination.
Amongst other ancient prophecies, we have this very express declaration of
Micah respecting the birth of Christ--a declaration which, after the lapse
of seven hundred years, we are now to see verified: "Thou, _Bethlehem
Ephratah_, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet _out of
thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel_, whose
goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."
It has been related, that at the time of the miraculous conception, Joseph
and Mary lived at Nazareth in Galilee, and still continued this residence.
If the predicted child had been born in Nazareth, it is obvious that
either he could not be the Messiah, or the prophet was not correct. The
virgin mother, however, neither disbelieved the communications of Heaven,
nor took any extraordinary measures, by a removal of her dwelling-place,
to aid the accomplishment of a divine oracle. How she, an inhabitant of
_Nazareth_ was to be the mother of him whom so many ages had expected in
_Bethlehem_, was indeed mysterious; and yet like Abraham, she hoped
against hope; allied in faith, as well as by descent, to that eminent
patriarch. Nothing could be more contradictory, to her anticipations than
external appearances; but nothing could be more humble, more patient, or
more indicative of lively faith in God, than her spirit and conduct. She
believed the angel, and she left the event. What an illustrious example to
her sex! what confidence in Providence! what trust in God! what a
resignation of reason to revelation!
Mark the event. Augustus, at this time emperor of Rome, suddenly published
an edict for the registry, or enrolment of the empire; probably with a
view to ascertain the state of his dependencies, to exact an oath of
fidelity, and perhaps, to determine the amount of money which might be
reasonably expected from each province in case of any future taxation. The
whole empire being included in this decree, all the families were required
immediately to repair to their respective cities, for the purpose of
having their names distinctly recorded; and, as Joseph was lineally
descended from David, he, with his espoused wife, went into Judea to
Bethlehem, because it was the birth place and residence of their
illustrious ancestor.
At this remarkable crisis Mary was detained by the full accomplishment of
the time for her delivery; "and she brought forth her first born Son, and
wrapped him in swaddling-clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there
was no room for them in the inn." Here then were fulfilled the prophetic
descriptions of the place and circumstances of the Redeemer's incarnation.
A virgin produces a son--a son who, by the exclusion of his parents from
the accommodation of the inn, already began to realize the inspired
declaration, "he is despised and rejected of men"--a son identified as the
promised Messiah by every thing connected with his birth. Augustus issues
a decree which brings Mary to Bethlehem at the precise moment when this
removal was requisite; and yet Augustus, ignorant of the designs of Heaven
or the condition of Mary, considers only his personal glory and the
security of the imperial dominions. He has one purpose, and Providence
another; but they both concur to the predestined end. Augustus knew not
that his edict was to prove the appointed means of accomplishing the most
important event that had ever transpired since the commencement of time,
and was, in fact, the wonderful hinge upon which the numerous and
concurring prophecies of past centuries were destined to turn. He knew not
that his imperial edict for an universal enrolment, was the last of a
series of preparatory means by which the great purposes of infinite mercy
were to be developed and displayed. Why was not the same policy pursued by
the emperor, when it was determined upon seven-and-twenty years before at
Taracon in Spain? and why, if he were diverted at that period from the
immediate execution of this project by some disturbances in the empire,
was it forgotten or neglected for so many years, and revived at so
critical a moment? Let infidelity stand abashed, and listen to the voice
of revelation: "He worketh all things after the counsel of his own will."
How often has the supreme Disposer made use of those agents to accomplish
his purposes, who were themselves the last to acknowledge his
superintendence, or perhaps the first to oppose his will! How consolatory
to the Christian to reflect, that the passions of the human mind, the
madness of ambition, the rage of envy, the misrule of tyrannic power, the
animosity of persecution, the decrees of princes, the events of war and of
peace, the elements of nature, and the powers of the invisible worlds, are
under the perfect control of God! A Pharaoh shall cause his "name to be
declared throughout all the earth," by giving occasion to the most
transcendent miracles, and the most direct and indisputable interference
of Omnipotence--a Cyrus shall pursue a wonderful career of conquest;
victory after victory shall enhance his fame; nations shall be subdued,
and gates of brass broken before him, for the sake of Israel the elect of
God, and Jacob his servant--an Augustus shall unconsciously fulfil a
divine decree by means of an edict of his own--the Roman empire shall be
enrolled, that Jesus may he born in Bethlehem.
It appears that Mary was supernaturally strengthened to perform the
necessary duties to her infant charge, in the cold and comfortless
situation in which she was thrown. No one seemed at hand to commiserate
her sufferings, to supply her wants, or to assist her weakness. Her own
life was endangered; but maternal tenderness struggled for the life of her
firstborn, and a divine faith in God and his promises sustained her amidst
the privations of her desolate abode. Let not his people permit
despondency to becloud their days or extinguish their hopes; but, relying
on his assurance, "As thy day is, so thy strength shall be"--an assurance
so remarkably verified in the mother of Jesus, and so often corroborated
by the experience of Christians--let them imitate the patience and faith
of this illustrious woman, who was at once the ornament of religion and
the glory of her sex.
Every thing is marvellous in this sacred story. No sooner was this child
introduced into the world, than his virgin mother received an unexpected
visit in her lonely dwelling. A company of shepherds came, with
unceremonious eagerness, to her asylum. Mary and Joseph were together in
the stable, conversing doubtless, upon this astonishing birth; and
probably might have been alarmed at the intrusion of strangers. Were they
come to remove them from this poor lodging, as they had been already
excluded from the inn, and occupy their places?--were other barbarians
come to pour the last drop into the cup of maternal wo, by expelling Mary,
her husband, and her offspring, from their wretched, but still acceptable
shelter? If this were the case--if, when the strangers obtruded, these had
been the just apprehensions of the afflicted family, they knew where to
find consolation; and she who held the babe in her arms, and pressed it
to her bosom, was no doubt prepared to adopt a similar strain with that by
which Simeon afterward proclaimed his ecstasy--"Lord, now lettest thou
thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation." But
fear not, Mary! It is no ruffian band that approaches thee! These are no
idle strangers, impelled by a vague curiosity; but they are the
commissioned messengers of Providence and the ambassadors of peace! They
have heard "glad tidings," and they are come to verify the visions they
have seen, and to renew the joys they have felt!
In the neighbouring fields these shepherds were watching their flocks by
night; when suddenly an angelic messenger made his appearance in a blaze
of celestial light. They were of course astonished and alarmed; but, from
the first, perceived it was no illusion of the senses, since all
distinctly saw, and were equally affected by the splendid reality. The
benevolent spirit bade them dismiss every apprehension, and proceeded to
open his glorious commission. It consisted of an assurance, that in the
city of David the long-predicted Messiah was actually born, and on that
very day; [7] and that this was the sign by which they should discover the
truth of this revelation, that if they went immediately to Bethlehem they
should find the Babe wrapped in swaddling-clothes, lying in a manger. This
angel, probably Gabriel, who had already appeared to Zacharias and Mary,
was in a moment joined by a multitude of the heavenly host, whose
enraptured bosoms could no longer repress the intensity of joy, and who
were permitted to strike their golden harps and unite their angelic voices
in those ever memorable strains, "GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST, AND ON
EARTH PEACE, GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN."
The shepherds instantly hastened to Bethlehem. They beheld the heaven-born
Babe. They explained to Joseph and the virgin what they had seen and
heard; and then circulated the wonderful news in every direction.
Astonishment filled the whole vicinity; but it is probable a great
diversity of opinion prevailed respecting the degree of credit due to the
testimony of these witnesses; and the impression would soon vanish from
those whose prejudices, whose ignorance, or whose temporal interests,
prevented their immediate acknowledgment of the mighty fact. And must we
not deeply lament, that to this hour similar reasons operate to produce a
similar infidelity or rejection of the well-substantiated claims of the
Son of God upon the affections and obedience of mankind?
In the mean time, as the evangelist states, "Mary kept all these things,
and pondered them in her heart." With a modesty and a piety so truly
characteristic of this eminent woman, she left it to others to publish to
the world the extraordinary manifestations of divine favour which she had
received, content to observe in silence the movements of Providence, and
to allow the mysterious fact to be gradually developed. As she took no
measures at first to screen herself from reproach, but left the defence of
her integrity to him whose wisdom was working all these wonders; so she
did not avail herself of the present opportunity to extend her fame. From
the astonishment or the applauses of the multitude she willingly retired
into the shades; and instead of indulging vanity, gave herself to solemn
meditation. Connecting together the vision of Zacharias, the language of
Elizabeth, the visitation of the celestial spirit to herself, the
miraculous conception, the unexpected occasion of her removal at this
crisis to Bethlehem, the recent account of the shepherds, the language of
ancient prophecy respecting the lowly birthplace of the Saviour of
mankind, and the peculiar accordance of its minute descriptions with her
present circumstances; she perceived the amazing conclusion to be drawn,
and humbly adored the God of her salvation.
We must pronounce Mary, then, a thoughtful observer and a humble inquirer,
free from the levity of her age, and superior in mental character to the
poverty of her condition. She had, indeed, superior advantages, and was in
a sense placed under divine discipline and instruction: but she possessed
a docility of spirit which rendered these singular means so conducive to
her rapid improvement in knowledge and piety. Happy for us if we make a
proper use of whatever religious privileges we enjoy, so that the
spiritual opportunities and blessings which enhance our responsibility, do
not, by our negligence, aggravate our condemnation!
It is probable that we forfeit much enjoyment, and lose much attainable
wisdom, by suffering the events of providence to pass unnoticed. The habit
of investigating their connections, and tracing their consequences, would
no doubt both improve the faculty of observation, and spare us many
perplexities. Diligence in this sacred study would be repaid by pleasure
and profit. We should "know," if we "followed on to know the Lord." The
deep shadows which overcast the scenes of life, and are so impervious to
the human sight, would be easily penetrated by the eye of faith; a new and
glorious scene would present itself; objects and arrangements, before
unseen, would gradually become visible; what was previously obscure in
form and shape, would appear in just proportions; and many of the sources
of our present anxiety might become the means of our richest
satisfaction. Let us imitate the noble examples upon record; remembering
that no place or time is unsuitable to a devout temper, or impossible to
be improved to pious purposes. Isaac meditated in the _fields_, and Mary
in the _stable_; and a devout spirit will transform either into a temple
of praise and prayer.
On the eighth day after his birth, this immaculate Child was circumcised,
both because he was a Jew, and the predicted Messiah. All the descendants
of Abraham were required to submit to this institution; and, therefore,
the parents of JESUS, for so he was named on this occasion, according to
the previous intimation of the angel, could not omit this service without
forfeiting their privileges; and as he was afterward to become the great
preacher of righteousness to his own nation, it was necessary that he
should not be exposed to the punishment of excommunication as a stranger.
Thus, according to the apostle's allusion, he was "made under the law,"
and evidently partook of flesh and blood.
At the expiration of forty days, the parents of Jesus went up to
Jerusalem, to present their Infant before the Lord in the temple,
conformably to the Mosaic law, to offer the sacrifices required upon such
an occasion, and to pay the stipulated sum of five shekels for the eldest
son. [8] Led by a divine impulse, a certain venerable saint, named Simeon,
came into the temple at this moment; and taking the wondrous Child into
his aged arms, exclaimed, "Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in
peace, according to thy word; for mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which
thou hast prepared before the face of all people; a light to lighten the
Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel!" Some have, with useless
curiosity, inquired into the birth, parentage, and station of this
enraptured believer; and with that mistaken prejudice so common to the
world, by which greatness of character is perpetually associated with
eminence of rank, and nobility of birth, they have endeavoured to prove
him to have been a priest, or the son of Hillel, who was chief of the sect
of the Pharisees, and president of the sanhedrim forty years; and he has
even been represented as the father of that Gamaliel who brought up the
apostle Paul. Whereas the narrative of Luke introduces him as a person of
no considerable notoriety, but as one who possessed an infinitely greater
claim to distinction in the inspired page, a man of exemplary conduct and
piety, who was waiting for him who was so long expected as 'the
consolation of Israel.' He was not the favourite of princes, but the
servant of God; and this was his best distinction, that "the Holy Ghost
was upon him; and it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he
should not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ." Growing
infirmities might have awakened, in an ordinary mind, some suspicion of
the reality of that assurance which he had received. Delay seemed to mock
his patience, time dimmed his eyes, and suspense might well have sickened
his heart--but at last the hour arrives, the ancient oracles are
fulfilled--celestial revelations, after the lapse of four hundred years
from the days of Malachi, relume a benighted world--Zacharias, Mary,
Simeon, received the prophetic spirit; and death becomes disarmed of his
terrors, amidst the bright gleamings of approaching day.
Turning to the astonished parents, and addressing himself particularly to
his virgin mother, he said, "Behold, this child is set for the fall and
rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign, which shall be spoken
against, (yea, and a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that
the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed." Anna, an aged prophetess, at
the same instant joined this happy group, and "gave thanks, likewise, unto
the Lord:" the glad tidings were circulated, and the parents returned
into Galilee.
The _accomplishment_ of that event, which in former ages was only the
subject of _prediction_, constitutes part of the happiness of gospel
times. True, indeed, as those predictions proceeded from God, there
existed from the beginning a certainty of their being fulfilled. It was as
impossible that God should lie, as that he should cease to exist; and
having declared the decree, that his Son should "sit upon his holy hill of
Zion," no human violence, no providential vicissitudes, no Satanic
devices, could prevent it. No one of them, nor all of them combined, could
effectually obstruct the march of omnipotent goodness to the completion of
its purposes. But the saints of old suffered a material disadvantage from
"his day" being as yet "afar off;" a disadvantage which could not possibly
be remedied. It is evident that, except in cases of immediate inspiration,
a suspicion might exist in the pious mind, that the prophecy might be
partially, if not entirely misunderstood, as the most penetrating mind
cannot, at this day, with the longest line of research, fathom the deeps
of futurity. Time alone can, with perfect certainty, interpret the visions
of prophecy.
It is also plain that no description, however minute and glowing, could
perfectly represent the life and love of the Redeemer, as displayed in his
own person. The imperfection of language rendered it impossible to portray
the glorious reality. What inspired or seraphic pen, though dipped in
heaven, could display all that was seen when they "beheld his glory?" Had
Omnipotence remanded back the flood of ages, and recalled from the
invisible state the illustrious saints that had been carried down the
stream, from the time of Adam, in order to have witnessed the incarnation,
the life, the death, and the resurrection of Jesus; with one voice they
would have exclaimed, "The half was not told me."
In proportion to the approach of the Messiah, hope glowed with increasing
ardour. Standing on the mount of prophecy, the pious Jews eagerly waited,
and triumphantly hailed the rising of this bright day of grace. How many
"prophets and righteous men" desired to behold this eventful period, but
"died without the sight!" With what sacred pleasure did Moses record the
first promise, though at the distance of many centuries! What rapture
thrilled through the patriarch's veins, when he spake of the coming of
_Shiloh_, "unto whom the gathering of the people should be;" and how did
his languid eyes brighten with new lustre in the dying hour, when he
exclaimed, "I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord!" In what strains of
holy joy did the "sweet singer of Israel" declare, "My heart is inditing a
good matter; I speak of the things which I have made touching the King; my
tongue is the pen of a ready writer. Thou art fairer than the children of
men; grace is poured into thy lips; therefore God hath blessed thee for
ever!" How did Isaiah's heart glow with transport, while his lips were
touched with inspiration, and triumph played on his prophetic harp, "Unto
us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be
upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the
mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase
of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of
David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with
judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the
Lord of hosts will perform this!" But neither the sacred pleasure of
Moses, when he recorded the first promise, nor the rapture that thrilled
through the patriarch's veins, nor the holy joy of the sweet singer of
Israel, nor the glow of transport that animated the heart of Isaiah, and
inspired his lays, can equal the joy of the Christian church. Hope,
indeed, presented to the early ages a lively _picture_ of future times,
and prophecy described them; but "blessed are our eyes, for they see; and
our ears, for they hear ... many prophets and righteous men have desired
to see those things which we see, and have not seen them; and to hear
those things which we hear, and have not heard them."
The visit of the shepherds to Mary, already recited, was succeeded by
another, perhaps equally remarkable. A company of Magi, or Magians, [9]
probably from Arabia, having seen a remarkable light, resembling a star,
suspended over Bethlehem, hastened to pay suitable homage to the
illustrious personage whose birth it indicated. These philosophers, who
were particularly addicted to the study of astronomy, being doubtless
incited by a divine influence to repair to the country over which this new
star or meteor seemed to shed its glory, immediately went to Jerusalem,
where they began to make the most anxious inquiries. The news of their
arrival soon reached the ears of Herod, a man whose cruelties had often
exasperated his subjects, and kept him in a state of constant suspicion;
so that he naturally apprehended fatal consequences to his crown, from
this report of the birth of a king. Having first consulted the priests
and scribes respecting the birthplace of Christ, he procured a private
interview with the Magians, for the purpose of ascertaining the time of
the meteoric appearance; and, with all the policy of all experienced
statesman, requested them to go and find out the extraordinary Child, then
return to bring him word, that he might come and worship him. This was a
contrivance, by which he expected to accomplish, with greater certainty,
the destruction of Jesus.
The Arabian philosophers instantly proceeded on their journey--the star
moved before them, as the cloudy pillar once guided the marches of Israel
in the wilderness; till at length it became stationary over the place
where the Infant lay: then, having fulfilled the design of its creation,
totally and forever disappeared.
Is it for us to question the wisdom of God in any of the productions of
nature, because _we_ do not perceive their utility? Shall we venture to
arraign his goodness, because he has not only supplied the necessities of
man, but filled the caves of ocean, and spread the pathless wilderness
with a rich variety of existence, the specific purposes of which the
researches of man have hitherto failed to discover? Shall we dare to say
that the impenetrable forest, or the untenanted island, was made in vain?
or that the grass grows, in the valley, the shrub sprouts on the
inaccessible height, or the flower expands its beauties and diffuses its
fragrance over the desert uselessly, because _we_ have not discovered the
reasons of their formation? Who, excepting the philosophers of Arabia,
that had seen the new luminary shine for a few days and expire, but would
have disputed the necessity or questioned the design of such a phenomenon?
The ignorant, vulgar, and even the rest of the sages of Arabia, might
have surveyed it with idle wonder or incurious eye; very few followed the
splendour, or knew the intention of its appearance. And may not other
beings be acquainted with many of those mysteries of nature which we fail
to penetrate? or may not secret connexions and combinations, both in the
animate and inanimate creation, exist, which, however important, it is not
necessary for us to know? In reference both to nature and providence--
"One part, one _little_ part, we dimly scan,
Through the dark medium of life's feverish dream;
Yet dare arraign the whole stupendous plan,
If but that little part incongruous seem."
BEATTIE.
The figure of Balaam, in predicting the birth of a Saviour, probably
contained a prophetic allusion to the phenomenon in question; "There shall
come a star out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel;" and
with similar reference, we read in the apocalyptic vision, "I am the
bright and morning star."
As soon as the Magians saw the young Child, with Mary his mother, they
"fell down and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures,
they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. And
being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they
departed into their own country another way."
This narrative suggests many instructive considerations, some of which we
shall briefly notice.
1. Many of those who have possessed the fewest means of moral and
spiritual improvement, will appear in judgment against multitudes who
enjoy the greatest variety of religious advantages. These Arabian sages
acted up to what they knew, and followed the light which was afforded
them; in consequence of which they made discoveries of the most valuable
description, such as could have been attained by no other proceeding, and
such as were totally concealed from the unobservant mass of mankind. It
was indeed a small "star" that first attracted their notice, but it led to
the "Sun of Righteousness." O that we were equally wise and diligent in
the use of our opportunities and privileges--we should then be equally
successful!
2. A specimen is here presented to us of the discriminating proceedings of
the grace of God. Those who were "far off" were "brought nigh," while
those who were "nigh" really, were placed "far off." These Pagans were
conducted to Jesus; while the infatuated Jews, unaffected by his
appearance and subsequent miracles, opposed his influence, and gloried in
their shame. Thus was fulfilled the ancient oracle, "I am found of them
that sought me not." The star which failed to excite attention in Judea,
darted an attractive and effectual splendour into Arabia.
3. It is truly deplorable, that those signs and wonders of Almighty mercy,
which will fill eternity with praise, should be so little observed or
appreciated by the great proportion of mankind. How different were the
engagements that occupied the inhabitants of Jerusalem, from those of the
Arabian philosophers! The star of Bethlehem excited the respectful
attention only of a few strangers, who saw and followed it, and "found the
Messiah." The Saviour they sought was despised and rejected of men, when
emerging from the obscurity of his early life, he dwelt amongst them,
distributing blessings, and imparting salvation.
Is not this the case to the present hour? Where are the travellers to
Zion? Where are the followers of Christ? Where are those happy individuals
to be found, who, renouncing the speculations of philosophy, and the
suggestions of a depraved and perverted mind, are led by the star of
divine revelation to Jesus? Where are those who forsake ALL for him? Where
the company of inquirers, whom no frowns and no flatteries can induce to
relinquish the pursuit? Alas, how thinly scattered! The multitude,
attracted by the glare of worldly glory, can see, indeed, the glitter of
gold, and hear with approving readiness the accents of pleasure; but are
unable to discern the excellencies of Christ, and will not listen to his
voice! They are enchanted by other charms, and lulled into dangerous
repose by other music!
4. Though the star of Bethlehem, which guided the Arabian sages to the Son
of God, be extinguished, the clear light of truth still shines as in a
dark place, and points us to the same object. "Thy word is a lamp unto my
feet, and a light unto my path." Whoever follows this light, will be led
to Jesus; whoever neglects it must wander in the wilderness of error and
perplexity. It sheds the clearest radiance on the path of the traveller,
who is pressing to the "Prince of Peace." Let us not pay attention to
those deceptive lights which the world holds out to allure and destroy.
This only is from heaven, and will guide the inquirer thither, where the
illumination it has diffused over the path of life, will be lost amidst
the splendours of eternal day.
Section III.
The Flight into Egypt--Herod's cruel Proceedings--and Death--Mary goes
to Jerusalem with Joseph--on their Return their Child is missing--they
find him among the Doctors--he returns with them--the Feast of
Cana--Christ's treatment of his Mother when she desired to speak to
him--her Behaviour at the Crucifixion--she is committed to the care of
John--valuable Lessons to be derived from this touching Scene.
Christians, in their times of trial, are usually favoured with adequate
supplies from heaven; so that if they have been overtaken suddenly, or
attacked fiercely, their afflictions have neither found them unprepared,
nor left them overwhelmed. It seems to have been the design of God, in
some of his most painful dispensations, not only to purify the individual
character, but to evince in general, by means of the sufferer's patience,
humility, and other virtues, the reality of religion, and the power of
faith; and thus to furnish an example for the imitation of mankind. This
consideration may serve to explain a part of that _mysteriousness_ which
has characterized many instances of remarkable tribulation, and to prevent
those hasty decisions upon the conduct of Providence which we are too apt
to adopt. On all occasions, we may safely conclude, that whatever be the
nature of our affliction, the goodness of our Father in heaven will both
proportion it to the necessity of the case, and enable us to sustain it,
by preparatory consolations.
The story of Mary and her family illustrates this representation. The
balance of her lot, so to speak, was poised by a divine hand; and the
equilibrium was mercifully and almost constantly preserved, by a
proportionate share of joy and sorrow. The danger of reproach and
proscription by the Jewish law, was compensated by the circumstances of
the miraculous conception; the meanness and misery of her condition in the
stable at Bethlehem, were counterbalanced by the visit of the shepherds,
and the equally wonderful journey of the eastern Magi; and the whole
train of previous manifestations, tended to prepare her for the new
distresses which were destined to attend the flight into Egypt.
Herod was arranging his plans with malicious skill, and as he imagined,
with secrecy; but there was an eye that watched his movements with
unsleeping vigilance, and a wisdom invisibly operating to counteract his
purposes. The Magi were forewarned, by a heavenly vision, not to return to
this foe of the holy Jesus; and an angel appeared to Joseph, directing him
to escape with the mother and child into Egypt; and thus did Herod himself
unconsciously fulfil the ancient oracle; "Out of Egypt have I called my
Son." The cruel archer shot at the Saviour's life, but the arrow rebounded
and took his own.
Behold, then, Mary and Joseph, with their infant charge, hastening, in
obedience to the divine command, to a distance from the persecutor's fury!
See them under the covert of darkness, and amidst the silence of night,
flying to their appointed place of exile; still under the guidance of that
hand which regulated all the events of their lives, with no less wisdom
and constancy than it directed the movements and fixed the positions of
the planetary and starry orbs, which glittered upon their adventurous
path. Observe them trembling with human fears, but sustained by spiritual
consolations! Mary presses the infant fugitive to her maternal breast,
still "keeping all these things, and pondering them in her heart;"
incapable of fully penetrating the cloud that obscures their present
destiny, but looking through the tears of anguish to her divine Protector
and Guide, believing that the light of Israel cannot be extinguished. In
some respects, they "knew not whither they went;" but each was, no doubt,
inspired by the devout sentiment of the poet:
"I hold by nothing here below,
Appoint my journey and I go;
Though pierced by scorn, oppress'd by pride,
I feel thee good--feel nought beside.
No frowns of men can hurtful prove
To souls on fire with heav'nly love;
Though men and devils both condemn,
No gloomy days arise for them.
While place we seek, or place we shun,
The soul finds happiness in none;
But with a God to guide our way,
'Tis equal joy to go or stay.
Could I be cast where thou art not,
That were indeed a dreadful lot:
But regions none remote I call,
Secure of finding God in all." _Mad. Guion_.
Herod, whose cruelty and duplicity were equally conspicuous, finding that
the young child had by some means eluded his grasp, meditated the deepest
revenge, which, like a smothered flame, the longer it is confined, the
more violently at last it blazes.
For a time he concealed his feelings, with a view of the better securing
ultimate success; but, on perceiving that his secret intentions were
frustrated, he resolved on open war. Animated with a tyrant's spirit and a
demon's rage he determined on the destruction of Jesus, though the
accomplishment of his purpose should deluge Judea with blood. He issued
his murderous decree, and despatched his executioners to Bethlehem and
"all the coasts thereof," to slay "all the children from two years old and
under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the
wise men."
What language can express the barbarity of this conduct! The most savage
of mankind have spared children, even when their parents have been guilty.
The innocence and weakness of their age have preserved them from the
sword, even of a victorious and exasperated enemy; and yet these little
innocents, whose parents were not implicated in any plot to deceive the
tyrant, whose yoke was endured with extraordinary patience, were given to
the murderous sword, and Bethlehem suddenly converted into one vast
slaughter-house. "Then," remarks the evangelist, "was fulfilled that which
was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard,
lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her
children, and would not be comforted, because they are not."
"The innocents were martyrs indeed, but not in will, by reason of their
tender age. Of these, however, it pleased the Prince of martyrs to have
his train composed, when he made his entry into the world, as at this
season; a train of infants, suited to an infant Saviour; a train of
innocents, meet to follow the spotless Lamb, who came to convince the
world of sin, and to redeem it in righteousness. They were the
first-fruits offered to the Son of God after his incarnation, and their
blood the first that flowed on his account. They appeared as so many
champions in the field, clad in the King's coat of armour, to intercept
the blows directed against him.
"The Christian Poet, PRUDENTIUS, in one of his hymns, has an elegant and
beautiful address to these young sufferers for their Redeemer [10]; Hail,
ye first flowers of the evangelical spring, cut off by the sword of
persecution, ere yet you had unfolded your leaves to the morning, as the
early rose droops before the withering blast. Driven, like a flock of
lambs to the slaughter, you have the honour to compose the first sacrifice
offered at the altar of Christ; before which methinks I see your innocent
simplicity sporting with the palms and the crowns held out to you from
above." [11]
The parents of the infant Saviour remained in Egypt until the death of
Herod [12], an event which was announced to Joseph in a dream, who was
directed to return with Mary and her child into the land of Israel. When
he heard that Archelaus, a prince no less sanguinary in his disposition
than his infamous predecessor, reigned over Judah in the room of his
father, he was afraid of returning; but being again divinely admonished,
withdrew into Galilee, under the government of Herod Antipas. He took up
his residence at Nazareth, a small city where he had formerly lived; by
which the ancient oracle was fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene."
We may he allowed a momentary interruption of the narrative, by one
observation on the death of Herod. How easily God can remove out of the
way whatever opposes the designs of his wisdom! He lays his finger on the
tyrant's head, and he sinks into the dust! Thus it has been, and thus it
ever must be, with the adversaries of Christ. Every Herod must die. On the
banners of the church is inscribed, "If God be for us, who can be against
us?" Where are the Neros, and Domitians, and Caligulas, that have sought
the life of Christianity?--They are _dead_! but his cause survives. "He
must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet." The Gospel, in
pursuing its course through the world, resembles a mighty river, here and
there meeting with powerful obstructions; but not prevented by these, it
takes a circuitous course, and leaves them to be gradually overflowed or
undermined, and buried in the stream. Thus superstition, idolatry,
infidelity, Popery, Mahometanism, constitute so many obstructions to this
celestial stream; but while it makes glad the city of God, it is gradually
diffusing itself around, and sapping by degrees the foundation of these
impediments, till being broken down and forgotten, an angel shall
proclaim, "Babylon is fallen, is fallen!" Then shall "the kingdoms of this
world become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall
reign for ever and ever." Then all that "sought the young child's life,"
all that opposed the interests of Jesus, being dead and vanquished, "the
whole earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord,
as the waters cover the sea."
The law of Moses commanded all the adult males of Israel to go up to
Jerusalem three times in a year, to celebrate the feasts of the passover,
pentecost, and tabernacles. Women were under no obligation to undertake
these journeys; [13] but it was not unusual for such as were eminent for
piety, to accompany their husbands and friends upon annual occasions.
Mary, who set the highest value upon the ordinances of God, and who would
not be disparaged by a comparison with the greatest characters of Israel,
went up with Joseph year after year. In the exemption by which the law
permitted females to remain at home, the weakness of their sex was
regarded; but the strength of Mary's piety surmounted every obstacle, and,
like her illustrious ancestor, she was "glad when they said, Let us go up
to the house of the Lord." How dissimilar was her spirit to that of
multitudes, whose reluctance renders religious duties so irksome and so
formal; who call the Sabbath a weariness; and who, instead of hailing the
hour of sacred solemnities, are eager to escape from spiritual restraints
to replunge into the cares,--perhaps into the dissipations, of the world!
The original constitution of the woman was that of a help meet for man;
and it should be her pleasure to prompt to holy duties, and to associate
with her beloved partner and children in them. Never does she appear so
lovely, as when occupied in this pious service, avoiding all those
needless cares which might preclude her own attendance upon
appointed means.
The passover was intended as a commemoration of the deliverance wrought
for the people of Israel when they were brought out of Egyptian slavery,
and the destroying angel, who inflicted death upon the first born of their
oppressors, passed over untouched the blood-besprinkled doors of the
people of God: but, under the Christian dispensation, we are invited with
our households to celebrate a more glorious release from a more tremendous
bondage. The sacramental festival of the church of Christ records our
emancipation from sin, both from its consequences and its dominion,
through the atoning blood of the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the
world," sprinkled upon the consciences of all believers. Mary, while
keeping the typical feast, embraced the real Lamb, and devoutly enjoyed
the festival of faith. So let us hasten to this institution, and
participate this divine joy.
It is probable that the parents of Jesus were in the habit of taking their
son with them every year to Jerusalem, that they might, as it became
religious characters, "train him up in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord;" we are at least certain that he accompanied them at the age of
twelve, when a memorable and instructive incident occurred.
At the expiration of the seven days of unleavened bread, they began their
return homeward; but the child Jesus staid behind in Jerusalem, to make
inquiries, and to listen to the instructions of those who publicly
explained the sense of Scripture, and the traditions of the elders. His
mother and Joseph were ignorant of this delay, till the end of the first
day's journey; for as it was customary on these occasions to travel in
very large companies, and these perhaps often separated into groups at
considerable intervals, they took it for granted that he was with some of
his friends or kindred, who were no doubt often charmed with his lovely
company, and expected him to rejoin them in the evening. The day closed,
the different parties assembled--but, to the inexpressible concern of Mary
and Joseph, Jesus was not to be found! They searched and searched again,
but in vain! The anxious father, but the still more anxious mother, flew
to every friend, to every fellow traveller--no tidings were to be heard!
Ah, Simeon, thy sword is beginning to pierce this maternal breast! What a
night of sleepless anxiety passed, and with what haste did they retrace
their steps to Jerusalem! What could they imagine, but that some evil
beast had taken their Joseph! The weeping mother chides her negligence,
stops every passing stranger, fancies perhaps that some emissary of
persecution had seized him, and that Archelaus had accomplished what Herod
had begun, searches every house where they had visited or lodged--O what
must the mother feel--such a mother--and of such a child!
But--he is found! On the third day, he was seen in one of the courts of
the temple appropriated to the Jewish doctors, where they were accustomed
to lecture to their disciples. It might be, perhaps, in the room of the
great sanhedrim, where they assembled in a semi-circular form. In front of
them were three rows of the scholars, containing each three-and-twenty. It
is probable, that Christ sat in one of these rows; and, perhaps, the
questions he put, and the answers he gave, excited so much notice amongst
the doctors, that they called him into the midst of them, which was
occasionally done. Thus the Jews state, that "if one of the disciples or
scholars say, I have something to say in favour of him (one that is put on
his trial) they bring him up and _cause him to sit in the midst of them_;
and he does not go down from thence the whole day." [14]
At the moment when his parents discovered the holy child Jesus, he was
hearing and asking questions of the doctors, in which he displayed so much
understanding, that they and their disciples were astonished. This is a
lesson to youth, who should, gladly and submissively receive instruction,
and may with respectful eagerness question their superiors. Let them avoid
all offensive forwardness and conceit of their knowledge and attainments;
remembering that he who could have taught the wisest of the Jewish
doctors, sat at their feet _listening_ and _asking them questions_!
Feeling as a mother, but ignorant of the cause of this singular
proceeding, Mary ventured, as soon as opportunity permitted, to
remonstrate in these words, "Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us?
Behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing!" We are to consider
this language as rather expressive of anxiety, that of anger; yet,
perhaps, it may be admitted to contain a mixture of both. His mysterious
and unauthorized disappearance might seem to her contrary to the obedience
he owed, and was so uniformly accustomed to manifest to his parents. Why
did he tarry? Why did he not, at least, _inform them_ of his wishes to
remain, and thus spare them the wretchedness which they had suffered
during the past three days? Did he not know the tender love of his
maternal parent? Did he not know the bitter tears she would shed, and the
agonies she would suffer? Did he not feel the claim which she had upon his
early years, and the reverence due to her character and piety?
Yes: these were considerations which he never overlooked; but he was
absorbed in sublimer thoughts. Jesus was an extraordinary being, and the
whole of this transaction ought to be viewed in connexion with the
subsequent development of his designs, and the glory of his future
actions. In it we have a glimpse of his superiority as the Son of God, and
it was, doubtless, intended to attract the attention of his thoughtful
mother, and to renew those meditations in which she had formerly exercised
her mind, during the miracles of his nativity. His reply, "How is it that
ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business," or,
at my Father's? [15] would upon any other supposition, seem strange and
unintelligible; and, accordingly, his parents did not comprehend him,
being at present imperfectly versed in the mysteries of his kingdom. It
was, however, perfectly in point, and full of meaning. Mary complained of
having been so troubled to find him, and at the same time called Joseph
his father. To which he replies, that she might surely have recollected
that the temple was the most proper place to inquire for him, who, she
knew, though a child, was already consecrated to so divine a work; that he
was, in fact, where he ought to be, and about the proper business to which
his life was to be devoted; and that, although Joseph were his reputed
father, he possessed a higher relationship, and a nobler character than
could distinguish mere mortals. God was his father--this was his
house--and nothing must impede his purposes. Still, however, he instantly
complied with the wishes of his parents, went with them to Nazareth, and
during many succeeding years veiled the splendours of his character in the
obedience and concealment of his childhood. Mary, in the mean time, "kept
all these sayings in her heart."
In detailing the life of Christ, the inspired evangelists do not often
introduce his mother; and whenever she is mentioned, it is rather to
illustrate _his_ character than _hers_; but we feel pleasure in collecting
even the smallest fragments of this divine record, that nothing may be
lost; and while searching for MARY, let us rejoice that we are, at the
same time, conducted to JESUS.
The next circumstance that demands our notice, is the history of the
wedding-feast at Cana in Galilee. Here the Saviour and his mother appear
as the most conspicuous characters. These, with the disciples of Christ,
at present few in number, were expressly invited; whence it has, with
sufficient probability, been thought that it was the marriage of one of
his own relations.
It seems highly becoming the dignity of the Saviour to sanction, by his
holy presence, the institution of marriage in general, and to sanctify its
observance on the present occasion in particular. Its utility, in
reference to individual comfort and to the interests of society at large,
renders "marriage honourable in all;" and while it would be ungrateful to
Providence, not to accept with suitable emotions of cheerfulness the
blessing which has been so long and so eagerly sought, it must always be
injurious to character to indulge in extravagant merriment or indecorous
festivity. Let persons forming such a connection aim to chastise their
mirth with a solid piety, recollecting that while they are allowed to be
cheerful, they must not be intemperate.
At the feast of Cana, the wine failed. The poverty of the family might not
admit of a very liberal supply, or a larger number of visiters might come
than had been expected. Mary immediately informed her Son. She saw that
this circumstance occasioned confusion, she knew the power of Jesus, and
she wished to spare the feelings of the new-married pair, who might have
been exposed to censure for the scantiness of the supply. If these were
her real sentiments, they were worthy of her character and sex. Let this
example of amiable concern for the reputation of another, and the general
comfort of the guests at this nuptial feast, stimulate us to an imitation
of her kindness. How common is it for persons to depreciate and ridicule
each other, availing themselves of trifling mistakes or unimportant
oversights, to awaken prejudices and to exasperate dislikes! Envy is so
prevalent in the world, so natural to the human heart, and so
inconceivably diversified in its methods of operation, that we cannot be
too much warned against it, especially as its venom lies concealed, hut
often works effectually.
The female sex, of which we have before us so fine a specimen, are
naturally attentive and kind, skilful to discern, quick to feel, and
prompt to relieve the wants of others. They seem endowed with a
generosity, in which it is their honour to excel, while it is their duty
to cultivate and indulge it. Are comforts needed? Their ready hands will
supply them. Is pain suffered? Their tender hearts will sympathize and aim
to alleviate it. They are officious to replenish the cup of joy, and no
less prompt to sweeten and mitigate the bitter draughts of sorrow. To them
we look to increase our pleasures in the days of prosperity--for them we
do not ask in vain to sustain our aching head, and to smooth the pillow of
sickness and of death!
But if the views we have imputed to Mary really dictated the intimation
which she gave to Jesus, respecting the deficiency of wine, it may be
asked, how came she to meet with so austere a reply, as "Woman, what have
I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come." This requires some
attention.
In the first place, notwithstanding the feeling of kindness which dictated
this interference, Christ might have thought it necessary to assert his
divine prerogative. It is evident, from her immediately directing the
servants to do whatever he commanded them, she expected some miracle; for
she was, no doubt, fully persuaded by this time of his being the Messiah.
But, though endowed with maternal authority, it was not her province to
point out the course of his proceeding as Lord of all. He was willing,
however, to grant her wishes; but, by this language, imposed secrecy. He
would choose the moment and the proper manner of imparting the necessary
supply. One would almost infer from the injunction of Mary to the
servants, that he had informed her of his intentions; and that while he
felt no displeasure at her request, it was necessary to wait his
divine will.
In the next place, the words were, probably, not so disrespectful as they
at first appear. Some have thought the original phrase might be rendered,
"What is that to thee and me?" meaning, "What concern have we in this want
of wine? it is the duty of others to provide, and not ours." It must be
admitted, however, that this interpretation is not so honourable to the
benevolent character of Christ, nor so natural, under all the
circumstances, since Mary was evidently and properly concerning herself,
as a relative in this affair, and the use of similar expressions in other
parts of Scripture imply some degree of reproof. [16] Considering the
divine character of our Lord, this phraseology was not improper, because
in what concerned his office she had no authority over him; and Mary,
impressed with a sense of his extraordinary character, which was every day
increasingly developing himself, withdrew in reverential silence to enjoin
the necessary obedience upon the servants. She felt, and let us never
forget, that the endearments of friendship and the tender ties of
consanguinity must not interfere with the superior claims of religion and
of Christ.
The greatest objection seems to attach to the use of the abrupt and
disrespectful term "woman;" but the usages of antiquity prove that this
mode of address was quite different in meaning from what it appears in
English. The politest writers, and most accomplished princes, adopted it
in addressing ladies of quality; and even servants sometimes spoke to
their mistresses in this manner. [17] In the last and tender scene of the
cross, it is not to be imagined that the dying Son should intentionally,
or even inadvertently, wound the feelings of a weeping mother, and at the
very moment too when affectionately commending her to the care of his
surviving friend and disciple; and yet his address is precisely similar:
"_woman_, behold thy Son!"
Jesus soon issued his orders to the servants to fill six water-pots of
stone, which were at hand, and were commonly used for washing cups and
other vessels, and the hands and feet of the guests, according to the
Jewish custom of purifying. [18] The water, to the astonishment of all
present, be turned into wine of so excellent a flavour as to excite
particular notice. This was the beginning of his public miracles, a
wonderful display of his glory, and a means of confirming the minds of his
disciples.
"There is a marriage whereto we are invited; yea, wherein we are already
interested; not as the guests only, but as the bride; in which there shall
be no want of the wine of gladness. It is marvel if in these earthly
banquets there be not some lack. 'In thy presence, O Saviour, there is
fulness of joy, and at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore.'
Blessed are they that are called to the marriage-supper of the Lamb." [19]
As the extraordinary character of Christ became from this moment
increasingly apparent, it is easy to believe that the strong feelings of
maternal tenderness in the bosom of Mary blended themselves more and more
with a spiritual affection. She was indeed, in one sense, the mother of
our Lord, but she was also his disciple--she had been guide of his
childhood, but she sat at the feet of his maturity. As he ascended to an
immeasurable elevation above every other being of the human race, she must
feel that the authority of the earthly parent, although it were never
disregarded or disavowed, but, on the contrary, must have impressed a
peculiarity both upon his affection and hers, was, however, absorbed in
the superiority of his heavenly commission. He obeyed her as a child, but
she submitted to him as the Lord.
Does the observant eye of a mother watch with unutterable solicitude the
progress of her beloved offspring, tracing the improvement of his mind,
the development of his faculties, the career of his life, sympathizing
with his sorrows and participating with his joys, taking a fond share in
all that concerns him--his prospects, his pursuits, his whole
character;--does the maternal heart, even in ordinary cases, feel so much
and so long, cherishing such undiminished interest in every vicissitude
that affects the son of her love? With what lively sensibility must Mary
have contemplated the rising glory of the inimitable Jesus! What a track
of majesty must have marked his footsteps! What a winning singularity must
have distinguished his actions! What purity must have adorned his conduct!
What "grace was poured into his lips!" Who can express the deep interest
that his thoughtful mother must have felt in the discourses she heard, the
wisdom with which he silenced gainsayers, penetrated human hearts, exposed
secret motives and purposes, confounded the most wise and artful, and
communicated the sublimest truths in the most commanding and lucid manner!
How must she have felt to have been the witness of his astonishing
miracles, to have seen the flashes of unearthly dignity breaking through
the concealment of a human exterior, and to have traced the accomplishment
of all that prophets had foretold and angels announced! O, what an honour
to have been the _mother_, but still more so to be the _disciple_ of him
who was predicted by prophets, prefigured by types, attended by
ministering angels, celebrated by the most eminent of the Jewish church,
obeyed by all the elements of nature, the principalities of darkness, and
the powers of heaven;--who, "being in the form of God, thought it not
robbery to be equal with God; but made himself of no reputation, and took
upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men!"
The sacred history, which is chiefly occupied in the life of Christ
himself, and the detail of his actions, does not explain how often his
mother accompanied him. The incidental mention of her and his brethren
upon one occasion shows, however, what we cannot but infer, that she was
one of his frequent attendants. He was talking "to the people" in a
private house, with the instructive familiarity for which he was so
remarkable, when "his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to
speak with him." They had something of importance to communicate,
otherwise it cannot be supposed they would have interrupted his
conversation; but, being unable to reach him on account of the multitude,
their wishes were conveyed from one to another, till the person who stood
by him intimated that his mother and brethren were waiting to speak with
him. Availing himself of the circumstance to impress his admonition upon
the assembled crowd, he said to the person who informed, "Who is my
mother? and who are my brethren?" Then addressing the people as he pointed
to the disciples, he exclaimed, "Behold my mother, and my brethren! For
whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is
my brother and sister and mother."
Did he then intend to pour contempt upon these near relatives? Did he
disclaim the ties of kindred? Did he exclude Mary, James, and Joses,
Simeon and Judas, from the honour and the happiness of participating those
spiritual blessings which he so liberally dispensed to others?--Surely
not. Applying to this the same principle of interpretation which was
adopted in explaining his words at the feast of Cana, we infer that he
meant to intimate that they who called him brother according to the flesh,
and even she who bore him, need not be envied by those whom he admitted to
the intimacy and happiness of a spiritual relationship; and that whatever
of love and kindness could be supposed to arise from the natural
connexion, was enjoyed in a nobler sense by virtue of a spiritual union.
Every thing that can consummate the happiness of man, every thing that can
secure the most glorious and permanent distinction, arises from being the
disciple of the blessed Jesus, and "doing the will of his Father." Let
such an one envy no more the possessions of time, for he is heir to the
inheritance of heaven; let him not value at too high a price any human
honour, title, or relationship, for he is a member of the "household
of God."
We now hasten to a scene calculated at once to excite our liveliest
sensibilities and our warmest gratitude--a scene upon which the eyes of
the remotest ages were fixed with holy anticipation, and which all future
generations will contemplate with retrospective joy--a scene distinguished
by the most affecting incidents--in one of which, not the least
remarkable, the mother of our Lord appears conspicuous.
It is observable, that whenever he alluded to the circumstances of his own
death, Christ adopted a mode of speaking which is expressive of the most
dignified composure of mind, united with an irresistible firmness of
purpose. He advanced to the cross of martyrdom like one who, "for the joy
that was set before him, despised the shame." His love to man annihilated
the terror of death, and rendered him solicitous to shed his blood. "I
have a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be
accomplished." In the hour of previous conflict he intimated that this was
the tragical but necessary design of his coming into the world. From his
radiant throne in glory, he saw, in awful perspective, the afflictions
which were destined for his incarnate state; and, instead of a train of
angels, he prepared to be attended by a retinue of sorrows, during his
abode in the world. Above all, he beheld the CROSS, surrounded with awful
clouds, raised amidst the scorn of human and the triumph of infernal
enemies. He saw the full tide of misery set in against him; but, with
unabating love to man, and perfect obedience of spirit to the
Father--melting with pity and glowing with zeal--he prepared to encounter
the billows and the storms of death. He was not overtaken by a calamity
which he neither foresaw nor could prevent, for ten thousand angels at his
word would have hastened to pluck him from the waves; but in fulfilment of
the everlasting covenant, to glorify the Father and to redeem a perishing
world, he was "led to the slaughter."
At this period all Judea was present to celebrate the paschal festival;
the great council of the nation was convened; Herod, the governor of
Judea, and Pilate, the tetrarch of Galilee, with their attending armies,
displayed the grandeur of the empire; and on the mount of crucifixion a
vast concourse of people assembled to witness this tragical scene. What
must have been their sensations when nature became convulsed--when
darkness veiled the sun--and the inhabitants of the invisible world burst
through the trembling earth, and reappeared to many in Jerusalem! Never
did an hour revolve since the beginning of time that laboured with such
great events. The fate of the moral creation was now weighing in the
scales--the happiness of millions was at stake--the interests of eternity
were deciding--and the victory over sin, death, and hell, was proclaimed
by the expiring Redeemer, when he said, "IT IS FINISHED."
Amidst this scene of wonders, behold a group of females, no less similar
in character than in name; Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the wife
Cleopas, and Mary Magdalene. Many women are honourably conspicuous in the
records of the New Testament, but never did they appear with greater
advantage than at this moment. All the disciples were fled, with the
single exception of John, who had overcome his temporary apprehensions,
and was returned to the field of danger. These pious heroines, although
incapable of affording the glorious Sufferer any assistance, and although
surrounded by an infuriated enemy, rose superior to the fears of their
sex, and pierced through the crowd, to testify their sympathy, to listen
to his dying words, and to watch the expiring flame of life to the moment
of its extinction.
What a scene was this for his MOTHER! How could she sustain the horrible
spectacle? How could she survive this fiery trial? What inconceivable
anguish must it have occasioned to witness the death of her _Son_! Say, ye
mothers who have watched the infant days and progressive maturity of a
firstborn, what distress ye have felt at his early loss! The flower
perhaps had just expanded to the day, when the pestilential wind blew from
the desert of death and withered its beauties! It is gone--but has left
behind a sense of unspeakable desolation. How were your most delightful
hopes annihilated in a moment, and ye were ready to adopt the language of
David in his agony, "O my son Absalom! my son, my son Absalom! would God I
had died for thee, O Absalom! my son, my son!"
But this was a death of the most ignominious and painful description. Mary
beheld her Son suffering the shame of a _public execution_ and the torment
of _a cross_. She saw him suspended between heaven and earth, as if
unworthy of either, crucified between two malefactors, and insulted by an
outrageous mob. She heard the revengeful speeches of that infatuated
multitude, and the mutual congratulations of those by whom they were
instigated, and who ridiculously imagined they had obtained a decisive
victory! The terror of this hour and power of darkness pervaded her own
spirit, and she lived to feel a greater horror than it is in the power
even of the king of terrors himself to inflict.
This was the crucifixion of an _innocent Son_! He had experienced indeed
the mockery of a judicial proceeding, but had been sacrificed to the
ravings of a despicable and infatuated mob, the asseverations of perjured
witnesses, the timidity of Pilate, and the hatred of every class of Jews.
No guile was found in his mouth, no recrimination in his language, no
impatience in his conduct. Conscious of perfect innocency, he yet
submitted to condemnation and death as a notorious offender; and, with all
things under his control, he did not lift a finger to stop the career of
injustice, or arrest the course of infernal rage. If the mothers of his
two associates in suffering were present on this occasion, whatever
bitterness of anguish they had felt to see the mournful end of their own
offspring, they could not but admit that public crime demanded public
punishment, and sentiments of commiseration must have blended themselves
with those of censure when they viewed their fate. But the mother of Jesus
saw her beloved Son condemned without reason, and suffering in defiance of
justice. In proportion as she knew his innocency she must have felt
his loss.
But his character was more than innocent; this, as the astonished
centurion exclaimed, "Truly, this man was the _Son of God_!" Well might
she wonder that no angel appeared to rescue the expiring Redeemer, and
that he who had saved others did not save himself! Well might she have
been confounded at the mysterious circumstance, that he whom winds and
waves obeyed, and whose presence on earth was felt by universal nature,
should die in apparent disgrace, exposed to the raillery of his
inveterate enemies!
This afflicted mother was also a _widow_! Long since the evangelical
narrative has dropped the name of her husband, doubtless because Joseph
was no more; but Jesus survived to console her amidst domestic
misfortunes, to cheer her declining days, to prop her falling house, to
pour the wine of consolation into her cup of sorrow, and the light of
celestial truth into her mind. He was all goodness, all perfection, who
could never forget a mother--a _widowed_ mother, wherever "he went about
doing good"--was to this awful hour her staff and comfort. How keen was
the edge of that piercing sword of which Simeon spake, and what
unparralleled grief was hers when she saw the cross, and the tortures, and
the blood of her Son!
Notwithstanding all, Mary is not seen wringing her hands and tearing her
hair in distraction; nor is she heard to utter intemperate language
against his persecutors, or to manifest resentment at the dispensations of
Heaven: she neither curses man, nor blasphemes God; nor do we observe her
fainting beneath the pressure of accumulated woes; but she stands near the
cross, in solemn silence, pondering, in an attitude of profound
meditation, and submitting to the purposes of Providence.
Let us admire the power of that "grace" which is promised to Christians,
"to help them in time of need," and of the efficacy of which the present
scene furnishes so substantial an evidence. Is it possible that after such
a record as this we should ever doubt or forget the divine assurances--"My
grace is sufficient for thee"--"When thou passest through the waters I
will be with thee, and through the rivers they shall not overflow thee;
when thou walkest through the fire thou shall not be burnt, neither shall
the flame kindle upon thee?" Should thy desponding heart be ready to
distrust the wisdom or deny the goodness of thy "Father who is in heaven,"
when sorrows, diversified and oppressive, burden thy spirit, think of the
mother of Jesus at the cross of her Son!
If the sublime sympathy of Mary prevented the recollection of her personal
condition, Jesus was not so overwhelmed with affliction as to be unmindful
of the future lot of his poor, pennyless, helpless, widowed, and weeping
mother; but committed her to the care of his disciple JOHN, directing him
to regard her henceforward as a mother, and her to consider him as a son.
_Woman, behold thy son_--"My beloved disciple will fulfil every office of
filial tenderness, and at my request he will receive and provide for my
destitute parent." _Behold_, said he, addressing John, _behold thy
mother_; "take her to thy house, allow her to share thy means, respect and
supply her as the most endeared relative of thy dying Lord. I have no
property to leave, no silver or gold to distribute: this is my fond and my
only bequest. I have confidence in thy attachment, and when thou dost
minister to _her_ thou wilt remember _me_."
From this exquisitely touching and instructive scene we must take a lesson
of _dependence on the providence of God_. If he inflict unexpected trials,
he affords unexpected supplies. His resources are numberless; and he who
raised up John to supply the place of an endeared Son to Mary, can never
be at loss for expedients when his people are in distress. One prop is
removed, another is substituted. "O fear the Lord, all ye his saints, for
there is no want to them that fear him." Earthly cisterns may indeed be
broken, and temporal streams of enjoyment may cease, but "the fountain of
living waters" is inexhaustible.
Take a lesson _of filial piety_. Children are under an indispensable
obligation to succour their aged parents. If amidst the agonies of
crucifixion, Jesus so carefully provided for the future comfort of his
maternal parent, be assured "he has set an _example_ wherein we should
follow his steps;" and disrespect to such claims is a dereliction of our
character, and a forfeiture of our profession as the disciples of Christ.
Learn to _be prompt in your obedience to every requisition of your Lord_.
It is an honour to be employed by him in any service, whatever it may cost
us. John did not hesitate, or indulge in surmisings; he did not think of
the trouble, the expense, or the possible danger of harbouring the mother
of one who was executed as an enemy to Cesar; but "from that hour that
disciple took her unto his own home." If the sacred history had followed
him to his lowly habitation, where our imaginations are ready to accompany
John and his venerable charge, it would doubtless have exhibited a
specimen of tender friendship and unwearied assiduity. What could John
deny to the mother of his Lord? How eagerly would he promote her comfort!
What "sweet converse" would they "hold together" upon the life, the
miracles, the doctrines, the precepts, the death of Jesus! What a gleam of
light and joy would the remembrance of one so dear throw upon the darkest
scene of their lives, and how would the glory of his subsequent
ascension, and dignity in the invisible world, occupy their daily
intercourse and their most devotional moments! "The sweet hour of prime,"
and the serenity of "evening mild," and "twilight gray," would still find
them amidst the wonders of the cross or the triumphs of the resurrection.
Nothing more is said of Mary till we come to the Acts of the Apostles,
where a brief but honourable notice closes her history. In an upper room
at Jerusalem "abode Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and
Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon
Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. These all continued with one
accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and _Mary, the mother
of Jesus_, and with his brethren."
It is supposed that John took her with him to Ephesus, where she died in
an extreme old age. There is a letter of the oecumenical council of
Ephesus, importing, that in the fifth century it was believed she was
buried there; but some authors think she was buried at Jerusalem.
Section IV.
Brief Account of the extravagant Regard which has been paid to the
Virgin Mary at different Periods--the Names by which she has been
addressed, and the Festivals instituted to honour her Memory--general
Remarks on the Nature and Character of Superstition, particularly that
of the Catholics.
After reviewing, as we have done in the preceding pages, the _facts_
which are stated by the evangelists respecting the life of the mother of
Jesus, the reader perhaps will not be displeased if he be presented with
some of the _fictions_ with which the fancy and the folly of the human
race have combined to embellish her history. That she has a claim upon the
respect of every age and nation, will not be disputed: but we must condemn
as well as compassionate that weakness which has exalted her into an
object of worship, and filled the temples, which ought to have been
devoted to the service of God, with unauthorized addresses, unscriptural
rites, and idolatrous disfigurements.
The first notice we have in history of undue honour being rendered to the
Virgin Mary is about the close of the fourth century, when the
_Collyridians_ adored her as a goddess; and by various libations and
sacrifices sought her protection, and hoped to avert her displeasure.
Soon after this period corruptions multiplied in the church to an
extravagant degree, and mankind departed more and more from the simplicity
of religion. A disposition to pomp and parade usually marks a decline in
piety; for wherever "the beauty of holiness" is preserved, gaudy
decorations and splendid formalities will be deemed unnecessary. Surely
God is not honoured by a service which he has never instituted, and which
is only calculated to divert the mind from the proper business of devotion
and the supreme object of religious homage! In the fifth century,
therefore, as piety languished, magnificence, with all her costly train,
obtruded into notice. The riches of the church increased to an amazing
extent; the altars, and chests for the preservation of relics, were made
of silver; images adorned, or rather defiled, every niche; and the Virgin
Mary, holding the child Jesus in her arms, every where occupied a
conspicuous place. She had, besides, universally acquired the title of
[Greek: Theotouos], or _mother of God_, which occasioned the Nestorian
controversy.
The idolatrous service of Mary assumed, in the tenth century, new forms of
extravagance and absurdity. Among the Latin churches, masses were
celebrated every sabbath; and afterward, what is termed the _lesser
office_ was performed in honour of St. Mary. There are also indications of
the institution of the _Rosary_ and _Crown_, by which her worshippers were
to calculate the number of prayers offered: the former consisted of
fifteen repetitions of the Lord's prayer, and a hundred and fifty
salutations of the Virgin: the latter, of six or seven repetitions of the
Lord's prayer, and six or seven times ten salutations, or Ave Marias.
About the year 1138 a solemn festival was instituted to celebrate the
immaculate conception of the Virgin, of whom it was pretended, that her
own birth partook of a similar purity to that which attached to her divine
offspring. This doctrine was opposed by St. Bernard; but the French
churches adopted it, and the superstition of the people contributed to its
establishment. The subject was again debated with extreme virulence in the
seventeenth century, between the Franciscans and Dominicans, in which the
pope interposed a mediatorial power. The opinion of the former, who
maintained the doctrine, was declared to have a high degree of probability
in its favour, and the latter were required not to oppose it publicly;
while the Franciscans were prohibited from treating the Dominican doctrine
as erroneous. [20]
It is lamentable to see the profusion of eloquence and ingenuity which
some of the most penetrating minds have expended on this subject. In all
the Catholic writings we meet with impassioned addresses to the Virgin,
appeals on her behalf to the feelings of piety, and a frequent celebration
of her matchless perfections. The theological oracle of the French church
distinctly states that "as the innocence of Jesus Christ is the life and
salvation of sinners, so, through the innocence of the holy Virgin, he
obtains pardon for the guilty," exhorting his hearers to "cleanse away
their sins in the glorious splendour of her incorruptible purity," and
adding, that "to undertake to describe the perfections of Mary, would be
to fathom a bottomless abyss."
After representing the Saviour as making particular choice of Mary for
himself, Bossuet bestows upon her the epithets of _beloved creature,
extraordinary creature, unique and privileged creature_; and continues
thus: "The Saviour imparted to his apostles and ministers whatever was
most adapted to promote the salvation of mankind; but he communicated to
his holy mother whatever was most pleasing, most glorious, and most
delightful to himself; consequently, I doubt not that he made Mary
innocent. She is his unique, and he is hers. _Dilectus meus mihi et ego
illi_ ('my beloved is mine and I am his.') I have only him, and he has
only me." I know well that innocence ought not to be easily lavished on
our corrupt nature, but it is no profuse expenditure to bestow it upon his
mother only: while to refuse to her would surely be too great a reserve.
"No, my brethren, this is not my Saviour's conduct: on Mary, from the
moment of her birth, I behold the innocence of Jesus Christ shining and
adorning her head. O honour this new ray of light which her divine Son
already sheds upon her! 'The night is far spent, the day is at hand;'
Jesus will quickly bring this day by his own blessed presence. O happy
day! O day without cloud! O day, which the innocence of the divine Jesus
will render so serene and pure, when wilt thou come to illuminate the
world?--Christians, it approaches; let us rejoice in already discovering
its dawn in the birth of the holy Virgin--_Nata Virgine surrexit aurora_,
says the pious father Damien. Can you be astonished after this, if I
assert that Mary was without spot from the first moment of her appearance
in the world? As the great day of Christ was to be so clear and splendid,
was it not proper that even its commencement should be beautiful, and that
the serenity of the morning should indicate that of the day? 'It is on
this account,' as father Damien observes, 'that Mary, who introduced this
illustrious day diffused a brightness over the morning by her
nativity--_Maria, veri proevia luminis, nativitate sua mane clarissimum
serenavit_.' Hasten then, brethren, hasten with joy to behold the
beginnings of this new day: we shall see it shine in the attractive light
of an untarnished purity!"......_Bossuet's Sermon_.
Bossuet had sufficient ingenuity to construct a plausible defence of a
sentiment which, however adapted to supply a theme for eloquent
declamation, is not to be found in Scripture. "It must be admitted," says
he, "that Mary would have been involved in the general ruin of mankind,
had not the merciful Physician who heals our diseases determined to imbue
her beforehand with his preventing grace. Sin, which like a torrent
overflowed the world, would have polluted this holy Virgin with its
poisonous waves; but Omnipotence can stop, whenever he pleases, the most
impetuous force. Observe with what ardour the sun pursues the vast circuit
which Providence has assigned him; and yet you cannot be ignorant that God
once caused him to stand still in the midst of heaven at the voice of a
man. Those who inhabit the vicinity of Jordan, the celebrated river of
Palestine, know with what rapidity it discharges itself into the Dead Sea,
if I am correct as to the place; nevertheless, the whole Israelitish army
saw it roll back to its source to form a passage for the ark, where their
omnipotent Sovereign resided. Is any thing more natural than the consuming
effect of heat in fire issuing out of a furnace? And yet was not the
impious Nebuchadnezzar surprised with the sight of three happy individuals
rejoicing in the midst of the flames which his merciless minions had
kindled--but kindled in vain? But notwithstanding all these examples, may
we not truly say, that there is no fire which does not burn, that the sun
performs his course with unceasing progress, and that no river flows back
to its source? We are accustomed to a similar mode of speaking every day,
without being checked by these extraordinary occurrences, of which no one
is ignorant. Whence does this arise, Christians? Doubtless from the habit
of conversing according to the ordinary course of things; though God
chooses sometimes to act conformably to the dictates of his own
omnipotence, independently of human notions.
"I am not astonished, therefore, that the apostle Paul has expressed
himself in such general terms respecting the sin of our first parents'
having occasioned the death of all their posterity. According the natural
course of things, which the apostle is stating in that place, to be born
of the race of Adam necessarily includes, in the ordinary sense of the
word, being born in sin. It is not more natural for fire to burn, than for
this accursed depravity to infect every one it touches with corruption and
death. No poison is more active, no plague more powerful and penetrating.
But I maintain, that this curse, however universal, that all these
propositions, however general they may be, do not preclude the exceptions
which may be made by the Supreme Disposer, or particular interpositions of
his authority. And on what occasion, great God, could thine unlimited
power, which itself is law, be more properly employed than in conferring
peculiar favour upon Mary?" [21]
In the Litanies the Virgin is denominated "the Mother of God, the Queen of
Angels, the Refuge of Sinners, the Mother of Mercy, the Gate of Heaven,
the Mystic Rose, the Virgin of Virgins," &c. [22]
Father Barry, in his "Paradise opened to Philagia by a hundred Devotions
to the Mother of God, of easy performance," says, "It is open to such as
confine themselves to their chambers, or carry about them an image of the
Virgin, and look steadfastly upon it--who, night and morning, beg her
benediction, standing near some of the churches dedicated to her, or
contribute to the relief of the poor for her sake--who, out of a pious
regard for her, avoid pronouncing the name of Mary when they read, but
make use of some other instead of it--who beg of the angels to salute the
mother of God in their name, who give honourable appellations to her
images, and cast amorous glances at them," &c.
In this work it is expressly stated, that "as many separate devotions to
the mother of God as you find in this book, are so many keys of heaven,
which will open all paradise to you, provided you only practise them;" and
afterward it is added, that "any _one_ of them is sufficient." Take the
following specimen: "Salute the holy Virgin wherever you meet her image;
repeat the little chaplet of the ten pleasures of the Virgin; often
pronounce the name of _Mary_; commission the angels to give your duty to
her; cherish a desire to build more churches to her than all the kings of
the world put together; wish her a good day every morning, and a good
night every evening; say the _Ave Maria_ every day, in honour of the heart
of Mary." [23]
In the earliest ages she was called Queen of angels and Mother of God;
afterward, the spirit of controversy induced her advocates to adopt every
possible device to make her considerable among heretics, and to accustom
her devotees to extravagant expressions. She has been represented as the
_disposer and depository of God's favours, the treasurer and queen of
heaven, the spring and fountain of salvation and life, the mother of
light, the intercessor between God and man, the hope of mankind, the ocean
of the Deity_! Almost an absolute and sovereign power over her Son our
Saviour has been ascribed to her. The psalter, nay the whole Bible, has
been applied to her, and proofs by miracles and apparitions furnished,
that the virgin appeases the wrath of Christ against sinners, and
possesses the power of absolving, binding, and loosening. Temples and
altars have been erected, and invocations addressed to her.
The Jesuit, who published the Psalter of our Lady, in French, exhorts the
devout Christian who pronounces these words in the introduction, _Holy
Lady, open thou my lips_, &c. "to make two signs of the cross when he
repeats them, one upon his lips with his thumb, and the other upon himself
with his hand, as the priests do when they begin their canonical hours."
This method, he assures us, will procure the devotee the honour and
happiness of being canon or canoness of heaven; and our lady, to reward so
conspicuous and instructive an act of devotion, will admit him into
paradise. He gives a pattern of the vows which the devotee is to make "for
Jesus and Mary's sake, and for all the lovers of them both, whether male
or female." He describes the alliance to be made by him with the _most
amiable and honourable mother of all mothers_, the act of repentance and
contrition for the reconciliation of himself with her, and all the
ceremonies, great and small, by which he may devote himself to the
blessed Virgin.
Whoever hopes to obtain the benedictions of the Virgin, must salute her
every day, both at his going out and coming in. The legends have
transmitted several remarkable instances of the advantages arising from
the repetition of the _Ave Maria_--not to mention a thousand day's
indulgence granted by some of the popes (Leo X. and Paul V.) to those who
shall repeat it at the hour of the _Angelus_.
St. Margarite, of Hungary, said an Ave kneeling before every image of the
Virgin she met in her way--St. Catharine, of Sienna, repeated as many Aves
as she went up steps to her house.
Fasting on _Saturday_, in honour of the Virgin, is looked upon as a
treasure of indulgences and delights, and as an excellent preservative
against eternal damnation.
Various festivals are instituted to commemorate her, such as the
Purification, the Annunciation, the Visitation, and others.
The fifth of August is the festival of _our Lady of the Snow_. We are
informed that the solemnization of it was owing to a miracle. When
Liberius was pontiff, a patrician, or Roman nobleman, finding himself old
and childless, resolved, with his wife's approbation, to make the blessed
Virgin his sole heiress. The vow being made with great devotion, their
principal concern, in the next place, was to employ their inheritance
conformably to our Lady's will: and accordingly they applied themselves to
fasting, praying, giving alms to the poor, and visiting the sick, to know
her pleasure.
The Virgin at length appeared to each of them in a dream, and told them
"it was her and her Son's will, that they should employ their effects in
erecting a church for her on a particular part of the _Mons Esquilinus_,
which they should find covered with snow." The pious husband first
communicated the revelation to his wife, who told him, with great
surprise, that she had had the same revelation that very night. But,
supposing the two dreams had not proved alike, an excess of zeal would
have been sufficient to have given them all the _conformity_ that was
requisite; These two devotees went immediately and declared their dreams
to the pope, who perceived that he was a third man in the revelation; for
his holiness had been favoured with the same vision. It was no longer
questioned, but that heaven was engaged in this affair. The pontiff
assembled the clergy together, and there was a solemn procession to Mount
Esquiline, on purpose to find out whether the miracle were real or not;
when the place specified in the dream was found covered with snow. The
ground was exactly of a suitable extent to erect a church upon, which was
afterward called _Liberius's Basilica_, and _St. Mary ad praecepe_,
(because the manger, which was used as a cradle for our Lady, was brought
thither from Bethlehem,) and is now called _St. Mary Major_. Every
festival day, the commemoration of this miracle is revived, by letting
fall white jessamine leaves, after so artificial a manner, as to imitate
the falling of snow upon the ground. [24]
It has even been asserted, that the apostle Peter consecrated a chapel to
the Virgin, a story which accords perfectly well with other absurdities.
The Spaniards attribute a similar act of devotion to James at _Saragossa_;
and some add, that the angels were the architects of the chapel. It is
decorated in the most costly manner with silver angels, lamps, and other
furniture, with the Virgin magnificently dressed on a marble pillar. The
walls are hung with feet, arms, hands, and other parts of the human body,
as grateful oblations to the Virgin, for the miraculous cures she is
supposed to have performed upon these members.
At _Madrid_, our lady of Atocha resides in a chapel which blazes with a
hundred lamps made of gold and silver, and is celebrated for as many
miracles as at Loretto and other places. The history of her first
settlement at _Liesse_, in Picardy, is thus related. During the crusades,
an Egyptian princess resolving to have an image of the Virgin, addressed
herself to three gentlemen of Picardy, who were prisoners at Cairo, one of
whom made an attempt to paint her, though ignorant of the art. Having
failed, he and his companions presented earnest supplications to the
Virgin, after which they fell asleep. As soon as they awoke, they found
an image of our Lady, accurately performed, which they transmitted to the
princess; who, in return, set them at liberty. She was, of course,
converted to the Christian faith by this image; and the three gentlemen
miraculously escaped out of Egypt, and on a sudden found themselves, by a
continuation of the miracle, in Picardy, on the very spot where the church
of _our Lady of Liesse_ is now erected.
Her devotees carry representations of the Virgin about them, deck her
images with flowers, dress them in silks or other costly ornaments, burn
tapers before them, kiss and look upon them with a languishing eye, touch
them with their chaplets, rub their handkerchiefs upon them, and salute
them with the profoundest veneration.
Her relics are innumerable--such as her wedding ring, handkerchiefs,
combs, slippers and goods of every description, as kitchen furniture,
toilette, earthenware, lamps; and even, as it is pretended, her gloves,
bed, chair, head-clothes, with other rarities.
"Surely," says archbishop Tillotson, "if this _blessed among women, the
mother of our Lord_, (for I keep to the titles which the Scripture gives
her,) have any sense of what we do here below, she cannot but look down
with the greatest disdain upon that sacrilegious and idolatrous worship
which is paid to her, to the high dishonour of the great God and our
Saviour, and the infinite scandal of his religion. How can she, without
indignation, behold how they play the fool in the church of Rome about
her; what an idol they make of her image, and with what sottishness they
give divine honour to it; how they place her in their idolatrous pictures
in equal rank with the blessed Trinity, and turn the salutation of the
angel, _Ave Maria, hail Mary, full of grace_, into a kind of prayer; and,
in their bead-roll of devotion, repeat it ten times, for once that they
say the Lord's prayer, as of greater virtue and efficacy? And, indeed,
they almost justle out the devotion due to Almighty God and our blessed
Saviour, by their endless idolatry to her.
"So that the greater part of their religion, both public and private, is
made up of that which was no part at all of the religion of the apostles
and primitive Christians; nay, which plainly contradicts it: for that
expressly teacheth us, that there is but one object of our prayers, and
one Mediator by whom we are to make our addresses to God. 'There is one
God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus,' says St.
Paul, when he gives a standing rule concerning prayer in the Christian
church. And yet, notwithstanding all the care that our blessed Saviour and
his apostles could take to prevent gross idolatry of the blessed mother of
our Lord, how blindly and wilfully have the church of Rome run into it!
and, in despite of the clearest evidence and conviction, do obstinately
and impudently persist in it, and justify themselves in so abominable a
practice."
In the homage rendered to the Virgin Mary by the Catholics, the servility
of superstition appears blended with the zeal of enthusiasm. Having
departed from Scripture, that only light which shines upon the path of
obedience, and conducts to God, they naturally lose themselves amidst the
perplexities of error and the mazes of falsehood: it need not, therefore,
occasion surprise though their course should be eccentric, or their
conduct preposterous. The passions being chiefly engaged in this service,
and kept in exercise by fear or fondness, reason retires; and imagination,
supported by these auxiliaries, sways the sceptre. The absurdities,
however, to which under such circumstances the human mind becomes
addicted, would seem utterly unaccountable, were it not for the gradual
manner of their influence. The victory over judgment and common sense is
not secured at a blow, but by perpetual insinuation. The hopes or fears of
mankind are wrought upon _individually_ from the period of infancy, long
previous to the age when reason attains its vigour and maturity,--and
_nationally_ by a slow and almost insensible accumulation of frivolous or
ridiculous observances from century to century. A natural consciousness of
weakness renders man the dupe of deception, and an equal sense of guilt
makes him the slave of terror. Hence he readily avails himself of every
means which he fancies capable of alleviating his anxieties, and in his
eagerness to escape the wretchedness of apprehension or the suffering of
evil, flies to unscriptural resources.
The pre-eminence of man over the brute creation arises chiefly from his
capacity of knowing God and serving him in the appointed exercises of
religion; and yet the perversion of this capacity, by the invention of
superstitious ceremonies, has rendered him utterly contemptible. In the
services of real piety, he appears elevated to the summit of creation, his
nature seems ennobled, and his character encircled with glory; but, in the
practices of superstition, he is degraded to the lowest depth of meanness
of which an intellectual and immortal being is capable. By the former he
soars to "glory, honour, and immortality;" by the latter he sinks to
wretchedness and ruin. In the one case he is useful and happy; in the
other, inactive, isolated, and full of disquietude; and thus either rises
into grandeur or falls into littleness,--is an angel or a brute!
Whoever reviews the several religious errors of the Pagan, Jewish, and
Christian communities, will admit, that the history of superstition
constitutes one of the most offensive pages in the annals of mankind; he
will see the object of worship misrepresented, the universe partitioned
into petty sovereignties, and Deity divided, contracted, and localized;
religion turned into mockery, and mockery into religion.
It is somewhat difficult to trace the operations and to ascertain the true
character of superstition, although it has prevailed so extensively in the
world, and produced such extraordinary effects. Amongst other anomalies,
this is observable, that it not only has led captive weak and ignorant
minds, which being unable to detect a specious sophism, or to depart from
a general practice, may easily be supposed incapable of resisting its
fascination; but it has been known to seduce and enchain some of the
noblest orders of intellect, and the most cultivated of human
understandings. Whole nations and successive generations have been
subjected to its influence, furnishing ample evidence of that statement,
which, if it be not repeated in every page of Scripture, lies at the
foundation of all its truths; and into which many of the peculiarities of
this principle may be resolved: "The world by wisdom knew not God."
Superstition is unquestionably founded in mean and absurd ideas of the
moral attributes of the Deity, which produce corresponding actions, and in
assigning to him an arbitrary character, deriving pleasure from what has
no connexion with the happiness of the worshipper. A consistent and
dignified conduct can only result from a just estimate of the divine
perfections, and a correct view of moral obligation. The worship we render
to a superior being, must necessarily be shaped and regulated by our
conceptions of the nature of God; consequently, mankind will degenerate
into error and folly, proportionate to their departure from the
representations of Scripture respecting the spirituality of his essence.
To this source may be traced especially the principles and practices of
the Romish church, in which reason is outraged, religion caricatured, and
God dishonoured. Transubstantiation is a doctrine manifestly absurd and
impious; and the practice of presenting those supplications to dead
saints, which the Supreme Being alone can hear and answer, is no less
ridiculous, as well as subversive of true piety. Perhaps, however, no
deviation from common sense is more remarkable than those extravagancies
of the Catholics which respect the Virgin Mary; and yet these have not
only been practised by the multitude, but defended by men of learning with
the utmost subtlety and the warmest zeal. In fact, she has been praised by
every Catholic pen for ages; and every term that language could supply has
been put in requisition to extol her merits.
Let the view we have given of these misstatements excite us to
self-examination, in order that we may discover any incorrectness or
deficiency in our own apprehensions of religion, and become vigilant over
those errors into which we may be apt to deviate. It will be studying man
to some purpose, if the better we are acquainted with the history of the
human mind, the greater the circumspection we exercise over ourselves. We
shall then be less imposed upon by the speciousness of falsehood, and less
betrayed by the weakness of our passions; we shall be led to "present our
bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God," and feel that it is
our "_reasonable service_."
Elizabeth.
Chapter II.
The angelic Appearance to Zacharias--Birth of John--Characters of
Elizabeth and Zacharias--Importance of domestic Union being founded on
Religion, shown in them--their venerable Age--the characteristic
Features of their Piety--the Happiness of a Life like theirs--the Effect
it is calculated to produce on others--the Perpetuation of holy
friendship through immortal Ages--the miserable Condition of the
irreligious.
Obscure as were the circumstances in which Christ appeared, Infinite
Wisdom saw fit to furnish miraculous attestations to his character and
mission. This evidence attended him during the whole of his career,
investing him with a heavenly glory, and rendering his pre-eminence
distinctly visible to the eye of faith, notwithstanding his assumed
inferiority.
It was in unison with this scheme of Providence to send the most exalted
of angelic beings to announce the birth of Messiah, and to prepare the
minds of Mary his mother, of the shepherds who were to circulate the
intelligence, and of others more nearly or more remotely interested in the
event, by celestial visitations. For similar reasons it comported with the
nature of this wonderful event, to attach something peculiar and even
miraculous to the birth of his precursor, whose destined office it should
be to "prepare the way of the Lord," by uttering his "voice in the
wilderness," and intimating to mankind the mighty transformations about to
be effected in the moral state of the world. Six months, therefore,
previously to the annunciation to Mary, the angel Gabriel descended to
proclaim "glad tidings" to Zacharias. In the performance of his customary
service as a priest, he had gone into the temple to burn incense, while
the people were praying without the holy place. On a sudden, he perceived
an angel standing on the right side of the altar, and became exceedingly
agitated, till the benevolent spirit addressed him in affectionate and
congratulatory terms. Ah! _they_ have no reason to dread a message from
the world of spirits, or to be filled with apprehensions at the sight of
other orders of beings than those with which they are conversant, who are
engaged in the discharge of their duties, and live under the influence of
religion! However new or extraordinary such revelations, they never could
have been real causes of alarm to the servants of God; and were they not
at present suspended, in consequence of the completion of the intended
communications of truth to mankind, piety ought rather to welcome than to
dread them.
Zacharias was assured that his prayer was heard, and that his wife
Elizabeth should have a son to be named John. As a sign of the
accomplishment of this prediction, and as a chastisement of the doubt with
which the message was at first received, he was struck with dumbness,
which continued only till the birth of his child.
The interview between Elizabeth and Mary, the mother of our Lord, has been
already adverted to in the preceding narrative, where the salutations of
these favoured relatives were recited. At the expiration of the appointed
time, Elizabeth bare a son whom they would have called after the name of
Zacharias, but his mother interposed; and the affair being finally
referred to his father, he wrote, to the general astonishment of their
neighbours and relatives, who had remonstrated in vain, "His name is
John." Immediately his speech was restored, and he broke out in
impassioned strains of praise: "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he
hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up an horn of
salvation for us in the house of his servant David; as he spake by the
mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: that we
should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;
to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy
covenant; the oath which he sware to our father Abraham, that he would
grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies
might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him,
all the days of our life. And thou, child, shall be called the prophet of
the Highest: for thou shall go before the face of the Lord to prepare his
ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of
their sins, through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the day-spring
from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness
and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace."
Reverting to the commencement of this history by the evangelist Luke, we
shall be led to notice the domestic characters of Zacharias and Elizabeth,
particularly as they illustrate the excellence of a life of piety. While
religion adorns every station, it teaches us to fulfil every relative
duty; and acting under its influence, a person becomes a light in the
world, diffusing through the family, the social circle, and the more
extended sphere of busy life, a mild and beneficent radiance.
Our attention is first directed to the office of Zacharias, and the
descent of his wife. He was a _priest_, and she "of the daughters of
Aaron." The world affords too many evidences, that piety is neither
created by station, nor hereditary in its transmission. As Zacharias was a
minister of the sanctuary, it was both to be _desired_ and _expected_ that
he should not approach the altar with a hardened and unsanctified heart.
"Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? and who shall stand in his
holy place? He that hath clean hands and a pure heart; who hath not lift
up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive the
blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation."
Yet, alas! it is not always to be presumed that real religion accompanies
either the brightest profession or the most dignified office! Korah,
Dathan, and Abiram, offered "strange fire," Judas betrayed the Son of God,
and Paul expresses an apprehension "lest, having preached to others," he
should himself "be a castaway." The admonition, therefore, of God by
Isaiah is appropriate and striking: "Be ye clean that bear the vessels of
the Lord." It is possible to be a preacher of righteousness, and yet a
child of Satan--a priest, and yet a demon--a worker of miracles, and yet a
"worker of iniquity:" but a pleasing exception to this remark occurs in
the history of Zacharias, who was "a _priest_, and _righteous_ before
God." His _office_ and his _character_ accorded, and the light of his
example shone with unclouded brightness and attractive glory.
It is observable, that Elizabeth, the wife of this holy priest, was
equally distinguished with himself for a sincere and active piety. "They
were BOTH righteous before God;" and it was their privilege to live at
that eventful moment when the clouds that obscured the past dispensations
of Providence were tinged with the rising glory of the day which was just
breaking upon the nations of the earth, and which lighted these pilgrims
home to their eternal rest. They were some of the last of the Jewish and
the first of the Christian economy, and their life seemed to form the
bright line which bordered the typical ages and those of unshadowed truth
and Christian revelation.
Zacharias and Elizabeth exhibit an attractive picture of union both
natural and religious; the hymenial tie was intertwined with celestial
roses, which diffused a fragrance over domestic life; their love to each
other was strengthened and sanctified by their love to God.
The perfection of conjugal felicity with every good man depends upon the
existence of similar religious principles and feelings with those which
influence himself in the partner of his life; consequently, it will ever
be his concern "to marry in the Lord." No language can express the
bitterness of that pang which rends his heart when a dissimilarity of
taste prevails in so important an affair. It is a worm for ever gnawing
the root of his peace, and will prevent its growth even under the
brightest sun of worldly prosperity. Let those especially who are forming
connections in life, and who "love Christ in sincerity," reflect on the
fatal consequences of devoting their affections to such as can never
accompany them to the house of God but with reluctance, or to the throne
of grace but with weariness and aversion. If the object of your fondest
regard be an unbeliever, what a cloud will darken your serenest days, what
unutterable grief disturb your otherwise peaceful sabbaths! Your pleasures
and your pains of a religious kind, which are the most intense, will be
equally unparticipated. You must walk alone in those ways of pleasantness
which would be still more endeared by such sweet society; and you must
suffer the keenest sorrows of the heart--_perhaps_ without daring to name
them, and _certainly_ without one tear, one word, one look of soothing
sympathy. How could you endure it that the very wife of your bosom should
manifest the temper of those assassins that murdered your Lord, while in
the exercise of a lively faith you hailed him as "the chief among ten
thousand, and altogether lovely?" Would it not agonize your heart that she
should be _indifferent_ only, not to say inimical, towards him in whom you
daily "rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory?"
In proportion to the wretchedness of such circumstances must be the
felicity of the reverse, of which this narrative furnishes a pleasing
exemplification. Zacharias and Elizabeth were _both_ righteous, and this
union of spirit diffused a holy and gladdening radiance over all the
scenes of life. In the family, in the social circle, in the house of God,
they were ONE. Together they could bow the knee at the throne of grace,
together go up to the temple! The grief or the joy of one was the grief or
the joy of both; they could sing the same song, unite in the same prayer,
feast on the same spiritual food! This was the perfection of love--this
was the triumph of friendship! No contrary current of feeling on either
side ruffled the pure stream of domestic and religious pleasure, but it
flowed along in a clear, noiseless, and perpetual course. In this case the
language of David might be applied with emphatic propriety: "Behold, how
good and pleasant a thing it is to dwell together in unity."
Elizabeth and her partner were "both well stricken in years." There is
something venerable in hoary age, especially when adorned with the graces
of the Spirit. The mind reposes with peculiar complacency on those who,
having long "adorned the doctrines of God their Saviour in all things,"
are waiting quietly and confidently for their admission to heaven. They
can see the shadows of the evening deepen upon them without a sigh; and
while death is unlocking the doors of their appointed house, can sing,
"Thanks be to God, that giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus
Christ." While the mind of a wicked man, in the near prospect of
dissolution, is filled with distraction, and "a fearful looking for of
judgment--while his
"------frantic soul
Raves round the walls of her clay tenement,
Flies to each avenue, and cries for help--
But cries in vain;------"
conscious that he is the enemy of God, the abhorrence of saints; the
confederate, and will soon become the companion, of evil spirits; the
dying Christian looks beyond the confines of mortality into the eternal
world, without one sensation but that "of a desire to depart and to be
with Christ." In quitting the present world, he expects a transition from
sorrow to joy--from the region of shadows to that of realities--from the
habitations of sin to the abodes of purity. Embracing Jesus by faith, he
exclaims with Simeon, "Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for
mine eyes have seen thy salvation;" or with Paul, "I have fought a good
fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth is
laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous
Judge, shall give me in that day."
It is pleasing to see the youthful mind impressed with the concerns of
religion, devoting its powers to the Saviour, and despising the
solicitations of sinful pleasure; but ah! how many cloudless mornings are
succeeded by gloomy days--how many false and fruitless blossoms adorn the
smiling spring--how many seeds spring up, but perish because they have "no
depth of earth!" Early piety, therefore, however gratifying, cannot be
contemplated without anxiety, if not suspicion; the force of temptation
has not yet been endured--the world has not half exhausted its quiver of
poisoned arrows--Satan has not yet tried all his arts and
machinations--the race is not yet run!--but in those who, like Zacharias
and Elizabeth, are "well striken in years," we witness the stability of
principle, the triumph of perseverance, and the reign of grace. Dear and
venerable companions in the ways of God, ye have borne the burden and heat
of the day! Like a shock of corn, ye shall soon be "gathered in your
season;" ye shall soon drop the infirmities of humanity, and be clothed in
the robes of light! "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they
may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates
into the city."
The brief, but comprehensive notice of these venerable saints, in the
commencement of the Gospel according to Luke, exhibits at once the
characteristic features of their piety.
1. It was of a quality approved by God himself: for they are represented
as "righteous _before God_," that is, in the divine estimation. It is
this only which can determine our genuine character; for, however
"outwardly virtuous _before men_," the internal spirit and character may
be marked by moral deformities which the eye of Omniscience cannot but
view with detestation. The most eminent Christians, indeed, are aware that
perfection in righteousness is not attainable in the present state, and
that when "weighed in the balances," they are in many respects "found
wanting:" but while they look for acceptance through the righteousness of
Christ, instead of "going about to establish their own," they possess a
rectitude of _principle_, though the _degree_ of holiness be imperfect.
They are sincere, habitual in their aim to please God, cherishing a
supreme attachment to his name and character, and determined in their
resistance of every influence that would seduce them from his service or
impel them to commit sin.
2. Elizabeth and her venerable partner regulated their conduct by divine
authority, irrespective of the opinions of men. They are said to "have
walked in the _commandments and ordinances of the Lord_." The Jews were
accustomed to blend the traditions of the elders with their religious
services; but these believers consulted and obeyed the oracles of Heaven.
They repaired at once to the spring-head of wisdom, deriving their faith
and obtaining direction with regard to their practice from Him who alone
possesses the authority of a master.
This was a very decisive evidence of their religion, and is a test which
is capable of being applied to every case and to every sphere of life. If
the only certain evidence of true piety consisted in becoming martyrs, few
could have an opportunity of evincing it, through not being called to this
high and holy service; or, if the test were the distribution of ample
charities, or self-devotement to the labour of the Christian ministry, the
poor, and the ungifted, and ineloquent, would be excluded from the
prescribed means of testifying their love to God: but obedience to his
commands may be practised in the humblest circumstances, in the lowliest
station, and by the most obscure individual. Any where and every where it
is possible "to take up our cross," to "deny ourselves," to "mortify the
flesh," to "walk in the Spirit."
3. The obedience of Elizabeth and Zacharias was universal--not partial or
restricted; for they "walked in _all_ the commandments and ordinances of
the Lord."
An insincere profession will be distinguished by partiality in its
observances. It will practise some duties and reject others, believe some
doctrines and hesitate to admit others. Influenced by many subordinate
considerations, it will select those requirements which are most easily
performed, most calculated to attract public attention, or most
conformable to natural prepossessions. It will dispense with some things
as difficult, and with others as unnecessary or unimportant. "Then,"
exclaimed the Psalmist, "shall I not be ashamed when I have respect unto
_all_ thy commandments."
4. Elizabeth and her aged companion were distinguished also for a piety
which was _blameless_. It is possible to merit blame even in our very acts
of religious obedience. How seldom do we attain that purity of _motive_,
that unostentatious simplicity of _manner_, that _uniformity_ of conduct,
which constitute a _blameless_ piety! In this respect we have daily
reason, at the footstool of mercy, to deplore our deficiency, our lanquor,
our lukewarmness of spirit, our unprofitableness and vileness. "If thou,
Lord, wert strict to mark iniquity, O Lord, who could stand?" There is not
a prayer we utter but would be rejected, were it not for the prevalence
of the Redeemer's intercession, nor a service we perform, but is so
defiled with guilt that it would be an abominable offering, but for the
efficacy of that blood which "cleanseth us from all sin." Nor, indeed, was
the piety of Zacharias and Elizabeth in itself "_blameless_," irrespective
of this atonement; nor were they "_righteous_," but as accepted and
justified "through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." To a lively
faith they, however, united a holy conversation, and an habitual
obedience: their life was a perpetual sacrifice to God, and diffused
around a sweet savour of piety.
Let us contemplate the _happiness of such a life_. It is common to
represent religion as incompatible with true enjoyment, and to describe
those who are under its influence as gloomy fanatics, dragging out a
miserable existence--the dupes of prejudice and the slaves of melancholy.
If a perpetual sense of the divine presence, a well-founded confidence of
pardoned sin, free access to the throne of mercy, abundant communications
of spiritual good and lively anticipations of a felicity beyond the grave,
commensurate with the capacities of an immortal spirit, and with the
everlasting ages of eternity; if these produce wretchedness, then, and in
no other case, is religion a source of misery. Be not deceived; such
allegations result from ignorance and depravity. Zacharias and Elizabeth,
joined together by the dear bonds of mutual affection, and the still
dearer ties of grace, present a picture of happiness unrivalled in the gay
and thoughtless world. We appeal to them, and to those who resemble them,
as "epistles" of God, that teach the efficacy of genuine religion. Read
them, ye profane, and blush for your impieties! Read them, ye sons and
daughters of strife, and banish discord from your houses! Read them, ye
fearful, hesitating, lukewarm professors, and learn to walk in "_all_ the
commandments and ordinances of the Lord!" Read them, ye worldly wise, ye
ambitious, ye "lovers of pleasure," and confess ye have mistaken the true
means to happiness, and have "forsaken your own mercies!"
It is a supereminent excellence of the religion of Jesus, that "the peace
and joy in believing" which it inspires do not depend on external
circumstances. As no worldly condition can _create_, so neither can it
_destroy_ the Christian's felicity; it is firm and immoveable amidst the
changes and revolutions of human affairs--in the bright or cloudy day.
Like the mariner's compass, which continually points in the same direction
amidst changing seasons and varying climes, the most extraordinary
vicissitudes of the "present evil world," cannot "move" the mind of a
believer from the "hope of the Gospel."
Reflect further, on the _effect which such a life is calculated to produce
on others_.
A holy life is a powerful argument for the "truth as it is in Jesus;" and
that suspicious eagerness with which the wicked watch the conduct of
professors, that patient malignity with which they wait for their halting,
and that Satanic joy with which they exult over their misconduct, prove
their own convictions of the strength of such an argument. Let us then be
concerned to falsify their predictions and disappoint their enmity by
"walking in _all_ the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."
Consider the impressive appeal of the apostle: "Only let your conversation
be as becometh the gospel of Christ." Shine, ye professing Christians, for
"ye are the lights of the world"--shine with a holy and steady radiance in
the church of God, and pray for daily supplies of the oil of grace, that
your light may not degenerate into a feeble glimmering or totally expire;
otherwise you may become accessary to the fall and ruin of others, and
"their blood may be upon _you!_" Such a pious union, such holy friendship
as that of Elizabeth and Zacharias, will be _perpetuated through infinite
ages_. It is not a transient but an everlasting union; it shall survive
the grave and defy the stroke of mortality. They who "sleep in Jesus" will
God bring with him. The sepulchre, to such as die in the faith of Christ
and in a state of holy friendship with each other, only resembles a vast
prison, in which dearest friends are separated only for a time in
different cells, and from which they shall be released when the gloomy
keeper resigns his keys, when "death is swallowed up in victory." Those
humble and affectionate disciples who have "walked together in all the
commandments and ordinances of the Lord, here, shall take sweet counsel
above, and walk together in the fields of immortality." In a nobler sense
than the original application of the words, it may be said of all
Christian friends, "they were lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in
their deaths they were not divided."
This perpetuation of Christian society and love, is intimated in the most
striking manner by our Redeemer when on the point of departure from his
disciples, whom he called his "_friends_." "I will not henceforth drink of
this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my
Father's kingdom." Who can describe the joys of that "marriage-feast," the
felicities of that endeared spiritual and eternal intercourse, that union
of hearts, that concourse of affections, that flow and mingling of souls!
These are some of "the mysteries of godliness"--this is what "eye hath not
seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man to
conceive."
Let these glorious expectations revive our failing courage amidst the
conflicts of life. Let us not despair, though we may weep over the
companions of our pilgrimage, slain at our side by the irresistible stroke
of death. The separation is transitory--the reunion will be eternal. "But
I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are
asleep, that ye sorrow not even as others which have no hope. For if we
believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in
Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the
Lord, that we which are alive, and remain unto the coming of the Lord,
shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall
descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and
with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we
which are alive and remain, shall be caught up together with them in the
clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the
Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words."
Such as are opposite in character to Zacharias and Elizabeth, and who are
"walking in _none_ of the commandments and ordinances of the Lord," should
reflect on the misery of their condition, as utterly destitute of all
those hopes and privileges which have been described. Who instituted these
ordinances?--who gave these commandments?--whose authority is it you dare
despise?--or who has released you from your obligations to this
authority?--what madness induces you to fly in the face of God--to measure
your power against the sword of Omnipotence? O, remember--"the wages of
sin is death!"
Anna.
Chapter III.
Introduction of Anna into the sacred Story--inspired Description of
her--the aged apt to be unduly attached to Life--Anna probably Religious
at an early Period--Religion the most substantial Support amidst the
Infirmities of Age--the most effectual Guard against its Vices--and the
best Preparation for its End.
Two illustrious women have already been presented to the reader as
adorning the era of our Saviour's incarnation; the one, the mother of his
humanity, the witness of his miracles, and the weeping attendant upon his
crucifixion; the other, her venerable relative, the wife of Zacharias, and
the parent of John, who was the destined precursor of the "Desire of all
nations." We are now to contemplate another female, whose age superadds a
charm to her excellences, and whose privilege also it was to witness the
commencing brightness of the evangelical day. Like Elizabeth, her
"memorial" is short, but it does not "perish with her." She has a place in
the chronicles of the redeemed, a name before which that of heroes and
heroines fades away, and which it requires no "storied urn nor animated
burst" to perpetuate.
Anna is introduced to our notice on the memorable occasion which has been
already mentioned, when the parents of Jesus took him after his
circumcision to Jerusalem, to "present him to the Lord." Then it was that
Simeon broke forth in eloquent and prophetic congratulations, expressive
at once of his own triumph over death, in consequence of having witnessed
the accomplishment of those prophecies which had so long and so often
filled him with delightful anticipations, and of the "glory" which he
foresaw would irradiate Israel and enlighten the Gentiles. Scarcely had he
finished his address, when Anna, a prophetess, remarkable for her extreme
age and exemplary piety, entered the temple, and not only united with
Simeon and the rest of the interesting group in "giving thanks unto the
Lord," but "spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in
Jerusalem."
It was benefiting the majesty of the event which had occurred, that the
spirit of prophecy should revive after being dormant for about four
hundred years. Since the days of Malachi no such inspiration had been
afforded; but the new and glorious period commencing with the incarnation
was marked by this as well as other signs and wonders. When Simeon held
the infant Saviour in his arms, the Spirit of God touched his tongue with
a live coal from the altar; and when the aged "daughter of Phanuel"
approached, she caught the glow of kindling rapture, and blended with his
her praises and predictions. This eminent woman is represented as "of a
great age," as having "lived with a husband seven years from her
virginity," and as being "a widow of about four-score and four years,
which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and
prayers night and day." This form of expression does not seem to furnish
decisive evidence whether her entire age was eighty-four, or whether she
was a widow during that period; if the latter, the seven years in which
she had lived with a husband, together with the probable number which
constituted her age at the time of her marriage, must be added to the
calculation, which would produce considerably more than a hundred years;
in either case she must be allowed to occupy a conspicuous place in the
records of longevity.
It has been observed of the aged, that although existence, when extended
beyond the usual period of "threescore years and ten," is nothing "but
labour and sorrow," they still adhere to life with the utmost tenacity,
and are even less disposed to relinquish it than those whose more vigorous
powers and undecayed youth capacitate them for its enjoyment. But however
surprised we may be to witness this anxiety to live in those who are
bending beneath the pressure of years and the load of decrepitude, and to
see that this anxiety rather increases than diminishes, there is something
in it by no means unnatural. In addition to the love of life which is
implanted in every human bosom for the wisest purposes, the aged person
cannot but feel that he is nearer than others to that hour of separation
from all the connexions and interests of time than the multitude around
him--an hour at which nature instinctively shudders, and which is always
regarded as painful, whatever may be the result. Corporeal suffering may
be considerable; and that change of being which the mortal stroke produces
has always something about it awful, mysterious, and terrific. There are
few instances in which it can be approached without some degree of dread,
some shrinking of mind, whatever be the state of detachment from the
present world, and whatever pleasing anticipations may exist with regard
to another: as the patient, however assured of the necessity of the
measure and the importance of the result, trembles while preparations are
making to amputate his disordered limb. It may be observed also of the
young, that while they compassionate their aged friends as the prey of a
thousand imbecilities both of body and mind, and lament over a state in
which man is reduced to a second childhood, there is scarcely an
individual who does not harbour in secret the wish to attain an age equal
at least, if not superior, to any of his cotemporaries. The reason is
similar to that which influences persons at an advanced period of life;
the thought of death, with all its concomitant evils, is unwelcome at any
time, and consequently it is grateful to the mind to place it at the
greatest conceivable distance; so that, were it now within the
appointments of Providence or the bounds of probability, little doubt can
be entertained that the great proportion of mankind would readily accept
as a blessing a patriarchal or antediluvian age.
Anna is particularly noticed as the daughter of Phanuel, of whom we have
no other information; and as belonging to the tribe of Asher, which was
situated in Galilee. This, whether recorded for that purpose or not, might
serve to refute the charge, that "out of Galilee ariseth no prophet,"
since from that quarter proceeded the very first inspirations upon the
revival of the prophetic spirit. Asher was a very inferior tribe, and one
of the ten carried captive by the Assyrians, having departed from the
worship of the true God, and from the house of David, under Jeroboam. But
notwithstanding this general defection, there were individuals who
returned and reunited themselves with Judah, that they might enjoy the
ancient privileges of the people of God. Thus even in the worst of times,
and amidst the least favourable circumstances, some portion of true
religion has always been preserved in the earth. Though the watchful eye
of Providence has occasionally suffered the flame of devotion to languish
and almost expire, yet its total extinction has been prevented, and
unexpected coincidences have frequently excited it into new and more
vigorous action.
We have in the history before us a specimen of a pious old age, remarkable
in itself, and calculated to suggest a variety of useful considerations.
This holy woman probably lodged in the immediate vicinity, if not in some
of the outward apartments of the temple, which gave her an opportunity of
indulging in those constant devotions which accorded with her wishes and
comported with her age. On every occasion she was present at appointed
services, and so entire was her self-devotement to religion, that she was
incessantly engaged in fasting and prayers. The world had no claims upon
her, being alike unfitted for any of its avocations and indisposed to any
of its pleasures: she had bid it a final farewell, and had withdrawn
behind the scenes of this vast theatre, which are so artfully painted as
to allure and deceive the imaginations of mankind, into the secrecy of
devotion and the sanctuary of her God. Peace was the companion of her
retirement, and piety shed its serenest ray upon the evening of her mortal
existence.
It may be presumed that the religion of Anna was by no means of recent
date, but that the seeds of so rich a harvest were sown "in the fields of
youth." Whatever is great or eminent is usually the work of time. _Nature_
does not produce the oak, with its spreading branches and solid trunk, in
a day or a twelve month; and, in general, a rapid luxuriancy is connected
with corresponding weakness and quick decay. The plans of _Providence_
require the lapse of years or ages to accomplish: events of importance
seldom burst suddenly upon the world, and without a previous course of
preparatory dispensations, tending to point out the purposes of such
occurrences, and to awaken human expectations. Nor can _excellence of
character_ be formed without the use of means, opportunities of
progressive improvement, and that experience which must be slowly gained.
Far be it from us to limit the operations of divine grace: it _can_,
indeed, and in some instances _has_, produced effects of a nature to which
no general rules and principles are applicable: it has instantaneously
converted a furious persecutor into a faithful, laborious, and eminent
preacher of "the faith which once he destroyed;" it has transformed a
malefactor into a saint, and in one hour raised the criminal from the
depths of infamy and the agonies of crucifixion to the dignity of a
believer in Christ and the joys of paradise. But these surely ought not to
be regarded as the ordinary methods of its operation, but rather as
miraculous interferences. In general, religious ordinances are to be
constantly and perseveringly attended, in order to the acquisition of
eminence in religion: holy vigilance must concur with devout and fervent
prayer, day by day, to check and finally vanquish the power of depravity,
to elevate the mind above the world, and prepare the Christian for his
future bliss; as the child must commonly be "_trained up_ in the way he
should go," if we hope that "when he is old he will not depart from it."
Impressions deepen and acquire the force of principles by degrees,
knowledge is obtained by perpetual accumulation, and faith is increased by
constant exercise. It would be as vain to look for the wrinkles of age in
the face of youth, or the strength of maturity in the arm of an infant, as
to expect the experience which can only result from the witness of changes
and the operation of circumstances, with its corresponding stability of
character, in him who has but just commenced a life of piety. As "the
husbandman waiteth for the precious fruits of the earth, and hath long
patience for it until he receive the early and the latter rain," so we
must in general look for a slow and gradual formation of the character to
eminence and spiritual luxuriancy. The account given of Anna would
therefore lead us to infer that she had been many years, and in all
probability from her youth, devoted to the service of God.
She had not to regret that her best days were spent in riot and
dissipation, in opposition or indifference to religion, by which so many
debase their nature, offend their Maker, and ruin their souls: but while
she contemplated the future without alarm, and perhaps with joy, she could
review the past with satisfaction.
As memory predominates over the other faculties of the mind in declining
life, and as so much of our happiness or misery at that period must
necessarily result from its exercise, it is of the utmost importance to
lay up in store a good provision in the "sacred treasure of the past."
Nothing can be more desirable than to leave the mind filled with pleasing
recollections; and this can arise only from a life of holiness and purity.
How awful is it to think that the last hours should be disturbed by images
of crime unrepented of, the intrusion of which into the dying chamber no
force can prevent! How lamentable to see the terrors of death aggravated
by the remorse and horrors of retrospection! "Life," says a profound
writer, [25] "in which nothing has been done or suffered to distinguish
one day from another, is to him that has passed it as if it had never
been, except that he is conscious how ill he has husbanded the great
deposit of his Creator. Life, made memorable by crimes, and diversified
through its several periods by wickedness, is indeed easily reviewed, but
reviewed only with horror and remorse.
"The great consideration which ought to influence us in the use of the
present moment, is to arise from the effect which, as well or ill applied,
it must have upon the time to come; for, though its actual existence be
inconceivably short, yet its effects are unlimited, and there is not the
smallest point of time but may extend its consequences, either to our hurt
or our advantage, through all eternity, and give us reason to remember it
forever with anguish or exultation." We may take occasion from the
account of Anna to remark, that true religion is the most substantial
support amidst the INFIRMITIES of age. This is emphatically the period of
"evil days," when diseases prey upon the constitution, and the faculties
both of body and mind decay. Then "the sun and the light, the moon and the
stars are darkened;" the greatest change takes place in the outward
circumstances of gladness and prosperity, the countenance of the man is
altered, his complexion faded, and his intellectual faculties, as the
understanding and the fancy, weakened. It is at this time "the keepers of
the house tremble, and the strong men how themselves; the grinders cease,
because they are few, and those that look out of the windows are
darkened;" the strongest members of the body fail, the limbs bend beneath
the weight of decrepitude and the effects of paralytic distempers, the
teeth drop away, while the eyes grow dim and languid; "the doors are shut
in the streets when the sound of the grinding is low," the mouth becoming
sunken and closed; they "rise up at the voice of the bird," awakened from
imperfect slumber when the cock crows or the birds begin their early
songs; and "all the daughters of music," the tongue that expresses and the
ears that are charmed with it, are "brought low;" they are "afraid of that
which is high, and fears are in the way," alarmed at every step they take,
lest they should stumble at the slightest obstacle, and especially
apprehensive of the difficulties of any ascent. At that age their gray
hairs thicken like the white flowers of the "almond tree" when it
"flourishes," and even the very "grasshopper is a burden," for they cannot
bear the slightest inconvenience, not even the weight of an insect, and
"desire fails:" then is the "silver cord loosed, the golden bowl broken;
the pitcher is broken at the fountain, and the wheel is broken at the
cistern;" all the animal and vital functions at length cease, and every
essential organ of life decays; "then shall the dust return to the earth
as it was, and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it."
Reduced to the state of feebleness and incapacity, which the sacred penman
so beautifully describes, man becomes an object of compassion; and it is
affecting to see him struggling amidst the ruins of his former self. The
sight becomes increasingly painful from the consideration that this is one
day to be our own condition; that we too are destined to grow old, to quit
the busy scene and the social circle for the solitude of age, and in our
turn to be pitied--perhaps forsaken! But there is one thing capable not
only of preserving the old from contempt, but of raising them to grandeur
and diffusing lustre over their years of decrepitude. In contemplating
Anna we do not think of her infirmities when we observe her piety: the
meanness of the _woman_--tottering, crippled, dying--is lost amidst the
majesty of the _saint_, incessantly serving God in his temple, and
advancing to the grave "in a full age, like as a shock of corn cometh in
his season." The dawning of a heavenly day seems to arise upon her "hoary
head:" which, "being found in the way of righteousness," is a "crown
of glory."
Anna's history further suggests, that religion is the most effectual guard
against the VICES of advanced age. One of these is a spirit of
_querulousness_. It is the common practice of those who believe themselves
entitled to veneration on account of their years, to complain of the
arrogant disregard of their counsels, which they impute to the rising
generation. Cherishing the highest opinion of their own sentiments, to
which they attribute a kind of infallibility, as being founded upon
experience, they naturally expect implicit submission to their dictates
and an exact conformity to their views: they require not only to be heard,
but obeyed, and are impatient at the folly of those who rebel against
their wisdom. Hence originate the often repeated tales of the degeneracy
of the present times, and the growing insolence of the young. It may,
indeed, be admitted, that, other things being equal, the aged have a just
claim upon the attention of the young, whom they are sometimes qualified
to instruct; but surely they are not always entitled to the same
reverence, and age does not necessarily confer wisdom. Genuine humility,
however, tends to correct the spirit of dictation, while it combines with
an affectionate concern for the interests of those who are newly come into
life; and genuine humility is the product of religion, which supplies
motives to give advice with kindness, and to endure the rejection of it
without anger.
Another fault of age, is the indulgence _of useless regrets for the past_.
In reviewing life, it is easy to discover instances of our own incaution
or negligence, which have possibly influenced our affairs and been
connected with many subsequent disappointments. We have not availed
ourselves of fortunate conjunctures, or we have rejected profitable
offers; one scheme has failed by our precipitancy, another by our
procrastination--some persons, perhaps, have been foolishly trusted, and
others as foolishly suspected--we have occasionally listened to advice
which should not have been taken, or rejected what would have proved
advantageous; and the consequence has been some diminution of fortune,
some disappointment of our expectations, some failure in the crop of
earthly enjoyment which we had anticipated. If it were possible to recall
the years which have for ever rolled away, or if the felicity of a
rational and immortal being consisted in the possession of temporal
abundance, worldly honour, or corporeal gratification, these regrets would
have some show of propriety, and might at least secure a patient hearing;
hut it is certain, they only betray a weak or a wicked mind; it is perhaps
equally certain, they will generally continue to occupy the thoughts of
the aged. There is, in fact, but one remedy, "pure and undefiled
religion." It is this alone which can fix in the mind a full persuasion of
the _nothingness_ of terrestrial pleasures and possessions. This only can
console us after our ineffectual efforts to "gain the whole world," or
amidst the loss of riches which have "taken to themselves wings," and long
since "fled away," by the assurance, that nothing we ever possessed was
adequate to render us happy, without other and better enjoyments--that
upon a fair estimate, it is questionable whether the perplexities it
occasioned did not counterbalance the advantages it either bestowed or
promised--and that could we _now_ call our own whatever we have most
valued or desired of worldly good, it would prove incapable of making us
substantially happy. _He_ need not wish to renew life, who has the hope of
a better existence--nor regret the loss of temporal advantages, if he have
immortal good. He who "lays up for himself treasures in heaven," may defy
the storms of time, and adopt the triumphant language of the apostle,
amidst the wreck of earthly good, "having nothing, yet possessing
all things."
Similar views and principles alone can correct a third error of age,
namely, the aim to _prolong juvenility to an unnatural period_. "To secure
to the old that influence which they are willing to claim, and which might
so much contribute to the improvement of the arts of life, it is
absolutely necessary that they give themselves up to the duties of
declining years; and contentedly resign to youth its levity, its
pleasures, its frolics, and its fopperies. It is a hopeless endeavour to
unite the contrarieties of spring and winter; it is unjust to claim the
privileges of age, and retain the playthings of childhood. The young
always form magnificent ideas of the wisdom and gravity of men whom they
consider as placed at a distance from them in the ranks of existence, and
naturally look on those whom they find trifling with long beards, with
contempt and indignation, like that which women feel at the effeminacy of
men. If dotards will contend with boys in those performances in which boys
must always excel them, if they will dress crippled limbs in embroidery,
endeavour at gayety with faltering voices, and darken assemblies of
pleasure with the ghastliness of disease, they may well expect those who
find their diversions obstructed will hoot them away; and that if they
descend to competition with youth, they must bear the insolence of
successful rivals." [26]
Religion also must be regarded as the best preparation for that END of
life, with which old age is so closely connected. However proper it may be
to realize this eventful time, at every period from our earliest to our
latest day, it cannot but be regarded as more certainly and evident near
at an advanced age. Anna, after the lapse of a century, had greater
reason, surely, to apprehend her dissolution, than in the bloom of youth,
or at the commencement of her widowhood; and how appaling the prospect!
It would diminish the impression we have of the terror of death, if his
dominion were limited to a part of the world, or to any ascertainable
extent of years; but, while his authority continues unimpaired and his
stroke irresistible, the power he is permitted to exercise over humankind
is universal. In visiting the repositories of the dead, it is calculated
to awaken our liveliest sensibilities to trace the reign of the "king of
terrors" upon the sepulchral stone, or the marble monument. In characters
which time has almost erased, we read the records of the past, and by a
more than probable analogy penetrate some of the mysteries of the future.
Here and there occur the names of those who were venerable for age,
remarkable for their exploits, conspicuous by their station, rank, or
talent--GREAT by the consent of their cotemporaries--who once figured upon
a stage which is now decayed, or where illustrious in an empire which is
now passed away. Some have been smitten by death's withering hand at an
earlier, some at a later period of life. Adjoining the grave of age is the
tomb of youth. There you see the stone half buried in accumulating heaps
of earth, and the inscriptions of love and tenderness obscured by
collecting moss; while the hand that wrote them has long since become
motionless, and the heart that dictated them ceased to beat.
It is affecting to visit places of public resort, under the full influence
of the consideration, that this busy and anxious crowd will soon
disappear--their race will be run, and the immortal prize
gained--or--lost! These possessors of the soil will, in a little time, be
disinherited--these tenants of a day exchanged--the funeral pall will
cover the most ambitious and the most active of them all, and the motley
multitude be succeeded by others equally busy, equally anxious, equally
thoughtless of another state of being--and equally _mortal_!
But these sentiments, however calculated to fill irreligious persons with
dread and melancholy, can produce no despondency in those who, like Anna,
are accustomed to the truths of religion, and derive the chief pleasure
both of their youthful and decrepit age from the services of religion.
With regard to _death itself_ they are taught that his power is limited to
the body, and that it is restricted even to a short period over this
inferior part of our nature; and as to its _consequences_, they cannot
incessantly frequent the temple, and be occupied in devotion, without
learning the value, as well as the reality, of those considerations which
are drawn from eternity. They know that "this corruptible shall put on
incorruption, this mortal put on immortality," and that then "there shall
be no more death." And what do these expressions imply, but, _the entire
renovation of our nature?_--Man is mortal, because he is sinful; and,
consequently, the removal of sin will prove the extinction of death. It is
only by the introduction of moral evil that the earth has been converted
into a vast cemetery, and life become a short and rugged passage to the
sepulchre; but when it shall no longer prevail, our sanctified nature will
inherit the abodes of purity and undecaying existence. It is this
consideration which endears celestial felicity. Exemption from death
implies deliverance from sin, and the Christian wishes to possess a
character which God shall approve, and to be cleansed from those stains of
guilt which infect his present being, and render him offensive to his
Father in heaven. Were he destined always to be unholy, he would scarcely
contemplate immortality as a blessing; but because he has reason to
anticipate "a waking" from the sleep of the grave, in the divine
"likeness," he realizes a period in the bright annals of his future being,
when he shall no longer have occasion to exclaim, "O wretched man that I
am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" The pains of
_separation_, too, which afflict this mortal state, cannot exist in that
"better country." Society will unquestionably prove one considerable
source of the happiness of heaven, where immortal beings will be so
circumstanced and capacitated, as both to receive and impart enjoyment.
The very nature of man is constituted social; and though our circumstances
in this life often render temporary separations unavoidable, in a perfect
state of society they must be needless; consequently they will not be
suffered to impair the joys of paradise.
The most afflictive of all separations, is that which is occasioned by
death. In all other cases, a lingering hope may exist of a reunion at some
period however distant; at least _the possibility of_ it is cheering: but,
even if there be no reasonable expectation of this, the very consciousness
that our friend is still alive, still on earth, still capable of receiving
and performing acts of kindness, still able to communicate with us by
letter or by message, to participate our pleasures, to sympathize with our
sorrows, and to pray for our welfare, is consoling in every
vicissitude;--but when death sets his awful seal upon our companion,
relative or friend, we cherish a deeper feeling of grief, and cannot look
to any _earthly_ means of consolation--but we _can_ look to a _heavenly_
one! Whatever resource fails, the religion of the Bible supplies
inexhaustible springs of comfort. God is on high--Jesus "ever
lives"--Christians know they shall soon pass into a world where the happy
circle will never be broken, the communion of kindred spirits never cease,
the day of blessedness never decline, the sabbath of immortality never
terminate.
It is in the temple also, that those who like Anna receive just
impressions from its services, and live in a state of holy intercourse
with God, learn to appreciate the capacities of a spiritual mind for
progression in wisdom and felicity, and by consequence to cherish the
noblest anticipations of their own future possible elevation of character.
How many unfinished schemes are frustrated by death! Our plans of
futurity, our purposes of gain, or our resolves of usefulness, may be
ended in one short hour. Here the labours of the industrious, the studies
of the learned, the investigations of the philosopher, and the career of
the pious, close. The grave silences the voice of the preacher, and
paralyzes the hand of the charitable. Here the arguments of a Paul
end--here the silver tongue of an Apollos is speechless--here the hands of
a Dorcas cease to manufacture for the poor, whose unavailing tears cannot
recall departed piety.
But who will define the limits of possible attainment in knowledge and
excellence in a state of deathless existence? Society is always improving,
even in the present world, amidst all its imperfections. The researches of
past ages have transmitted a vast stock of wisdom to their successors,
both in reference to natural science and religious truth. Who can tell
what discoveries a Newton might have made, had he possessed a terrestrial
immortality? or who can conceive what heights and depths of divine
knowledge might have been disclosed, had the apostles of Christ been
permitted to live to the present period, and had it been the will of God
that they should have received a constant succession of revelations?
In both these cases, not only has death terminated this series of bright
discovery, but this earth is not the destined place, nor time the destined
period, for those manifestations of eternal wisdom, which we have reason
to believe will take place in another world. Those impediments to
knowledge, and those reasons for concealment, which at present exist, will
be removed, and truth open all her treasures to immortalized and
sanctified spirits. The consequence of the progressive disclosure of
spiritual things, of the works and ways of God, will be progressive
improvement: and, as in consequence of the clearer development of truth
in the Gospel, "he who is least in the kingdom of heaven, is greater than
John the Baptist;" so when all the shadows and clouds that bedim our
present existence shall have disappeared, and a ray of heaven pours its
glorious illumination upon the mysteries of time, the least in the
paradise of God will be greater than the most distinguished in his church
on earth. And as we never shall cease to improve in knowledge--for there
will be no termination to our spiritual researches--there will probably
arrive a period in eternity, when he who at the resurrection will be least
in the heavenly world in capacity and glory, will become greater in
consequence of ever new discoveries, than at that moment will be the
greatest of the redeemed universe. And the meanest Christian on earth may
indulge the hope that, at a future age, even he may become superior in
knowledge, in love, in capacity, and in glory, to what the brightest
seraph or the tallest archangel, is at present in the heaven of heavens;
for who can tell what God may do for beatified souls? who dare limit the
operations of his mercy, or who can imagine to what an elevation of wisdom
and felicity an emparadised believer may attain?
Progression is the law of a thinking being. And why should it not operate
upon holy intelligences in the future state, as well as in the present?
and why not when "there shall be no more death," to an incalculably
greater extent? Why should not every new idea acquired in that world
become a seed of truth in the mind, that shall spring up and bear fruit,
multiply and expand, without restriction and without end?--
There is not in religion a nobler or a more animating sentiment, than this
perpetual advancement of the soul towards perfection. Life has its
maturity and decline, nature its boundaries of beauty, human affairs their
zenith of glory; but, in "the new heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth
righteousness," every thing will be eternally upon the advance--there will
be no end to the path of knowledge--present acquisitions will be the basis
of subsequent acquirements--we shall be continually outshining ourselves,
by making nearer approaches to infinite goodness--and the whole moral
creation will be forever beautifying in the eyes of God.
The Woman of Samaria.
Chapter IV.
Account of Christ's Journey through Samaria--he arrives at Jacob's
Well--enters into conversation with a Woman of the Country--her
Misapprehensions--the Discovery of his Character to her as a
Prophet--her Convictions--her Admission of his Claim as the true
Messiah, which she reports in the City--the great and good
Effect--Reflections.
Every incident in the life of Christ is illustrative of the evangelical
testimony, "he went about doing good." His efforts were not partial, nor
confined to particular occasions; but, availing himself of all the
opportunities which occurred, either in public or in private, to promote
the welfare of mankind, time never measured out an idle hour--the sun
never sat upon a useless day!
It may be truly said, with regard to those who imbibe the spirit of their
Master, "no man liveth to himself." Nothing can be more remote from
genuine Christianity, than that selfishness which is characteristic of a
worldly disposition, and which with an uniform and undeviating assiduity,
seeks its own interests and purposes: while nothing can so fully comport
with its nature, and evince its prevalence, as that charity which is
limited only by the period of human life, the extent of means, and the
boundaries of creation.
"When the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and
baptized more disciples than John ... he left Judea and departed again
into Galilee."
The jealousy of his enemies induced them to become narrow observers of all
the proceedings of Christ; and, knowing their spirit, he removed to some
distance: not, however, through fear--nor (as some expositors have stated)
lest they should put him to death; for his hour was not yet come--and it
would have been impossible to counteract the purposes of Heaven. He could
easily have eluded their utmost vigilance and malignity, as on a certain
occasion, when "passing through the midst of them, he went his way." But
our Lord did not think proper to disclose himself at once, and in a very
public manner. It was not his intention to astonish, but gradually to
excite the attention of the Jewish nation, to furnish evidences of his
mission to humble and contrite minds, and to lay the foundation of a
future work, rather than to operate on a very extended scale himself. In
this manner was accomplished the prophecy of Isaiah, "He shall not cry,
nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed
shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall
bring forth judgment unto truth."
His route lay through Samaria; any other way to Galilee would have been
very circuitous: and this is mentioned, because of the directions to his
disciples, "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the
Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel." The hour for that enlarged operation of mercy amongst the
Gentiles, which had been so long predicted, was not yet arrived, though it
was now approaching with desirable rapidity. The dispensations of God are
inscrutable to mortals, to whom it seems profoundly mysterious, that the
purposes of love to man should first be delayed for so many ages, and then
manifested by the work of Christ to so limited an extent. Here we must
"walk by faith, not by sight;" while, upon every leaf in the great volume
of providence, it is legibly written, "My thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are
higher than the earth, so are my ways, higher than your ways, and my
thoughts than your thoughts."
It has been piously remarked, that the evangelist refers, by the
expression, "he must _needs go_ through Samaria," to our Saviour's
purposes of mercy to that vicinity; and undoubtedly it is true, that he
was powerfully impelled and irresistibly guided, wherever he went. Nothing
could obstruct his designs of mercy, or his labours of love. No force
could prevent his benevolent progress: as well might human or diabolical
agency attempt to arrest the sun in his course, or stop the march of
time.--"My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." "I _must_ work the works
of him that sent me, while it is day; the night cometh, when no man
can work."
In his journey, Jesus came to a city of Samaria called _Sychar_, which
appears to have been the same with the _Sichem_ or _Shechem_ of the Old
Testament; [27] where was a well, to which tradition had assigned the
name of Jacob, as having been originally dug by that patriarch. It was now
about the sixth hour, or noon, and the climate being exceedingly sultry,
Jesus, under the pressure of fatigue, sat down by the well.
Let us for a moment turn aside, like Moses, to "see this great sight."
Jesus "sat thus on the well," as the weary traveller seeks a renewal of
his strength by temporary repose. What majesty and mystery surround the
spot, when we recall the ancient oracles to mind, which represent him as
"the Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the
Prince of Peace;" and compare descriptions of this nature with the
evangelical record of his own words, "The foxes have holes, and the birds
of the air have nests: but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head."
What a scene for ministering spirits, who had been accustomed to behold
and adore him, but who now witnessed his abasement! What a contrast
between "the Lamb in the midst of the throne," and Jesus sitting on a
well, and afterward suspended on a cross--between the "King of glory:" and
the weary traveller--the "Lord of lords," and the "man of sorrows!"
Let us derive instruction, as well as consolation, from this scene. "We
have not a high-priest, who cannot be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities: but was in all points tempted, like as we are, yet without
sin." If the Saviour had appeared upon earth in external splendour, and in
a manner which to human apprehension would have comported better with the
majesty of his nature and the pre-eminence of his celestial glory, our
insignificance would have created a sense of unapproachable distance: we
should have been more _astonished_ than _attracted_--more _confounded_
than, _conciliated_. But he disrobed himself of ineffable brightness to
bring us nigh, and to produce a just and holy familiarity, saying to his
disciples, "I have called _you friends_."
Let us be reconciled to the infirmities, pains, and poverty we may suffer;
for it is "sufficient for the servant to be as his master." More elevated
stations in life would be attended with more danger to our spiritual
character, and expose us to more afflictions; as mountains in proportion
to their height attract clouds and tempests. The present is a state of
trial for the righteous; but however distressing or obscure our way, Jesus
has trod it before us--sanctifying the path of sorrow by his presence, and
plucking up many of its thorns. Place his example before your
eyes--observe his humble life--his assumed poverty--his unaffected
condescension! To the poor he preached--with the poor he lived--_their_
dress he wore--and their lowly sphere he chose and honoured!
How many of the most important events of our lives may be traced to
trifling circumstances! A single step may have a remote, but very obvious
connexion with the greatest results. A single turn in the journey of life
may influence the happiness, and direct the course of years! "There cometh
a woman of Samaria, to draw water." Nothing could be more apparently
incidental; and yet he who thinks rightly will perceive it to be a link in
the great chain of Providence, which was absolutely essential to the
completion of the whole. It was in the purpose of God, that many of the
Samaritans of that city should believe--that this conviction should be
wrought by that woman, who herself should be forcibly impressed by the
proofs with which she was furnished in the relation of her most private
domestic concerns. Had she come earlier or later, Jesus had not
been there!
We must trace the links of this chain further. The malignity of the
Pharisees induced Jesus to leave Judea; and both convenience, and perhaps
a moral necessity, impelled him here. His arrival at that hour--his
stay--the opportunity occasioned by the absence of his disciples--were all
appointed by superintending wisdom. Who knows what a day or an hour may
bring forth! Little did this Samaritan woman expect such a meeting, such a
traveller, or such a conversation; so wisely and so wonderfully are the
plans of Providence arranged!
How often has the promise been accomplished, "I was found of them that
sought me not!" To some unforeseen occurrence--some accidental
meeting--some trifling coincidence, Christians may often trace their first
conversion, and their best impressions. A stranger--a word, a casualty,
has proved the means of spiritual illumination; and while the recollection
of these circumstances often solace them in the vale of tears, we doubt
not but they will furnish a subject of pleasing contemplation and adorning
gratitude, when they shall have attained the perfection of their being on
the heights of immortality.
"Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink:" a very natural request from a
weary stranger, and one with which, from the common hospitality of the
times, he might expect a ready compliance. The evil effect of luxury is,
that it has multiplied our artificial necessities, and diminished our
benevolent feelings; in a simpler state of society, the wants of mankind
are fewer and more easily supplied.
The woman paused and inquired, "How is it that thou, being a Jew, asketh
drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings
with the Samaritans." Alas! where rancorous animosity exists, how
frequently the laws of hospitality, and the principles even of humanity,
are sacrificed! The Sanhedrim interdicted any friendly intercourse with
the Samaritans, and the Jews cursed them by the secret name of God; and as
this mutual animosity existed, the woman received our Saviour's request
with a reproachful sneer.
The enmity subsisting between the Jews and Samaritans was very ancient in
its origin, and exceedingly inveterate in its character. It had also been
aggravated by different incidents. When the ten tribes revolted in the
time of Jeroboam, the calves were set up in Dan and Bethel, with a view to
seduce the people from worshipping at Jerusalem, which was of course
highly offensive to Judah and Benjamin; and when Shalmaneser, the king of
Assyria, carried away the ten tribes into captivity, he colonized the
cities of Samaria with the Babylonians and others, who carried their false
religion with them; in consequence of which they became odious to the
Jews. At first, the providence of God punished these idolatrous settlers,
by permitting lions to infest the country, whose ravages induced
Shalmaneser to send one of the priests "to teach them the manner of the
God of the land;" when they _united_ the worship of the Jehovah with that
of their own idols. These people very much discouraged the Jews in the
erection of the second temple, after their return from captivity.
After this, when Alexander had conquered Syria and Palestine, Sanballat,
who governed the province of Samaria for Darius, submitted to the
conqueror; and having married his daughter to Manasseh, the brother of
Jaddua the high-priest, he obtained permission from Alexander to build a
temple on mount Gerizzim, in imitation of that which was built at
Jerusalem. [28] Manasseh was constituted the high-priest, a multitude of
Jews mixed with the Samaritans, and a distinct service, after the Jewish
mode of worship, was conducted. This occasioned great contentions, and
suspended all intercourse between the rival nations. The Samaritans are
generally said to have admitted little more of the Old Testament than the
Pentateuch; but Justin Martyr, who was a native of Sichem, affirms that
they received all the prophetic writings. [29]
Drop a pitying tear over human weakness, folly, and crime. What divisions
separate the human race, and exasperate men against each other! But of all
others, they are the most inveterate, which are produced on account of
religion. The Samaritan appoints Gerizzim as the place of worship, in
opposition to Jerusalem--the fires of persecution are instantly kindled,
and the victims of intolerance suffer martyrdom!
To the reproachful insinuation of the woman, Christ returned no answer,
for it kindled no resentment. When he was reviled, he reviled not again:
but with his characteristic condescension and eagerness to instruct the
ignorant, he said, "If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that
saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he
would have given thee living water." This language was expressive of his
readiness and ability to supply the necessities of the destitute, to
console the afflicted, and to save the lost. By the "gift of God," he
intended divine bounty in general; by "living water," the blessings of
salvation, especially the gifts and graces of "his holy Spirit." [30]
The conciliating and affectionate manner of Christ's appeal to the woman,
appears to have softened her turbulent spirit, and won her respect. She
uses an epithet of respect previously omitted, "_Sir_,"--perceiving that,
though apparently a _Jew_, he possessed none of that rancorous enmity
which characterizes others, and cherished national antipathies. "A soft
answer turneth away wrath; but grievous words stir up anger." Offences are
likely to arise in the present world; but let us rather aim to disarm
malignity by conciliation, than strengthen and envenom it by resistance.
Soft words may in time operate on hardened hearts, as water continually
dropping on the rock wears it away. Such a mode of proceeding costs us
little, but tends much to dignify and exalt us. "Who is a wise man and
endued with knowledge among you? let him show out of a good conversation
his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and
strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This
wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For
where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But
the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and
easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality,
and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of
them that make peace."
Our Saviour's discourse was further distinguished by "exceeding great and
precious promises;" and the woman seems to have partaken of similar
surprise with those who are said to have "wondered at the gracious words
which proceeded out of his mouth." As a "fountain of living waters," he
was always pouring forth refreshing streams; as the depository of wisdom
and knowledge, he incessantly communicated his treasures of sacred
instruction; and as the "Sun of righteousness," he constantly imparted his
heavenly light and heating beams. Who could approach him without feeling
the benign influence, and being benefitted by the rich supply?
As the term which Christ had employed in a spiritual sense, simply denoted
excellent spring water in common language, the woman at present conceived
no other idea of his meaning; and seeing he was a stranger, with no
bucket, she expressed her astonishment at his promise. With some
mysterious impression, probably, of his extraordinary character, blended
with incredulity, she proceeded to inquire, "Art thou greater than our
father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his
children, and his cattle?"
This may furnish an exemplification of the fact, that the "natural man
receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness
unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually
discerned." The terras of Christianity are mysterious, because its
doctrines are misunderstood, and cannot be discerned by him, the "eyes of
whose understanding" are beclouded, and whose heart is sensual. How
deplorable the effects of sin, which has drawn a veil over the moral
perceptions of man; in consequence of which, he cannot see the glories of
truth, the charms of Jesus, the value of his soul, and the importance of
its redemption! Nothing but the glare of earthly grandeur can affect him,
while eternity with all its vast concerns disappears.
Though the woman at first manifested considerable animosity, and afterward
betrayed great ignorance, Jesus was neither provoked by her prejudices,
nor irritated by her misconceptions. We must not unnecessarily _wound_
the unenlightened, nor even the perverse, by reproaches; but aim to _win_
them by kindness and forbearance. O for more resemblance to the "Lamb of
God," and more of the temper which the apostle inculcates! "And the
servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to
teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if
God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the
truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil,
who are taken captive by him at his will."
It would exceedingly conduce to the promotion of this spirit, were we
frequently to recollect our own former ignorance and slowness to apprehend
the "truth as it is in Jesus;" and the patience we have ourselves
experienced, especially from "our Master in heaven." We should also
consider, that the best and most permanent impressions are often the most
gradual; and he who advances to perfection, goes on from strength to
strength. Let us not be unduly discouraged, because of our _present_
ignorance and darkness of mind: but pursuing our inquiries with a humble
and teachable disposition, we may hope by copious supplies from the Source
of wisdom, to increase our knowledge, and enlarge our capacities.
It appears rather surprising, that instead of questioning the pretentions
of Christ, this woman did not at once solicit a fulfilment of his promise,
and "draw water from the wells of salvation;" but her method of proceeding
is illustrative of a very common case. Religious inquirers are full of
doubts and prejudices; for though Jesus invites them to participate the
blessings he so liberally dispenses, they imagine, _falsely_ imagine, that
some previous qualification is requisite to justify their approach. "Can
such a sinner be saved? Am I _indeed_ invited--after all my sins and
broken vows? I know not whether I shall be accepted, for what claim have I
upon his mercy?"
Yet the Saviour still invites--still promises--still encourages--still
instructs--and will not let the weakest inquirer go, but guides his feet
into the way of peace.
"Whosoever," said he to the woman, "whosoever drinketh of this water shall
thirst again; but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him,
shall never thirst: but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a
well of water springing up into everlasting life." The allusion is
unquestionably to that principle in the heart which is of divine
implantation, and which however various its names, and diversified its
operations, is uniform in its nature and origin. Sometimes it is
represented by the cause, and sometimes the effect. It is the "_Spirit_
given to them that ask him," with regard to agency; it is _grace_, in
point of character; and it is holiness or practical religion, in reference
to its outward influence. Jesus Christ beautifully describes this
principle in his metaphorical addresses to the woman of Samaria, by an
allusion to the thirst which the water of life assuages, the inexhaustible
consolation it imparts, as a "_well_ of water;" and the perpetual and
perfect blessedness with which it is connected, as "springing up into
everlasting life."
_Thirst_ is one of the most powerful propensities of human nature, and is
therefore adapted to represent the intensity of that desire with which
mankind seek the wealth, the honours, and the pleasures of the world: and
though "he that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he
that loveth abundance with increase;" the appetite is still insatiable,
and the pursuit continued. When under the influence of violent thirst, it
is not unusual for persons to avail themselves of the first supply,
however unwholesome, and eagerly to drink even of a filthy stream; with
similar impatience and satisfaction, the "carnal mind" indulges in its
sensualities, seizing forbidden, and contented with polluting joys. But
the grace of God in the heart is distinguished for its purifying
influence: it cleanses the spirit from guilt--sanctifies it by the
"washing of regeneration," and imparts a new desire, a heavenly thirst, a
holy ardour for spiritual communications; so that "as the hart pants after
the water-brooks, so panteth the soul after God."
This woman had a considerable distance to go in order to procure the water
with which it was needful to supply the necessities of her household; and
when arrived at the spot, it was a laborious service to draw from the
well, and return laden into the city. Our Saviour intimates, on the
contrary, the ease with which his divine blessings were attainable, as
well as their unfailing abundance. There is imparted to every applicant a
fund of peace, in consequence of which "a good man is satisfied from
himself." Religion furnishes consolations of a nature precisely _adapted_
to our necessities as fallen and miserable creatures; and it affords them
in circumstances, when it is obvious that no other resource remains. The
supplies of this world resemble the casual streamlets of winter, cold, and
soon exhausted, or lost in evaporation beneath the returning beam of
spring: but amidst the vicissitudes of life, and in the hour of
dissolution, religion has consolations which never fail. The river of a
Christian's consolation runs throughout the wilderness of time, nor stays
in its course till it expands into the boundless and fathomless ocean of
eternal blessedness.
At length, the woman in question is induced to make the request which we
wonder she did not at first present; though still she misapprehends the
meaning of her divine Teacher, however plain his sentiment may now appear
to us; in consequence of which, he condescended to adopt another mode of
conveying instruction to her mind. He had excited her attention, he now
proceeds to address her conscience.
We must not overlook the circumstance that Christ was "wearied with his
journey;" but he was not wearied with his _work_--well doing. If he had
now remained silent, it would not have been wonderful; or if, intending to
disclose his character to this woman, and by her means to the Samaritans,
he had smitten her conscience, removed her prejudices, enlightened her
mind, and won her affections, as we know he could have done, _in a
moment_--as when he said to Matthew, "Follow me," and immediately "he left
all"--or as when he spake from the clouds with irresistible effect to
Saul;--we should not have been astonished that he spared his words, while
we must have admired the mighty operation of his grace. But lo! he entered
into a long conversation, though in a weary hour, and took the utmost
pains to teach her. We have here an example for our imitation. Ought not
_we_ to be _patient_ and _laborious_? Ought not _we_ to recollect the
value of the soul, and strive "in season and out of season" to win it,
knowing "he that converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall
save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins?" "The servant
of the Lord must not _strive_," nor despond; lest consulting his own
advantage, he prejudice the divine service; but he must forget his
infirmities, and pursue his work.
To the request, "Sir, give me this water," Jesus does not appear to have
returned any direct answer, but said, "Go, call thy husband, and come
hither." The reply _was_, in one view, direct, and he began _instantly to_
communicate the "living water;" for the discourse upon which he entered,
though at a superficial glance it may appear foreign to the immediate
purpose of her request, and might seem to point her to a different
subject, was really intended to produce deep and salutary convictions of
sin, and such as were requisite in order to her reception of the _living
water_ of spiritual consolation. Nothing in reality could display both the
_wisdom_ and _goodness_ of the great Teacher in a more striking manner,
than this proceeding. In effect, he takes her by the hand, conducts her
through the narrow path of conviction and penetential acknowledgment, to
that fountain which has supplied millions, and is still inexhaustible; and
by whatever mysterious methods he brings his people to himself and to
their final rest, it will ultimately be found the _right_ way to the city
of habitation. As the woman did not comprehend his metaphorical language,
he determined to disclose his prophetic character. "Jesus saith unto her,
Go, call thy husband, and come hither. The woman answered and said, I have
no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:
for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy
husband: in that saidst thou truly." By divine inspiration, an ordinary
prophet might be supposed to have been made acquainted with the woman's
character and domestic circumstances; but we must contemplate the Saviour
on this occasion as supporting his claim to a higher distinction, such as
none of them could possess. It is a solemn consideration that we are
perpetually inspected by those "eyes which are upon the ways of man," and
by _him_ who seeth all his goings, his most retired moments, most secret
sins, most private affairs, and most latent thoughts. Even though we
should not live in that excess of sensuality which existed in this case,
how important is the apostolic entreaty, to "abstain from fleshly lusts;"
and how just the assurance, "they war against the soul!"
At length the woman's eyes were opened; she had a glimpse of the glory of
her divine Instructer through the influence of that grace which is
effectual in its operations, and imparts those perceptions which cannot be
otherwise possessed. Happy for us if we have been led to discern the
exalted character and excellencies of the Son of God! "Sir," said she, "I
perceive that thou art a prophet;" and availing herself of the present
favourable opportunity, she proposes a question much and violently
agitated between the Jews and Samaritans. When the passions are inflamed
by controversial discussion, how apt are we to be mislead by the opinions
of men rather than guided by the oppointments of God; and how frequently
convenience, instead of conscience, dictates the conduct of religious
professors! The Samaritan woman pleads the authority of the fathers for
worshipping at mount Gerizzim rather than repairing to Jerusalem. This has
frequently proved a source of error; and the history of mankind will
furnish ample evidence, that in departing from Scripture, the only "sure
word of prophecy," we shall inevitably wander into an endless labyrinth of
mistake, and be lost amidst the intricacies of delusion.
Our Lord intimates the improper proceedings of the Samaritans in
consequence of being thus misled by prejudice and by the example of
others, and shows that Jerusalem was certainly the ancient place of
appointed worship, and the Jews the depositaries of celestial wisdom. From
that illustrious people issued the word of the Lord which contained the
doctrine of salvation, which descended like the dew from heaven, and was
calculated to diffuse spiritual fertility through the earth, and impart
universal joy. "Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither
in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye
know not what: we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. But
the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the
Father in Spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
God is a spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and
in truth." In this passage Jesus points out the superior nature of the
worship which was now required, and which he was about to introduce to the
world. In the former controversy the Jews were certainly right; but the
designs of mercy being now accomplished in the mission of the Son of God,
and the "fulness of time being come," it was determined to spread the
blessings of the "everlasting Gospel" to the widest possible extent, and
to render, in honour of the mediation of Christ, the whole earth an
universal temple, in which the sacrifice of humble and contrite hearts
should be always acceptable.
Two great effects were produced by the introduction of the Christian
dispensation. The one respected the _mode of worship_. It was now no
longer to be _ceremonial_, but _spiritual_; it was no longer to be
conducted in _types_ and _shadows_, but in _truth_. In compassion to human
infirmity, numerous ceremonies were originally appointed, to impress awe,
and to fill the mind of man with a sense of the majesty of God. The
conceptions of a fallen creature being too grovelling at first to
comprehend the invisible realities of religion, a system of service was
admitted which tended to produce general impressions by an appeal to the
external senses, and thus slowly to insinuate sublimer facts, and prepare
for more noble manifestations; but when "the Lord came to his temple," and
made "the place of his feet glorious," darkness vanished, truth shone with
effulgent brightness, and simplicity rose to the dominion which ceremony
and complexity had assumed: at his presence the new creation smiled, and
the Lord of the universe again descended to pronounce upon another series
of wonderful works, that "all was very good."
Another effect resulting from the introduction of the Christian age
concerned the _variety and number of worshippers_. The limitations which
had hitherto prevailed in communicating truth to the world were to be
superseded; for, though the commissioned apostles were to deliver their
message "to the Jew _first_," they were expressly directed to convey it
"_also_ to the Gentiles." How calculated is this precedure to allay
animosities and unite hearts! and what a motive is here presented to us to
dismiss every petulant and revengeful disposition from the Christian
sanctuary, remembering that whether Jew or Gentile, rich or poor, bond or
free, every one is accepted of God _only as he is a_ SPIRITUAL WORSHIPPER!
As "God is a spirit," witnessing our movements and acquainted with our
thoughts at all times and in every place, we should often consecrate our
moments to his service. In the hour of seclusion and retirement, as well
as on public occasions and in religious assemblies, it becomes us to
direct our meditations to him by whom we are encircled. Let us contemplate
GOD, and feel his awful presence. He is on heaven and on earth; his eyes
behold us amidst the shades of midnight as well as in the brightest noon
of day; he pervades all space, is in all time, above all creatures, before
all being, and through all eternity. "Canst thou by searching find out
God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?"
At the period of this conversation at Jacob's well, a very general
expectation of the speedy appearance of the Messiah was prevalent, and the
woman was aware of the reference in the words, "The hour cometh, and _now
is_, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father;" although at
present "her eyes were holden," that she did not know him through the
concealment of his mean attire and unstately solitariness. This, however,
was wisely planned; and while it tended to cast contempt on worldly glory,
it enabled him to become a fellow-sufferer with his people, and to cherish
a holy familiarity with his disciples. Hence we find him not in palaces,
but in cottages--on the highways of common resort--healing the sick at the
pool of Bethesda, conversing with a poor woman at Jacob's well, and in
other similar situations: and never shall we be worthy to bear his name
till we imitate his conduct. "The woman saith unto him, I know that
Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us
all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he." This was
the point to which all his discourse was directed, this the revelation he
intended from the first to disclose; but how wisely was it delayed! Such
an assertion at the commencement of the conversation would have kindled
animosity or excited ridicule; but that mind which was originally so
prejudiced and so resentful, is brought to receive the most glorious and
spiritual discovery. If we wonder at her ignorance, and lament her
prejudices previously to this declaration, how much more criminal would
she have _now_ been had she persisted in unbelief! Yet, alas, how often is
Christ proclaimed, all his glories revealed, and all his truth exhibited,
by the ministry of the Gospel, and nevertheless rejected!
Upon Christ's explanation of his true character, the Samaritan woman
immediately left her water-pot, and went into the city, to announce her
discoveries to the neighbourhood, and invite her fellow citizens to the
Messiah. Glowing with zeal for others, she said, "Come, see a man which
told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" And the
historian records the success of her efforts; for "they went out of the
city, and came unto him;" and "many of the Samaritans of that city
believed on him." This induced them to solicit his continuance for some
time amongst them, "and he abode there two days. And many more believed
because of his own word; and said unto the woman, Now we believe, not
because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this
is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world."
Gratitude becomes us in reflecting upon that diversity of means which
divine wisdom uses to promote the circulation of his truth, and "win souls
to Christ." The greatest beings are at his control, and are sometimes
commissioned to visit the "heirs of salvation"--"Bless the Lord, ye his
_angels_, that excel in strength, _that do his commandments, hearkening
unto the voice of his word_;" while on other occasions he employs the most
unlikely agents, or the feeblest instrumentality, to "do his pleasure." He
can from the very stones "raise up children unto Abraham," convert an
infuriated persecutor into an "apostle of the Gentiles," or change a
Samaritan into a Christian, an infidel Gentile into a child of Abraham by
faith, and a woman coming casually to draw water for her household, into
an instrument of dispensing the living streams of salvation to a
perishing vicinity.
The early part of the narrative before us, is sufficient to show, that
however slow persons whom we have an opportunity of instructing in
religious truth may seem in understanding, or however reluctant to obey
it, we ought never either to despair of success, or be weary of repeating
our instruction. "I charge thee," says Paul in addressing Timothy, "before
God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at
his appearing and his kingdom; preach the word; be instant in season, out
of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine."
Who can tell the favoured period? Who can calculate the extent of the
benefit conferred when one sinner is "converted from the error of his
ways?" And who would not rejoice at the thought of having his final hour
cheered by the recollection of having been the means of letting in the
light of an eternal day even upon an individual of the human race, who was
once sitting in the darkness of spiritual delusion, and pining in the
dungeon of guilt, and misery, and helplessness?
Many things in religion, which we at present misunderstand, may probably
become intelligible in the course of future experience, and a great
variety of interesting truths now unknown will certainly be revealed in
another world. The woman of Samaria could not for a considerable time
comprehend the metaphorical allusions of Christ; but when she had "found
the Messiah," she was no longer at a loss to ascertain the signification
of the stranger's assurance, that he could have given her, had she
requested it, "living water." The disclosure of one fact, illustrated
another, and in spiritual knowledge and attainment she went on doubtless
with a rapidity proportioned to her extraordinary advantages.
With what deep interest, at every subsequent period of her life, would
this woman recollect the conversation at Jacob's well! Never, surely,
would she repair again to that spot, without presenting to her imagination
the image of Jesus sitting there, like a weary traveller, asking for water
to refresh his pilgrimage, incidentally adverting to topics of supreme
importance, addressing her conscience, and gradually unveiling his
character to her view--first as a prophet, then as the Messiah of the
Jews, and the glory of the Gentiles! Never could she forget that wonderful
morning--a morning which shone with such glory in the annals of her
existence, and was destined to occupy a conspicuous place in the
recollections of eternity! And it is our privilege, as well as duty, to
remember the place of our spiritual birth, the instructer of our infant
piety, the guide of our religious inquiries, and all "the way in which the
Lord our God has led us in the wilderness." Experience will rivet our
affections to every circumstance; life will derive a charm, in many of its
future years, from such welcome reflections; and memory will not discard,
amidst the ineffable joys of paradise, the well--the stranger--the
converse--the whole scene of those first impressions, which ripened into
religion and were the seeds of immortality.
In a sense more important than that in which the subject of this narrative
originally employed the words, each reader may feel encouraged to address
the Saviour, "Give me this water, that I thirst not." Holy prophets concur
with the evangelical publishers of "glad tidings," in urging you to
partake of the heavenly supply, which is dispensed with perfect freeness,
and in undiminishing abundance. "Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come ye to
the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come,
buy wine and milk without money and without price."
The Woman Who Was a Sinner.
Chapter V.
Jesus and John contrasted--the former goes to dine at the House of a
Pharisee--a notorious Woman introduces herself, and weeps at his
Feet--Remarks on true Repentance and Faith, as exemplified in her
Conduct--Surmises of Simon the Pharisee--the Answer of Jesus--the Woman
assured of Forgiveness--Instructions deducible from the Parable.
There was a remarkable dissimilarity between Christ and his celebrated
precursor. The latter was unbending in his manners, austere in his mode of
living, and abrupt in his public discourses: in fact, John was
distinguished by all those qualities of a great reformer, which fitted him
for the service assigned him by Providence; zealous, eloquent, intrepid,
inconsiderate of himself, and resolutely exposing the vices of those
around him, to whom he pointed out "a more excellent way." The wildness of
the wilderness seemed to accord with the singularity of his character; and
the rocky standing from which he might probably often address his
auditors, was well adapted to the design of his preaching, and the mode of
his appearance. His Divine Master gave ample testimony to his
excellence--"What went ye out for to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you,
and more than a prophet. For this is he of whom it is written, Behold, I
send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before
thee. Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women, there has
not arisen a greater than John the Baptist."
But the character of the "Son of man" differed in many respects from that
of his forerunner. He was familiar, affable, and ready to associate with
others; he assumed no austerity of manners, and no reserve of behaviour.
The cast of his public preaching, too, was of a milder and more winning
strain, suited to his character as the image of the God who is love, and
adapted to the merciful nature of that dispensation which he came to
introduce.
It was this diversity which excited the malignant revilings of the Jews,
who said of John, "he hath a devil;" and of Christ, "Behold a man
gluttonous, and a wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners:" but the
success of the means has fully justified the use of them, as the
prescriptions of the physician are justified by the restoration of health
to the diseased, and the mode adopted by the agriculturist in cultivating
his soil is effectually vindicated by its fertility. God bestows upon his
church a diversity of gifts, and upon men a variety of qualities, that
different stations may be occupied to the best advantage, and his cause
promoted in the most effectual manner. The formation of suitable
instruments to accomplish his purposes, is one of those arrangements of
Providence which we can never sufficiently admire. Whatever peculiarities
exist, they are all made to concur to the same end, and are all regulated
by the same influence: the "gifts" and the "operations" are diverse, but
"it is the same God which worketh all in all."
Happily for mankind, there was a sense in which a part of the accusation
preferred against Jesus Christ held true. He was indeed "a friend of
publicans and sinners"--if he had not been, what would have been the
situation of a Matthew, whom he called from the receipt of custom to
"follow him;" or of a Zaccheus, whom he addressed in the sycamore tree,
and to whose house he "that day" conveyed "salvation;" or of a Bartimeus,
"blind and sitting by the highway-side, begging," whose eyes he opened,
and to whose mind he imparted faith? If he had not been a "friend of
publicans and sinners" the songs of descending spirits would never have
charmed the shepherds of Bethlehem--a church would never have been formed
on earth and ultimately taken to heaven--the mansions of eternity would
never have been peopled by the children of transgression--the hymns of
human gratitude would never have mingled with the hallelujahs of the
blessed--nor would the sacred writings have contained such a history as
that before us of the penitent sinner.
It is introduced by an account of one of the Pharisees having solicited
the company of Jesus to dinner, and of his having accepted his invitation.
The Pharisees were amongst his bitterest enemies, and yet here is one who
courteously introduces him into his house. He might have been affected by
his discourses or miracles; and it is pleasing to recollect, that divine
grace is not limited in its operations to one community, class, or age,
but peoples the heavenly world by the redemption of sinners of every rank
in life, every period of time, every degree of moral corruption, and every
nation of the globe.
Our Saviour's visit to the Pharisee is related for the sake of the
incident and discourse with which it was connected, and which are given in
the following words: Behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner,
when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an
alabaster box of ointment, and stood at his feet behind him weeping, and
began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her
head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. Now when
the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying,
This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of
woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner. And Jesus answering,
said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith,
Master, say on. There was a certain creditor which had two debtors; the
one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had
nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me, therefore, which of
them will love him most? Simon answered and said, I suppose that he to
whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged. And
he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, seest thou this woman? I
entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet; but she
hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.
Thou gavest me no kiss; but this woman, since the time I came in, hath not
ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint; but this
woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, her
sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little
is forgiven, the same loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are
forgiven. And they that sat at meat with him began to say within
themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also? And he said to the
woman, "Thy faith hath saved thee: go in peace."
The woman is denominated a _sinner_, because incontinency was her trade
and the means of her subsistence. Her character is branded with merited
infamy, but her name is mercifully veiled. She was notorious in the city;
and one would have imagined that as it could be no defamation to name her,
the sacred historian need not have manifested any scrupulousness upon the
point; nevertheless, as justice did not require it, and as it was the
writer's purpose rather to record her penitence than to expose her crimes,
she is mentioned only in general terms, as _a sinner, a woman in
the city._
What compassionate mind can help deploring the immoralities of populous
towns and crowded cities! What an illustration of human depravity does it
afford, that wherever mankind resort in great multitudes, vice is
proportionably varied in its nature, atrocious in its character, and
barefaced in its practice--as if it were thought that the numbers who
perpetrated wickedness, tended to conceal from the view of Omniscience
individual delinquency! It is common to acquire boldness by association;
and society, which ought rather to purify the mind, is often the means of
its pollution. The facilities for secrecy in sin which exist in
considerable places, the incalculable variety of forms in which temptation
appears, the force of example operating upon an extensive scale, and
enhanced by a thousand tributary streams that pour into the tide of
transgression flowing down the streets, concur to involve the inhabitants
of populous vicinities in circumstances of great moral danger. Apart from
all persuasion or direct influence, the very sight of immoralities is
liable to injure that delicate sensibility to wrong which it is of the
utmost importance to preserve in a pure and uncontaminated state. The
nicely polished mind is susceptible of the breath of impurity; and when it
once becomes dim and obscure in its perceptions, it is difficult to
restore it. Many have on this account withdrawn into retirement,
supposing that they should be able to secure that leisure for devotional
exercises which they have believed conducive to religious eminence. But
they have forgotten that the human heart is sown with unholy principles,
which will spring up in solitude as well as in society; that in avoiding
dissipation, they are liable to be narrowed into selfishness; and that the
honourable and heroic part which Christianity requires, is not to fly from
difficulties, but, "in the grace that is in Christ Jesus," to contend
with, and conquer them.
In the woman whose brief but instructive history is to be reviewed, we see
indications of a "repentance that needeth not to be repented of." It is to
be traced, in the first place, in the _posture_ she assumed, and the
_tears_ she shed. When she found that Jesus was dining in the house of
Simon, she went and "stood at his feet behind him weeping." She who had
known no shame, but whose unblushing impudence and obtrusive familiarities
had so often scandalized the city, now avoids a look, shrinks even from
respectful notice, and is overwhelmed with a consciousness of guilt.
This conduct bespeaks the most pungent and unaffected sorrow. Her sins
present themselves in array before her mind, and she "abhors herself, and
repents in dust and ashes." Though all around was festivity, her heart was
sad--she wept as in secret; and those eloquent tears bespoke the Saviour's
pity, in a manner more powerful than the most studied language could have
done! Those tears were precious in his sight--that silence expressed the
depth and sincerity of her grief--and he approved it!
With what pleasure must holy angels have contemplated from their radiant
spheres this impressive scene; for "there is joy in the presence of the
angels of God over one sinner that repenteth!" The gayeties of life, and
the appearances of worldly grandeur, excite no satisfaction in them; they
are not attracted by those tinsel shows and glittering nonentities which
fill the circle of human vanity, and fire the ardent wishes of mankind;
the most splendid titles, the most opulent condition, the most celebrated
heroes, pass before them like shadows that haste away, unregretted and in
quick succession; but they bend from their thrones of light to witness the
sorrows of the meanest penitent, and listen to his secret moanings.
It is to be apprehended that many substitute an external reformation of
manners for solid repentance towards God. They lay aside the filthy
garments of gross immorality, and invest themselves in the decent attire
of correct conduct; but the principle of genuine penitence consists in a
just estimate of the perfections of that Being whom we have offended, and
of the nature of sin, as violating those obligations which devolve on us
as creatures. It is an humbling consideration, that God must perceive the
guilt of sin with infinitely greater distinctness than is possible to the
most self-examining penitent; and that their number and variety must be
perfectly discerned by the eyes of his purity. We are apt to throw them
together, as in a confused heap; and instead of realizing them in detail,
to contemplate them only in the aggregate and mass, by which their
individual atrocity is overlooked.
The true penitent views sin in connexion with his personal obligations,
and the requirements of the divine law. The Being against whom he rebels,
has, he knows, conferred upon him all the blessings of existence; and has,
consequently, the most indisputable claim upon his entire obedience--an
obedience, however, which, in his presumption and folly, he has refused
to render.
It may be remarked, also of repentance, that it possesses a character of
universality. Its regrets extend to every sin, without exception or
excuse: it has no apologies to offer, and cannot hold the balance to
measure with cold and calculating nicety, the respective demerits of the
offences which have been committed, with a view to conciliate the mercy of
heaven, or institute a plea in mitigation of punishment. It is, besides, a
deep and permanent impression, which is perpetually renewed by reflection,
and by witnessing the transgressions of a degenerate world. What are "the
sacrifices of God," but a "broken spirit?" verily, "a broken and a
contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise."
We observe, in the next place, if not the _words_, certainly the very
_spirit_ of confession in this once profligate but now penitent woman. It
is impossible to imagine a finer or more complete specimen of
self-debasement than that which she exhibited upon this occasion. How
easily could she have avoided such an exposure of herself, and spared
those lamentations! She was under no necessity to introduce herself into
the presence of that holy man, whose looks would condemn her immoralities,
and whose words, should he condescend to address her, might be expected to
convey severe reproof. Surely she might have remained at home:--no--it
could not be--she _was_ unable to avoid this exposure, and to spare those
lamentations; she was under a most imperious necessity to go to the house
of Simon--she _could not_ have remained at home: the irresistible
influence of "godly sorrow" urged her in to these circumstances, and her
bursting heart was forced to seek relief at the feet of Jesus, Her own
vileness tormented her recollections; her views of sin were of the most
tragic and affecting kind; in the depths of humiliation, the waves and
billows rolled over her; and her tears were confessions of guilt, which he
who was perfectly acquainted with the emotions of her spirit, know how to
interpret.
How common is it for persons suffering pain of conscience, to plunge into
new excesses, in order to disengage themselves from wretchedness of
remorse, and, as they hope, to divert their sorrows! This infatuation is
attended with mischievous effects: it diminishes sensibility to sin, and
confirms the habit. The thorns which at first grew in the path of
indulgence, are trampled down by frequent passage; and a return to God
becomes every day less and less probable. Familiarity with the various
modes of vice weakens the impression of disgust which is originally felt;
as we lose by degrees the horror with which an unsightly countenance was
beheld at the first interview, till at length we can more than tolerate
distortion, and even court deformity. Never was a more important maxim
delivered by the Saviour for the guidance of his disciples, than that
which respected their avoidance of the first step in transgression. "Watch
ye and pray," said he, "lest ye _enter_ into temptation." The fence which
is placed around the forbidden fruit-tree, by the interdictions of Heaven,
being once violated, the most alarming consequences ensue; and, unless
grace prevent, the transgressor must inevitably perish. Avoid then,
studiously avoid, whatever leads to the way of death. Escape for thy life,
O sinner, from the brink of transgression, if thou hast unhappily ventured
so far; and tremble at the yawning gulf below. If thou hast _fallen_,
while thou hast not yet passed the boundaries of life, thou art not
irrecoverably lost; but, O let a sense of thy danger induce thee to lift
up thine eyes to view the weeping penitent standing in the presence of
Jesus Christ, of whom she is accepted, and open thine ears to hear the
voice of kind invitation: "Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the
Lord; and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful,
saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever. Only acknowledge thine
iniquity, that thou hast transgressed against the Lord thy God, and hast
scattered thy ways to the strangers under every green tree, and ye have
not obeyed my voice, saith the Lord.... Return, ye backsliding children,
and I will heal your backslidings.... He that covereth his sins shall not
prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them, shall have mercy."
Further, this woman, who went into Simon's house at Nain, upon the
occasion already mentioned, is celebrated by Jesus himself for her faith,
which "worked by love." Addressing her in the presence of the astonished
company, he said, "Thy _faith_ hath saved thee, go in peace."
The Pharisees treated others with scornful contempt, especially those whom
they deemed to be of notorious character. Theirs was not like
Christianity, the religion of compassion--the religion, that, deriving its
characteristic peculiarities from its Author, pities the deluded,
sympathises with the miserable, seeks to reclaim the criminal, and marks
the tears of the penitent; but "trusting in themselves that they were
righteous, they despised others." Disregardful, however, of the sneers or
reproaches which she might have to encounter, this penitent woman presses
to the house of the Pharisee, because Jesus was a guest. Her object was
not concealment, but forgiveness; she was willing to be rebuked, so that
she might be saved; and while by obtruding in this manner into the house
of Simon, she exposed herself to the insults which her dissolute habits
would be likely to incur, she courageously adopted a course of proceeding
which brought her under the most solemn obligations to future chastity and
holiness of life. She was willing that the whole assembly or city should
witness her change, and that the reality of her penitence, and the
strength of her attachment to Christ, should be as notorious as her former
irregularities. Her courage, then, demands notice, and deserves imitation.
What might be the opinion of the motley assemblage who were the spectators
of her conduct, seemed to have had no influence upon her mind; but obeying
the impulse of sorrow for sin, and hope in Jesus, she dismissed every
thought of personal exposure, and with tears of undissembled grief,
hastened to him who was "full of grace and truth."
Timorousness, arising from an undue regard to the world, is too often a
hinderance to religious profession. Persons who have been awakened to some
sense of the evil of sin, and have perceived the importance, while they
have felt in some degree the claims of piety, frequently, alas! have been
deterred from that avowal of their sentiments, which is essential to
verify their convictions, and to honour God in the eyes of men. They would
be servants of Christ, if they were not slaves to human opinion: they
would go to Jesus, if it were not in the observers who stand around: they
would renounce the world, if they could avoid reproach: they would, in a
word, be decided, but they dare not be singular!
We are required to "_confess_ Christ _before men_," and it is only by such
a confession we can evince the sincerity of our attachment. Jesus Christ
was not ashamed to call us _brethren_, to assume our nature, to fill our
humble station, to suffer our sorrows, and to die an ignominious
death:--he is not ashamed to own his connexion with us, now he is ascended
into the highest heavens, or to be engaged in preparing a place for us
amidst the mansions of glory. Shall we be ashamed of him, or his cause?
Shall we be afraid to avow our regard, if we feel it?
It is the design of Christ to establish an interest in the world which
shall be universally prevalent, and this cause is rendered visible by the
public profession of its adherents. In the apostolic age, therefore, to
embrace Christianity, and to profess it, were considered as inseparably
connected; and why should they now be separated? "Then they that gladly
received the word were baptized."
Do any circumstances now exist to render it proper to act contrary to
apostolical example and precept? Is not the world the same? is not the
command of Jesus the same? is not his religion the same as in primitive
ages? This cause is to be now maintained as then; not by fear, but by
firmness--not by compliance with the world, but by resisting it--not by
sloth, inactivity, and shrinking into a corner, but by "putting on the
whole armour of God," and pressing to the field of battle. Not to be for
Christ, is to be against him; _inactivity_ is _enmity_; a dread of
standing in the ranks, or a refusal to enlist under the banners of
Immanuel, are indications of disloyalty, rebellion, and treason. The
territories of his grace are invaded by the troops of hell--the great
power that "ruleth in the children of disobedience" is opposing the
kingdom of the Redeemer, and extending his influence over the hearts of
men. Not to resist his encroachments, therefore, not to withstand in our
own person his dominion, and declare our cause, is, in fact, to favour his
designs, and betray him whom we profess to love. It is stated, that at the
second appearance of Christ "he will be glorified _in_ his saints, and
admired _in_ all them that believe;" and it is _in_ them he expects _now_
to be glorified before men; and the most effectual way to honour him is
to "confess him," to avow before the world our determination to be "on the
Lord's side.
"Perfect love," remarks an apostle, "casteth out fear;" of which we have a
striking exemplification in this woman of Nain. The expressions of her
attachment to Jesus were such as could not be mistaken, for she not only
caressed him, but made considerable sacrifices to show her love. The gifts
of nature had been the instruments of dissipation. With what care had she
been accustomed to adjust her smiles, to throw fascination into her
countenance, to beautify her person, to arrange her dress and her hair,
and to cultivate every exterior charm! What sums of money had she lavished
upon herself, with a view to attract admiration! Behold her now at the
feet of Jesus, careless of her personal attractions, and absorbed in the
contemplation of her Saviour: she washes his feet with her tears, wipes
them with the hairs of her head, kisses his feet, [31] and even expends an
alabaster box of ointment, very precious and costly, in anointing them.
Whatever has been the occasion or the means of transgression, becomes an
object of dislike; and in the true spirit of penitence, she not only
deserts what is obviously criminal, but detests and relinquishes whatever
may tend to renew the remembrance of indulgence, or rekindle the expiring
flame of desire. She renounces every superfluity, submits cheerfully to
every privation, and slays at once with unreluctant severity, the dearest
lusts that twine about her heart. It is thus that a sincere Christian will
abandon both the practice and principle of sin, and aware of his peculiar
propensities, he will watch with a scrupulousness proportioned to his
sense of danger, over those sins to which he knows himself to have been
most inclined in the days of his unregeneracy. "If thy right eye offend
thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee
that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should
be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast
it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should
perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."
Reader! examine into the state of thy mind, the propensities that reign
within, and the principles that predominate in thy heart! Hast thou
professed an attachment to Jesus Christ? "Dost thou _believe_ in the Son
of God?" What sacrifices hast thou made, tending to evince the sincerity
of thy declarations, and the ardour of thy love? Hast thou braved
reproach--stood firm amidst opposition--abandoned criminal practices and
guilty associates--assisted the cause of thy Lord--encouraged and supplied
his disciples--and for his sake been willing even to renounce indulgences,
which, if they were innocent, might have proved offensive to others, or
ensnaring to thyself. Decision of character is important, both as a proof
of our own sincerity, and as a means of confirming others in religion; for
neutrality, which Christ himself has so pointedly condemned, is even more
prejudicial than hostility.
But it is not sufficient to inquire into the _extent_ of those sacrifices
which may have been offered to the service of religion, the _nature_ of
those sacrifices must be investigated; otherwise there may be "a fair
show in the flesh," while the individual is destitute of the essential
principles of Christianity. The love of the world, and indulgence in
secret sin, may be compatible with an ostentatious religion. What is
difficult to some, may prove comparatively easy to others, whose
constitutional tendencies or mental prepossessions are of another
description. The sacrifice, for example, of a spendthrift to religion must
be of a different kind from that of a miser; otherwise the one may obtain
undue credit for splendid charities, and the other for pious scrupulosity.
In estimating, therefore, the characters of men, or apportioning their
duties, the respective casts of mind, habits, and inclinations, are to be
investigated, in order to judge of the one, or prescribe the other. To
gain advantage from a course of self-inspection, it is requisite to study
the peculiarities of our own mind, and to ascertain what is really a
_sacrifice_ to ourselves, and how far we have made it, or are prepared to
offer it, to Christ. What gratifications have we relinquished? what sins
have we resisted? what lusts have we overcome? Where are we in point of
moral progress? Has our professed penitence led us to Christ? What degree
of assimilation to him have we attained? Have we, in fact, devoted to life
service our ENTIRE BEING--and do we feel that
"Our lives and thousand lives of ours"
can neither discharge our obligations, nor repay his love?
The state of the mind is often indicated by trifles, better than by what
appears to be of greater magnitude and importance. There are, certain
actions not intended for the public, and, therefore, not dressed up for
inspection, which mark the feelings of the heart, and the meaning of which
no vigilant observer can mistake. There is a truth and a certainty about
them sufficiently obvious; they as infallibly show the state of the man,
as the index points to the hour of the day. In the history of the penitent
sinner, the negligence of her dress and hair, which had doubtless before
been decorated, according to the habit of the age, with jewels, was such
an indication. Some professed penitents would have given, perhaps, the
costly presentation of the alabaster box of ointment, but would have found
it infinitely more difficult to renounce their vanity: but here the
sacrifice was complete; her best affections were engrossed with the new
object of her delight, and she virtually said, "Perish, thou love of the
world; perish, thou fond and criminal passion for show; perish, all ye
ministers of iniquity, at the feet of Jesus! I willingly exchange masters;
and henceforth I shall be regardless of personal attractions, solicitous
only of participating the blessings of salvation!"
Simon, during all this time, was an attentive observer of what passed; but
rashly concluded within himself that Jesus could not be a prophet, as he
seemed ignorant of the character of the woman whom he admitted to such
familiarity. He mistook both the character of the woman, and that of his
divine guest. She was not, in _his_ sense of the term, a _sinner_, but a
_penitent_ and a _believer_; nor was Jesus capable of contamination by her
touch. He knew perfectly, "who and what manner of woman it was," though
the Pharisee was too proud to see or acknowledge it. The important change
which had been produced upon her, essentially altered the case. She was no
longer what she had been, and what Simon supposed her. Grace had
constituted her a chosen vessel, and purified her heart by the impartation
of heavenly principles. The impurities of her life were rectified by the
"renewal of a right spirit" within her. She had been snatched from the
jaws of destruction; she had resorted to the "fountain opened for sin and
uncleanness," and proved that she was one of those "lost sheep" which
Jesus came into the wilderness to "seek and to save."
Simon had not _expressed_ his ideas, but the Saviour _knew_ them with
perfect certainty, and answered them with unerring wisdom. Having first
claimed the attention of his host, which was respectfully conceded, Jesus
delivered a parable respecting a creditor having two debtors, who owed,
the one five hundred, and the other fifty pence, but were both forgiven in
consideration of their poverty; and he put it to the Pharisee, which of
them would love him most? he properly answered, "he to whom he forgave
most." Then turning to the woman--and, O what sensations of joy must have
thrilled through her agitated bosom!--he continued to direct his discourse
to Simon; "Seest thou this woman?" _q.d._ "Art thou aware of the extent
and value of those sacrifices she has made to me? Hast thou observed the
tears she has shed, and the love she has manifested? Has it struck thy
mind, that the conduct of this woman, whom thou art despising in thy
heart, is far more deserving of my approbation than thine?" Mark, with
what punctuality and detail he proceeds to enumerate every act of
kindness! He mentions her tears, her caresses, the kisses, and the
ointment which she had lavished upon his feet--nothing is forgotten or
omitted--everything is distinctly told--her love is extolled, and her sins
are pardoned: Simon, "her sins, which are many, are forgiven"--Woman,
"thy sins are forgiven." There is a beauty and a propriety in this
repetition, which was well calculated to stimulate the inquiries, and to
correct the errors of the Pharisee, while it ministered consolation to the
weeping penitent. Ah! our secret desires, our silent tears, our meanest
services, are noticed by our Master and Lord! He will "reward us _openly_"
having given the grace of penitence, he will bestow the joys of faith; our
_many_ sins shall be overlooked and forgiven; our _few_ services
remembered and recorded for his sake!
This parable is illustrative of our moral obligations, and of our total
incapacity to discharge them. We are all _debtors_--to God; we are so, it
is true, in different proportions--some owe five hundred and some fifty
pence. A difference exists in the nature and atrocity of our respective
crimes--we have run to greater or less extravagances of iniquity--our sins
are more or less notorious, more or less limited or extensive in their
influence on others; more or less aggravated by knowledge, by vows, and by
repetition--indulged in for a longer or a shorter period, as there was a
great diversity of moral character between the Pharisee and the woman; but
"_all have sinned_, and, come short of the glory of God"--all have
incurred debt--and it is important to remark, that all are equally
incapable of discharging it--of atoning for their guilt, or rescuing
themselves from the pains and penalties they have incurred.
However plain this statement, and however frequently repeated, it is but
little believed and felt. If it were--if mankind were actually convinced
of the utter inefficiency of every attempt to recommend themselves to God,
and regain his forfeited favour; whence is it that they are perpetually
"going about to establish their own righteousness?" Why do they endeavour
to persuade themselves that sin is a trifling concern, or that at least
_their_ sins are trivial and excusable? It is obvious, that they form very
low and inadequate ideas of the greatness of their debt, and the utter
worthlessness of their own merit--they do not realize their ruined and
bankrupt condition, nor are they sufficiently persuaded that they have
"_nothing to pay_" not an atom of righteousness, not a grain of inherent
goodness, not a particle of real virtue!
Sinner, come to the test. Hear the indictment, and see if thou hast any
defence, if thou hast any plea, or if thou canst put in any just demurrer
to stay the proceedings of eternal justice and equity. But how shall human
language express the debt? Thou hast violated every divine precept,
pursued a course diametrically opposite to the commandments of God,
trampled on his authority, and lived to thyself. Every action, word, and
thought, has augmented the already incalculable debt. God has called, but
thou hast refused; his providence has warned thee, but thou hast despised
it, and made a covenant with hell. While thy personal transgressions have
abounded like the drops of the ocean, or the sands upon the shore, thy
example has perniciously influenced others. Thou owest thy whole existence
and all thy faculties, thy entire obedience and constant affection, to
God. He is thy _Father_--thy _Creator_--thy _Benefactor_, and what hast
thou to pay? what are thy resources? _Future_ obedience, supposing it
_perfect_, could not expiate _past_ offences. Pains, prostrations,
pilgrimages, penances, and mortifications, can be of no avail. Hecatombs
of animals would not suffice, or ten thousand rivers of oil; but, if they
would, the treasures are not _thine_: "for every beast of the forest is
_mine_, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the
mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine. If I were hungry, I
would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof. Will
I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?" What then hast
thou to pay?--_Nothing_! absolutely _nothing_!
But the parable in question represents the free pardon, which it is the
privilege of the vilest transgressors to participate upon their return to
God, And we should mark the _sovereignty_, blended with the mercy of this
procedure. It is not supposed that the recipients of divine bounty and
blessing have any claim upon such favors; nor, indeed, that they can plead
any extenuating circumstance to conciliate offended justice. The debtors
had "nothing to pay," and their impoverished condition was a sufficient
excitement to their creditor to remit his dues. He "remembered them in
their low estate;" and, with a liberality characteristic of him to whom we
are so deeply indebted in a moral sense, he discharged them from every
obligation. There is not the slightest intimation of any urgency or
solicitation on their part; but he "_frankly_ forgave them." If sinners
had any just conception of their state, they would indeed seek mercy with
the utmost importunity, and relinquish their present courses with the most
fixed resolution of mind; but the grace of God operates in _calling_ men
to repentance, as well as in _constraining_ their attention and
acquiescence. They are "made willing" in "the day of his power;" and, like
a gale that rises upon a vessel drifting to a rocky shore, and bears it
from destruction, this influence effectually propels them to "the hope set
before them" in the Gospel.
The exercise of mercy is distinguished also for its _extensive and
diversified application_. Simon the Pharisee, and the woman who was a
sinner, differed in the nature and proportion of their guilt. He was as
much condemned for self-righteousness, as she for impurity--he
transgressed by pride, and she by rebellion: but "he frankly forgave them
_both_." "Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and
passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth
not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy! He will turn
again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and
thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea."
If, reader, thou art impressed with a sense of guilt, and ready to
exclaim, "What must I do to be saved?" it is with unspeakable satisfaction
and confidence we point to "the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of
the world." That heart which was melted by the tears of this woman, is not
closed against _thee_! That Saviour who was all pity and benevolence in
the days of his humiliation, still waits to be gracious now he is exalted
to his throne!
Hast thou experienced the efficacy of his grace, and the joys of his
salvation? Be stimulated to _love him much_. What sins, what rebellions,
what broken vows, what ingratitude has he forgiven thee! All are
obliterated from the book of his remembrance; all are lost and buried in
the ocean of his grace; and he has fixed thy name amongst a thousand
promises, and in a page which his eye never peruses but with ineffable
complacency!
The _plan_ upon which forgiveness is dispensed to a sinful world, and
which is now more fully developed, demands our admiration, as it glorifies
God, exalts the sinner, and harmonizes the universe.
It _glorifies_ God. The work of redemption by our Lord Jesus Christ is the
central point, where all the perfections of Deity assemble and meet. Every
attribute of God pointing to Calvary, seems to devout believers to say, as
Jesus did to his disciples, with reference to their last interview on a
mountain in Galilee, "There shall ye see me." His perfections had hitherto
appeared in the world in their distinct forms.--Justice in its inflexible
decisions, Truth in its firm decrees, Holiness in its terrible
inflictions, operated powerfully, but often separately--as in the
destruction of Pharaoh, and the deliverance of Israel--in the earthquake
that devoured the rebels who presented strange fire--in the deluge that
overwhelmed the world--in the burning tempest that descended upon Sodom,
and the sword that scattered the nations of Canaan; but round the brink of
that "fountain which was opened" on Calvary for "sin and uncleanness,"
they seem to unite and say, "Glory to God in the highest." This is the
common and sacred ground, on which "mercy and truth can meet together."
Inflexible justice does not remit her claims, but "the Lamb that was
slain" satisfies them--she still demands _blood_--and blood is shed--she
demands the _life_ of the guilty, and the guilty are furnished with a
victim who can endure the curse and suffer the chastisement--she requires
a recompense for the violated law; and "he hath magnified the law and made
it honorable," by becoming "obedient unto death, even the death of
the cross!"
This plan of mercy _exalts the sinner_. If the requisitions of justice
were strictly personal, and the economy of Heaven such as to admit of no
substitute, the sinner's salvation would have been impossible; because his
individual sufferings, though the just consequence of his guilt, could
never become the meritorious means of its removal. Suffering, extreme in
its nature, and perpetual in its duration, was the desert of
transgression; but it could neither repair the injury which sin had done,
nor constitute a claim upon divine forgiveness; or, if it _could_--by the
very supposition there would be no possibility of any period arriving when
that mercy could be enjoyed, because the suffering must be _eternal_.
Such, however, was the infinite merit of the Saviour, that in the plan of
forgiving mercy, his death was accepted as an equivalent for the
sufferings of creatures. By exercising faith in his name, we transfer the
burden of our debt, and he liquidates it: we confess we have nothing to
pay, and wholly confide in his ability to discharge on our behalf every
obligation; in consequence of which the transgressor is treated as
innocent; he is released--the door is opened, his chains are broken off,
and he is exalted to the favour and friendship of God; and "Who," he
inquires, "shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God
that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea
rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who
also maketh intercession for us"
This plan of mercy _harmonizes the universe_. Sin has separated chief
friends--it has divided man from God, man from angels, and man from his
neighbour. It has introduced a general war, and generated universal
anarchy and strife. But redemption is the great work that restores order
and promotes concord. It is on Calvary the terms are made, and the great
treaty ratified--divided interests are reunited, and peace on earth
proclaimed. It is there "God is in Christ reconciling the world to
himself;" and there, realizing the efficacy of atoning blood, and weeping
over the follies and criminality of past rebellion, the penitent exclaims,
"Abba, Father!" Thus God and man are united. It is there holy angels,
instead of being executioners of vengeance, become "ministering spirits to
the heirs of salvation;" while every Lazarus begins to anticipate the
period of "absence from the body," when "he shall be carried by _angels_
to Abraham's bosom," and be "ever present with the Lord." Thus men and
angels become one. It is there also before the cross, having "tasted that
the Lord is gracious," "the brother of low degree rejoices in that he is
exalted, and the rich in that he is made low." There the murderer Saul
meets his victim Stephen, with "all who in every place call on the name of
the Lord;" and (O happy change!) embraces as a brother him whom he
believed a foe! There the turbulence of passion is allayed--the violence
of animosity ceases--the battle of conflicting interests and petty
selfishness rages no more. Those who were enemies in the world, become
friends at the cross. The barbarian, Scythian, bond, and free, drink
together the cup of blessing, partake the "common salvation," and imbibe
the fraternal spirit. Thus man and man unite, while "Christ is all and
in all."
"Religion, in all its parts, requires the exercise of forgiveness. It is
required by its precepts, its spirit, and its prospects. Its
_precepts_--we are not to render evil for evil, but contrariwise blessing:
we are to love our enemies, to forgive our brother as often as he returns
acknowledging his misconduct, and saying, 'I repent.' Its _spirit_; the
Gospel, or the religion of Jesus, is emphatically styled 'the ministry of
_reconciliation_.' Its _prospects_; we are members of the same family,
heirs of the same kingdom, and going to the same heaven. Heaven is a state
of perfect and universal harmony and love. Nothing must enter there,
either to defile or disturb. There must be no little disputes, no rising
resentment, no shadow of reserve. All must be of one heart and of one
soul. Yes, if we both be Christians indeed, there we must meet our
brother, with whom wo have been angry, and towards whom we have even
indulged our anger; an anger upon which not only the 'sun went down,' but
over which life itself passed. Yes, happy necessity! there we _must_ meet
him! There will be no passing' by on the other side, no refusing to go
into his company. Countenance must sparkle to countenance, thought must
meet thought, bosom must expand to bosom, and heart bound to
heart forever,"
The Syrophenician; or Canaanitish Woman.
Chapter VI.
Introductory Observations--Christ could not be concealed--the
Syrophenician Woman goes to him on Account of her Daughter--her
Humility--Earnestness--Faith--the Silence of Christ upon her Application
to him--the Disciples repulsed--the Woman's renewed Importunity--the
apparent Scorn with which it is treated--her Admission of the
contemptuous Insinuation--her persevering Ardour--her ultimate
Success--the Necessity of being Importunate in Prayer--Remarks on the
Woman's national Character--Present State of the Jews--the Hope of their
final Restoration.
The facts and incidents of the New Testament furnish the best exposition
of its doctrines. Owing to the imperfection of human language, as a medium
of communicating truth, and, the very limited capacities of the human
mind, as well as the numerous prejudices that darken our understandings in
the present state, some obscurities will always attend even the clearest
revelations of Heaven. "Touched with a feeling of our infirmities," our
blessed Saviour often adopted a parabolic method of instruction, which was
calculated to awaken attention and to stimulate inquiry, as well as to
simplify the great principles he was perpetually inculcating; and he has
caused those frequent conversations into which he entered with different
individuals during his personal ministry, to be transmitted to succeeding
times for their instruction. We have by this means an opportunity of
witnessing the diversified modes in which truth operates on men; we see
the various workings of the passions, the progress of conviction, the
development of character, and the designs of Infinite Mercy. The sublimest
doctrines and the finest precepts are taught by example; and we are shown
what they _are_, by seeing what they _accomplish_. The sacred history
introduces us to persons of like passions with ourselves, and, by its
interesting details, gives us a participation of their hopes and fears,
their joys and sorrows, their difficulties and their successes. We are not
introduced into the school of Socrates, the academy of Plato, or the
Lyceum of Aristotle, where some wise maxims were undoubtedly dictated to
the respective admirers of these eminent men; but we are conducted from
the region of abstractions to real life. Christianity is taught, by
showing us, Christians--humility by holding up to view the
humble--repentance by exhibiting the penitent--charity by pointing out the
benevolent--faith by displaying, as in the narrative before us, the
true believer.
The case was this. Jesus went into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, where,
having entered into a house, he intimated his wish for privacy and
concealment, "but he could not be hid;" upon which an ingenious writer [32]
observes: "I think I see three principal reasons for the conduct of our
Saviour; 'He would have no man know it.' Why? because he would fulfil the
prophecy--explain his own character--and leave us an example of virtue.
Once, 'when great multitudes followed him and he healed them all, he
charged them that they should not make him known; that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Behold, my
servant shall not cause his voice to be heard in the streets;' that is, he
shall not affect popularity, nor stoop to use any artifice to make
proselytes. Most likely this was one reason of our Lord's desiring to be
concealed on this occasion. Probably, he intended also to explain his own
character to the family where he was. Jesus was a person of singular
modesty, and a high degree of every virtue that can adorn a man, was a
character of the promised Messiah. It was necessary to give frequent
proofs by his actions of the frame and temper of his heart, and he
discovered the tenderness of a friend to the family where he was, and to
his disciples, who were along with him, just as he had done before, when
there were so many coming and going, that they had no leisure so much as
to eat.' Then 'he said unto his apostles, Come ye yourselves apart into a
desert place, and rest awhile. And they departed into a desert place by
ship privately.' Further, in the case before us we have a fine example of
the conduct proper for men exalted above their fellows. They ought not to
make a public show of themselves, nor to display their abilities in vain
ostentation. All their abilities should scent of piety and the fear of
God. The apostle Paul reproved the Corinthians for abusing extraordinary
gifts to make the people think them _prophets_ and _spiritual_ persons,
while they ought to have applied them to the 'edifying of the church.'
'God,' adds this apostle, 'is not the author of confusion, but of peace.'
For such reasons we suppose our blessed Saviour desired concealment in
this house; and so much right had he to rest after a journey, to refresh
himself with food and sleep, to retire from the malice of his enemies, and
to enjoy all the uninterrupted sweets of privacy, that had not his
presence been indispensably necessary to the relief and happiness of
mankind, one would have wished to have hushed every breath, and to have
banished every foot, lest he should have been disturbed; _but he could
not be hid_."
Having heard of the miracles which Christ performed, for long since his
fame had gone throughout all Syria, a woman of Canaan, a Syrophenician by
birth, and a Greek by religion, [33] repaired to the house with haste,
under the pressure of a severe domestic calamity. Her young daughter had
an unclean spirit, or, as she expressed it, was "grievously vexed with a
devil." There was something peculiarly awful and mysterious in the nature
of this affliction, which was very prevalent in the days of Christ, and is
frequently mentioned by the historians of the New Testament. It does not
appear any longer to afflict mankind, and if the reason be inquired,
perhaps it is that the victorious power of Messiah might he displayed in
the expulsion of evil spirits, by his presence upon the earth.
This Syrophenician woman then was induced to hasten to Jesus, in
consequence of the distressing situation of her poor possessed daughter.
[34] How often has affliction proved the successful messenger of
Providence, when every other failed! It has gone out into the "highways
and hedges," and "compelled them to come in," when no entreaty or
remonstrance could overcome the obduracy of sinners, and thus has
replenished the table of mercy with thankful guests. It cannot be doubted,
that a part of the felicity of glorified spirits in eternity will consist
in tracing the mysterious goodness of God in conducting them through a
variety of painful dispensations in the present world; and it is by no
means improbable, that the very events of life, which once occasioned the
greatest perplexity, and filled the mind with the most overwhelming
anxieties, will hereafter prove the noblest sources of gratitude, and the
strongest incentives to praise. A personal or a relative affliction, which
agonizes the soul by the suddenness of its occurrence, or by its dreadful
nature, which embitters life, distracts the mind, confuses every scheme,
and confounds every hope, has often proved the real, though perhaps
unknown or unacknowledged means of turning the feet of the transgressor
into the way of peace. It has led the wayward mind to reflection, and the
wandering heart to its rest. It has proved the first effectual means of
exciting attention to religion; it has subdued and softened the mind, and
subjected it to divine teachings; and the once untractable rebel has
become tamed into submission, penitence, and obedience. In this manner
affliction is often essentially connected with salvation, and the
apostolic statement pleasingly realized; "Our light affliction, which is
but for a moment, _worketh for us_ a far more exceeding and eternal weight
of glory."
When this poor woman came to Jesus, she fell at his feet, explained her
situation, and earnestly entreated his kind interposal. Disregarding every
spectator, waiting for no formal introduction, and convinced of his mighty
power, she rushed into his presence, and with all the vehemence of
maternal agony, urged her suit.
Her conduct evinced great _humility_. She not only assumed the attitude,
but felt the spirit of a suppliant. It does not appear that the external
appearance of Jesus was in any respect remarkable, for on some occasions
where he was unknown, he was equally unnoticed. When he sat over against
the treasury observing the poor widow, he attracted no particular
attention--when he visited the sick and dying at the pool of Bethesda, he
was not at first recognized as any extraordinary personage, and the
prophet intimates that he possessed "no form nor comeliness: but his
visage was marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of
men." It was before the majesty of his character this Syrophenician woman
bowed with holy reverence and humble admiration. Conscious of having no
claim upon his notice, but such as her affliction conferred--and this
indeed was to him, who "went about doing good," no insignificant
recommendation--and overawed by a deep sense both of her own unworthiness,
and his greatness and goodness, she "fell at his feet." O, that with
genuine prostration of spirit, we always presented ourselves before the
Lord! This is essential to success in all our applications to the "throne
of grace." Divested of this quality, our best services will prove but
religious mockery and useless parade; for "God resisteth the proud, but
giveth grace unto the humble."
The language of this woman is highly impassioned, and indicative of
extreme _earnestness_. She besought "him that he would cast forth the
devil out of her daughter;" she "cried out," like one overwhelmed with
grief, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David!" The case is
completely her own. The precious life for which she pleads is dear as her
own existence. But who can realize, or what language can express her
feelings? The affectionate mother alone, who has watched over the sick or
dying bed of a languishing daughter, or the agonized parent who has seen
some mighty and incurable disorder befall his child--some member
withered--some essential faculty enfeebled or destroyed--perhaps reason
distracted; can imagine the emotions of that moment when the woman
exclaimed, "Have mercy on _me_!!" What reason have we to be grateful for
domestic health, while many are afflicted by the severest trials!
We have here a remarkable specimen of _faith_. When, the father of the
young man who had a dumb spirit brought him to Jesus, "_If_," said he,
after describing his case, "_if_ thou _canst_ do any thing, have
compassion on us, and help us." This was an implication deregatory to the
glory, and disparaging to the power of the Son of God. It implied at least
a doubt of his capacity to afford the requisite assistance, and
consequently occasioned the remonstrance; "If thou _canst believe_, all
things are possible to him that believeth." _q.d._ "The question is not
whether I possess power, but whether you can exercise faith. Nothing
obstructs my benevolent exertion but human infidelity. This, and this
only, is the great barrier, the insurmountable impediment to the more
universal display of my character, and the multiplication of my wonderful
works" This woman, however, expressed no suspicion, intimated no doubt;
but, with unhesitating confidence, addressed him as the "Lord, the Son
of David."
"O blessed Syrophenician, who taught thee this abstract of divinity? What
can we Christians confess more than the Deity, the humanity, and the
Messiahship of our glorious Saviour? His Deity as Lord, his humanity as a
son, his Messiahship as the son of David. Of all the famous progenitors of
Christ, two are singled out by way of eminence, David and Abraham, a king
and a patriarch; and though the patriarch was first in time, yet the king
is first in place; not so much for the dignity of his person, as the
excellence of the promise, which, as it was both later and fresher in
memory, so more honorable. To Abraham was promised multitude and blessing
of seed, to David perpetuity of dominion. So as, when God promiseth not to
destroy his people, it is for Abraham's sake; when not to extinguish the
kingdom, it is for David's sake. Had she said, 'the Son of Abraham,' she
had not come home to this acknowledgment. Abraham is the father of the
faithful, David of the kings of Judea and Israel; there are many faithful,
there is but one king; so as in this title she doth proclaim him the
perpetual king of his church, the rod or flower which should come from the
root of Jesse, the true and only Saviour of the world. Whoso shall come
unto Christ to purpose, must come in the right style; apprehending a true
God, a true man, a true God and man: any of these severed from other,
makes Christ an idol, and our prayers sin." [35]
The disadvantageous circumstances of this woman illustrate the
_superiority_ of her faith. There is no evidence of her having seen the
Saviour before, much less of her having been a witness of his miraculous
works. She had only heard the report of them in her distant residence, and
yet, under the guidance of that Spirit who wrought conviction in her mind,
hastened to cast herself at his feet. Hers was the blessedness of those
who have "not seen, and yet have believed." What a fine contrast do her
faith and zeal exhibit to the conduct of the Scribes and Pharisees of the
Jewish nation, who in defiance of evidence, of signs and wonders daily
performed before their eyes, persisted not only in rejecting Christ as the
Messiah, but in plotting against his life. She beheld the rising
brightness of the Sun of Righteousness, and was attracted by his glory,
though at a distance; whilst they who were near shut their eyes against
his heavenly light. She was, therefore, not only distinguished from her
fellow-countrywomen, but from the mass of the Jewish people, who
voluntarily forfeited their noblest privileges; and, under the influence
of the basest prejudice, eventually completed the long train of their
iniquities in rejecting and stoning the prophets, by crucifying the Son
of God.
Happy would it be for the best interests of mankind, did the annals of
succeeding ages present no other specimens of the same infatuation! But,
alas! similar follies are reacted every day. Amidst the most favourable
circumstances for spiritual improvement, what awful degeneracy of
character exists! Multitudes who have enjoyed the best means, who have
been religiously educated, repeatedly admonished, and carefully
superintended; who have been taught the holy Scriptures from their
youth--who have been led to the house of God, and had "line upon line, and
precept upon precept"--on whose behalf a thousand supplications have been
presented to heaven, and over whom ten thousand thousand tears have been
shed--have continued to manifest an aversion against the claims of truth,
and the disobedience of spirit to the commands of Christ. Like the barren
fig-tree, they have remained unproductive of any good fruits,
notwithstanding unusual cultivation; and have been unsightly as well as
useless "cumberers of the ground;"--on the other hand, some whose early
habits and irreligious connections were singularly unfavorable to piety,
have nevertheless been "brought out of darkness into marvellous light" Our
privileges enhance our responsibility: let us, therefore, anxiously avoid
the misconduct of the Jews, and beware lest those who have fewer means of
improvement, advance, through a better use of them, to higher degrees of
spiritual attainment and excellence.
The humility, the earnestness, and the faith we have been contemplating,
it is natural to expect, met with a welcome reception. It is true that
mankind often repay confidence with coldness, and shut the hand and the
heart against the most importunate entreaties. It is true there are wolves
in sheep's clothing, monsters in human form, who aggravate by unkindness
the wounds which Providence has inflicted, and who tear and devour as
their prey those whom they should supply as their pensioners; but Jesus
was "the _Lamb_ of God"--he was "touched with the feeling of our
infirmities"--he "went about doing good"--he pronounced blessings on "the
merciful"--he was no stranger to personal suffering--it was his nature to
sympathize--his element to relieve--the grand predicted feature of his
gentle character, that he should "come down like rain upon the mown
grass," and should "_spare_ the poor and needy." Who can express the
tenderness of that spirit which cherished "pity for us in our low estate"
while surrounded by the glories of his Father's throne, and charmed with
the harps of heaven, voluntarily descending into this vale of affliction
to dry up the tears that flow so copiously from the mourner's eye! We are
prepared then, to witness the overflowings of tenderness in his reception
of this afflicted mother! But, lo! "he answered her not a word."
Mysterious silence! And what were thy feelings, O thou agonized stranger,
in these moments of sad suspense? And what explanation can be offered for
this extraordinary conduct? Had she escaped his notice amidst the crowd?
Had she fallen unobserved at his feet? Did he not then hear that piercing
cry--that powerful appeal--that humble entreaty--those words of agony and
of faith?--Yes--but he "answered her _not_ A WORD!"
This is not, indeed, a solitary instance. When the adulterous transgressor
was brought into his presence by the Scribes and Pharisees, Jesus "stooped
down, and with his finger wrote on the ground as though he heard them
not;" but this was to disappoint their malice, whose sole purpose was to
obtain some materials for his accusation. When he was attacked by
reiterated calumnies in the presence of Pilate, "he answered nothing;"
because he would manifest a holy indignation against their unreasonable
and exasperating conduct. The railing of the impenitent malefactor, who
was his fellow-sufferer on the cross, could provoke no reply; although
this dignified reserve was instantly changed into language of gracious
promise, when the other entreated his mercy. He could not remain a moment
inattentive to the penitent's petition, and far exceeded his desires; for
he requested only a place in his _memory_, but he gave him a place in his
_kingdom_. Delightful pledge, that "he will do for us exceeding abundantly
above all we ask or think."
If we were unable to discover any satisfactory reason for his silence,
when in the most supplicating attitude and with the profoundest humility
the Syrophenician woman besought him to restore her daughter, it would he
the height of imprudence to impeach his benevolence. His general conduct,
the kindness of all his other actions, the gentleness of his words, the
universal benignity of his deportment, would forbid our imputing this
apparent deviation from his general goodness to any other than some latent
cause, which it might not have been necessary or proper to disclose, or
the statement of which the brevity of the inspired narrative precluded.
But too frequently we misjudge, and even murmur against the divine
proceedings, because our limited capacities cannot trace their ultimate
design, or even their present connections and combinations. With a
characteristic presumption we act as if we expected that the plans of
Heaven ought to be submitted to our inspection, or stopped in their
progress to await our approval; whereas it is neither proper nor possible
to disclose to us more than "parts of his ways!"
Many reasons, however, might be assigned for this remarkable silence. The
principal one was probably the purpose of proving her character, and
encouraging a perseverance, which from the strength of her faith he knew
would be the result, and which would eventually illustrate both her
character and his own. How many, had they even advanced to this point of
submission, would have withdrawn in disgust, and misrepresented the
conduct they could not comprehend! But she is not offended at this
seeming neglect. She does not exclaim, with the sarcastic vehemence of
disappointed hope, "Is this Son of David--the wonder-worker of Israel--the
meek, the compassionate, the condescending person of whom we have heard
such extraordinary reports?--Am I to be neglected while others are
relieved?"--but patiently waits the result, still persevering in her suit.
"O woman, great is thy faith!" Of this we may be fully assured on every
occasion of supplicating the throne of mercy, that if the "cry of the
humble" he deferred, it is not "forgotten," and that the trials to which
we are exposed always bear a well-adjusted proportion both to the
necessity of the case and to our capacity of endurance.
In this interval the disciples interceded for her dismission with the
answer she requested. They pleaded her vehement importunity; and, as
Christ had expressed a wish for concealment, they probably supposed her
cries would excite an unwelcome degree of popular observation. To this he
answered, "I am not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
As this was said in the hearing of this distressed woman, it was not only
calculated to silence the disciples, but to discourage the suppliant. A
mere inattention to her urgent plea might have been imputed to some deep
abstraction of mind, which we know sometimes renders a person in the full
exercise of his faculties as indifferent and insensible to external
objects or sounds as if he were in a profound sleep; or he might have been
supposed to be occupied in meditating upon the woman's distress, and
devising means to afford her an effectual and speedy assistance: but his
language is an argument to justify his disregard, rather than to solicit
time for consideration. His commission was to Israel; he was a "minister
of the circumcision;" and that period was not yet arrived when "the
Gentiles were to be brought to his light, and kings to the brightness of
his rising." That favoured people, who were for so many ages distinguished
by celestial visitations, were destined notwithstanding their ingratitude,
to receive the first communications of the Son of God. Amongst them he
came to labour, to preach, and to die!
The solicitude of the disciples on this occasion was highly laudable. It
becomes the fellow-members of the great mystical body to sympathize with
each other. By this we fulfil the law of nature, but especially "the law
of Christ:" and in nothing can this sentiment be better expressed than in
fervent available prayers. "As the body is one, and hath many members, and
all the members of that one body, being many, are one body; so also is
Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be
Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to
drink into one Spirit.... And whether one member suffer, all the members
suffer with it, or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with
it. Now ye are the body of Christ and members in particular."
Driven perhaps to the very borders of despondency, and yet unwilling to
relinquish every hope, this agonizing mother again rushed forward,
prostrated herself at the Saviour's feet, and with impetuous zeal
earnestly cried out, "Lord, help me!" She seemed reduced to the last
extremity; and yet, like Esther, who resolved to go in to the king,
whether she perished or not, and like Jonah, tossing about amongst the
waves of the ocean, determining "to look again towards the holy temple of
Jehovah," she ventured to renew her application, and in language implying
her conviction of his ability, and a glimmering hope of his willingness,
she does not merely say, "Lord, deign some answer--even if it be a
refusal," but "Lord, _help_ me!" She was vigorous in faith. She "laid hold
of the horns of the altar"--she "cleaved to the Lord with full purpose of
heart." Reader, what shall we say?--"Go thou and do likewise."
Her entreaties obtain an answer, Jesus turns to address the suppliant. He
is no longer deaf to her petitions or blind to her tears. Her throbbing
heart beats with unutterable emotion, and at that glad moment she is all
ear to the long-sought reply. "Who now can expect other than a fair and
yielding answer to so humble, so faithful, so patient a suppliant? What
can speed well, if a prayer of faith from the knees of humility succeeds
not? And yet behold, the further she goes the worse she fares: her
discouragement is doubled with her suit. 'It is not meet to take the
children's bread and to cast it to dogs.' First, his silence implied a
contempt, then his answer defended his silence; now his speech expresses
and defends his contempt. Lo, he hath turned her from a woman to a dog,
and, as it were, spurns her from his feet with a harsh repulse. What shall
we say?--Is the Lamb of God turned lion? Doth that clear fountain of mercy
run blood? O Saviour, did ever so hard a word fall from those mild lips?
Thou calledst Herod fox--most worthily, he was crafty and wicked; the
Scribes and Pharisees a generation of vipers, they were venomous and
cruel; Judas a devil, he was both covetous and treacherous. But here was a
woman in distress, and distress challenges mercy; a good woman, a faithful
suppliant, a Canaanitish disciple, a Christian Canaanite, yet rated and
whipped out for a dog by thee who wert all goodness and mercy! How
different are thy ways from ours! Even thy severity argues favour. The
trial had not been so sharp if thou hadst not found the faith so strong,
if thou hadst not meant the issue so happy. Thou hadst not driven her away
as a dog, if thou hadst not intended to admit her for a saint; and to
advance her so much for a pattern of faith, as thou depressedst her for a
spectacle of contempt." [36]
In nothing is the preposterous arrogance of mankind more apparent than in
the violence of their national antipathies. Did not the history of all
ages and countries furnish an ample catalogue of opprobrious epithets,
which they have not scrupled to bestow upon each other, we might wonder
that the Jews should have accustomed themselves to speak so contemptuously
of others as to call them _dogs_. Owing to the natural propensity of human
nature to villify and degrade, the vocabularies of all languages have been
swelled with such odious terms; and till the principles of the Gospel have
been universally disseminated, we cannot indulge the hope of seeing the
animosities of mankind removed. Then only will they love their neighbours
as themselves. It is to be most deeply lamented, that even where
Christianity has taken root in the mind, this unholy leaven does not seem
to be entirely purged away; and mutual jealousies, bickerings, and
recriminations exist, where love should be the ruling principle and bond
of union. O, when will the reign of perfect charity, that "thinketh no
evil," commence! When will "the whole earth be filled with the _glory of
the Lord_!" When will men of every rank and class associate as Christians,
and Christians of every order unite as brethren!
The term _dog_ in the mouth of our Saviour, and as applied to this
distressed supplicant, must not, however, be considered as used in
conformity to the vulgar prejudices of his countrymen, but for the double
purpose of a sarcastic allusion to the unreasonableness of their degrading
views of others, who were Gentiles by birth, and to try still further a
faith which he knew would endure the test, and display this persevering
woman to the greatest advantage. Jesus Christ must necessarily, in point
of personal feeling, have been infinitely superior to all those unworthy
littlenesses which were conspicuous in the multitude around him; and as he
was acting for the moment, to answer an important purpose, in an assumed
character, we cannot be surprised that he should personate a Jew elated
with self-conscious superiority, by saying, "it is not meet to take the
children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." We are reminded of Joseph, an
eminent antitype of Christ, who, though he knew his brethren, and was
overflowing with fraternal tenderness, "made himself strange unto them,
and spake roughly unto them;" and we are led to reflect also on the
impenetrable darkness which, to the human eye, sometimes envelopes the
dispensations of Heaven; when, as a pious poet represents it,
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.
The woman at once acknowledges the charge, but instantly extracts an
argument from her very discouragements. "Truth, Lord--the dogs ought not
to be fed with the supply designed for the children. I own the general
fact, and humbly submit to the painful but obvious application. It is not
from any conviction of meriting thy interposing mercy, that I have
ventured to solicit it, and to reiterate my plea. I am indeed a sinner--a
Gentile--a dog. 'And yet,'if I may pursue the allusion, 'the dogs eat of
the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.' One act of kindness I
entreat amidst thy boundless liberalities--one word of consolation from
thy lips, which drop as the honey and the honeycomb--one, only one supply
from thine inexhaustible plenitude of grace and power--one fragment from
the table!"
It is done!--Joseph unveils himself! Jesus reassumes his proper character!
The stern air and attitude of repulsion is dismissed--he smiles with
ineffable affection--commends her faith, and with commanding authority
bestows the wished-for blessing; and though at so great distance, expels
the demon from the afflicted daughter. "Then Jesus answered and said unto
her, O woman, great is thy faith; he it unto thee even as thou wilt. And
her daughter was made whole from that very hour."
Such was the result of persevering _importunity_, which must ever
characterize successful prayer, and will necessarily spring from a genuine
and deep-rooted faith. We have been contemplating one of the finest
specimens of it that ever occurred in the world; and we are solemnly
exhorted to the practice of it in the introductory passage to one of our
Lord's parables--"Men ought always to pray, and not to faint."
Sometimes people are under the influence of very needless discouragements.
They "grow weary and faint in their minds," because they do not meet with
_immediate_ success; though this consideration constitutes no essential
part of the divine promises, would in many cases be injurious to our best
interests, and is by no means characteristic of some of the most
remarkable examples of successful prayer. At other times impatience arises
from observing that "the Father of lights," to whose wisdom it becomes us
to refer every petition, does not answer our requests in the _manner_
which we had anticipated, and, perhaps, dared presumptuously to prescribe.
But while in this, or in any other way, we approach God in the spirit of
dictation, rather than of faith and submission, we virtually renounce the
blessing even whilst we solicit it. From the history of the Syrophenician
woman we may learn, that our applications for mercy must be sincere,
fervent, and incessant. Whatever delays may occur, it is our happiness to
be assured that the ear of Infinite Goodness is always open; "the throne
of grace," to which we may approach "boldly," is always accessible. The
petitions of faith cannot escape the notice, or be obliterated from the
memory, of him to whom they are presented, but will prove ultimately
effectual; and, as prayer is the appointed means of divine communication,
it is _necessary_ to obtain the blessings of Heaven. "Whosoever _asketh_,
receiveth."
The value of the mercies we are required to seek is such as ought to
excite our utmost importunity. If the Syrophenician woman were so eager
and so persevering in order to obtain a temporal blessing, surely it
becomes us to manifest at least an equal zeal for spiritual good. She
entreated the cure of her possessed daughter; we are assured that "ALL
things whatsoever we ask in prayer, believing, we shall receive." At the
voice of prayer the treasures of grace are unlocked, the windows of heaven
opened, the riches of eternity dispensed. The language of _petition_
ascends above the language of _praise_, and is heard amidst the songs of
angels. "O thou that hearest _prayer_, unto thee shall all flesh come."
The interesting consideration, that this woman was a _Canaanite_, ought
not to be overlooked. This people was particularly denounced by Noah in
the person of their guilty progenitor, and in the following terms: "Cursed
be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." The
descendants of Canaan, that is, primarily of Ham, were remarkably wicked
and idolatrous. "Their religion," as bishop Newton observes, "was bad, and
their morality, if possible, worse; for corrupt religion and corrupt
morals usually generate each other, and go hand in hand together." Some
centuries after their predicted subjugation to the yoke of Shem and
Japheth, the Israelites, under the command of Joshua, smote thirty of
their kings, and Solomon made such as were not before extirpated or
enslaved his tributaries. The Greeks and Romans afterward subdued Syria
and Palestine, and conquered the Tyrians and Carthaginians. Subsequently
to this period, the Saracens, and finally the Turks, fastened upon them
the iron yoke of servitude.
Behold, then, from among the accursed Canaanites, a woman outstrips in
zeal and faith thousands, and tens of thousands, who were her superiors in
birth and privilege; and Jesus withholds not his blessing from this
insignificant Gentile! What an encouragement to the meanest, the
obscurest, and the most unworthy, to apply with instant haste to this
Almighty Saviour! His free and abundant salvation is dispensed to
penitents irrespectively of national distinctions or individual demerit;
and, instead of its being derogatory to his dignity to condescend to
persons of low estate, he chose to publish his Gospel to the poor, and to
"save the children of the needy." "His blood cleanseth from _all_ sin." He
came "not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." We have
here a specimen and pledge of the influence of Christ and his salvation.
He is become the centre of universal attraction, the powerful magnet of
the world, pervading by his influence the moral creation, and gradually
drawing all into himself. The designs of mercy were now enlarging, the
scale of its operations extending, and the ancient lines of demarcation
between Jew and Gentile were overstepped by the zeal of the Lord of Hosts.
In the person of this Canaanite we witness the first "lively stone"
brought from the Gentile quarry, and placed on the chief corner-stone of
the great spiritual edifice of the Christian church. "They shall come,"
said our Saviour, "from the east and from the west, from the north and
from the south."
The present condition of the Jews forms an awful contrast, to those clays
of boasted pre-eminence, How are they, who once regarded all other nations
as dogs, become contemptible in consequence of their treatment of the Son
of God, while the cordial reception given him by many Gentile nations has
elevated them into the dignity of children! For nearly eighteen centuries
the once honored people of the Jews have been dispersed in every direction
upon the surface of the globe. They furnish an example of one of these
dreadful recriminations of Providence which have sometimes been inflicted
on atrocious sinners in their collective and national capacities. Never
did the universe before witness so astonishing a spectacle, as a nation
destroyed as a nation, but preserved as individuals--preserved to suffer,
and to be accounted the offscouring of all things. At this moment they are
destitute of a temple, a priest, a sacrifice, a country, and a king. The
temporal dominion of their rulers and the succession of their priests have
ceased since the destruction of Jerusalem. No oblations and sacrifices
now exist. The fire burns no longer on the holy altar--the incense ascends
no more from the demolished temple--the flood of ages has swept away the
sacred edifices, and Desolation sits enthroned upon their ruins. The house
of Israel is, in consequence of the rejection of Christ, become a
spectacle to angels and to men--a melancholy monument of wo, on which the
hand of recriminating justice has inscribed in legible characters a
condemnatory sentence, which is read with silent awe by the inhabitants of
heaven, and by every king, and people, and nation of the globe.--But the
period of Jewish dispersion is hasting to its close. Party names and
ancient prejudices shall soon disappear, and mankind of every class and
country be eternally united in one blessed fraternity. "And it shall come
to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second
time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from
Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam,
and from Shinah, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And he
shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of
Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners
of the earth. The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries
of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall
not vex Ephraim."--"Other sheep," said Christ, "I have, which are not of
this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice: and there
shall be one fold and one shepherd,"
Martha and Mary.
Chapter VII.
Bethany distinguished as the Residence of a pious Family, which
consisted of Lazarus and his two Sisters--their diversity of
Character--the Faults of Martha, domestic Vanity and fretfulness of
Temper--her counterbalancing Excellences--Mary's Choice and Christ's
Commendation--Decease of Lazarus--his Restoration to Life at the Voice
of Jesus--Remarks on Death being inflicted upon the People of God as
well as others--the Triumph which Christianity affords over this
terrible Evil--Account of Mary's anointing the Feet of Jesus, and his
Vindication of her Conduct.
Almost every spot in the vicinity of Jerusalem may be regarded as "holy
ground." The enraptured imagination cannot traverse this district without
recalling the many wonderful transactions that occurred there in different
periods of the Jewish history, but especially during the personal
residence of the Son of God upon the earth. Within the small circumference
of a few miles round the city, what a multitude of great events have taken
place! What miracles have been wrought! What mercies have been
distributed! What doctrines have been revealed! What characters have
appeared! What a development has been made of human nature! What a
surprising display of the perfections of the blessed God! What an
exhibition of the love of the incarnate Redeemer! Who, then, can think
without emotion, of Bethlehem--of Bethpage--of Bethany--of Mount
Olivet--of the brook Kedron--of Emmaus--and of Calvary?
Excepting only that mountain where Jesus "suffered, the just for the
unjust, that he might bring us to God," and where "once in the end of the
world" he "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself," the village of
Bethany may, perhaps, be considered as the most interesting point in this
all-attractive scene. It is situated at the foot of the Mount of Olives,
on the way to Jericho. To this neighborhood the Son of God frequently
retired for meditation and prayer; thence he began to ride in triumph to
Jerusalem; thither he repaired after eating the last supper with his
disciples, and there they witnessed his ascending glory and heard his last
benediction--for "he led them out as far as to Bethany; and he lifted up
his hands and blessed them. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he
was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. And they worshipped him,
and returned to Jerusalem with great joy; and were continually in the
temple, praising and blessing God."
Bethany, however, claims our present attention chiefly as being the
residence of one of the "households of faith," with whom our Saviour was
particularly intimate, and with whose history some remarkable
circumstances are connected. It was a small but happy family, consisting
of only three members, Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. The two sisters, though
united by the ties of nature, and the still dearer bond of grace, were
distinguished by a considerable dissimilarity of character, which will
furnish us with some instruction. While charmed into an effort to imitate
remarkable persons by a description of their excellences, it is of great
importance to notice their defects, not only for the purpose of avoiding
them, but that we may not be overawed into despondency and paralyzed into
inaction by their superiority. Biography, to be useful, must be brought to
our level, capacities, and circumstances. We must see excellence that is
_attainable_, and view the same infirmities which are incident to our
nature, acting in our sphere, and struggling with perplexities,
resistance, vicissitude, and trial, similar to what we ourselves
experience. The appeal is powerful when we are called upon to be
"followers of them who," though circumstanced as we are, "through faith
and patience inherit the promises."
"Once they were mourners here below.
And wet their couch with tears;
They wrestled hard, as we do now,
With sins, and doubts, and fears."
A history of angels might, indeed, excite our admiration, but would
conduce less to our real improvement than a history of our
fellow-creatures. We wish to witness the actions, and to be admitted into
the secret feelings, of those who, whatever elevation they may have since
obtained, were once in the same probationary state with ourselves, and
subjected to the same course of moral discipline. In this view it is
desirable to be introduced into the privacies of domestic life. It is in
the family and at the fireside we all occupy some station, and have some
appropriate duties to discharge; and on this account the narrative before
us is pre-eminently attractive. We are led to the native village--the
chosen residence--the family--the fireside--the _home_--of Martha and
Mary. We see them in all the undisguised reality of private life, and
participate at once their pleasures and their pains. We join the social
circle. We hear the Saviour conversing with them. We see them in
affliction--the common lot, the patrimony to which are all born--and
while we participate their sorrows, learn to sustain and profit by
our own.
In vain, to the great purposes of spiritual improvement, do we read the
lives of statesmen, heroes princes, philosophers, poets, orators, and the
mighty dead that emblazon the historic page. They excite our
astonishment, and perhaps our pity, and some moral lessons may be gained
from their reverses or the varieties of their characters; but the most
useful history is the history of religion--religion in the village, and in
the family--religion as exhibited at Bethany, in the house of Martha
and Mary.
It is a pleasing peculiarity of this household, that they were _all_ the
devoted disciples of Jesus Christ. Lazarus appears to have been a solid,
established professor of religion, and of the two sisters it is recorded,
they "sat at Jesus's feet." We do not hear of another disciple in the
whole village, and all Judea could furnish but few, if any, similar
instances of three in a single dwelling; three solitary lights amidst
surrounding darkness; three flowers expanding to the newly risen Sun of
Righteousness, and blooming in a desolate wilderness. The dispensations of
providence and of grace are sometimes mysterious to the human eye, and we
feel disposed to inquire into the reasons why so few were touched by
divine influences, and bidden to follow Christ during his incarnation?
Could not that same commanding authority which drew twelve apostles and
seventy disciples into his train, and that same power which kindled the
lamp of truth in one village or city, and left another in moral darkness,
have filled Judea and the world with the glory of the Lord? Could not that
energy which pervades the universe, and imparts such inconceivable
fleetness to the morning beam when it irradiates the earth, have spread
the knowledge of salvation with equal rapidity, and multiplied the
disciples like the drops of dew?--Undoubtedly. No limits can be assigned
to divine efficiency; but in the present state no explanations are
afforded of the secret principles of his eternal government. Curiosity may
often be disposed to inquire, with one of the hearers of Christ, "Lord,
are there few that shall be saved?" But Scripture checks such
investigations, and admonishes us rather to cherish an availing solicitude
for our personal salvation: "Strive to enter in at the strait gate."
The state even of the civilized world at this day is truly deplorable.
Although whole nations profess the Christian faith, yet every city, every
village, and almost every hamlet, contains families in which there is not
a single disciple of Jesus. The sun rises and sets upon a prayerless roof.
No altar is erected to God--no love exists to the Saviour--nothing to
attract his attachment or to furnish a subject for angelic joy--no
repentance--no faith--and none of "the peace of God which passeth all
understanding." Whatever may be the temporal circumstances of such
families, Christian benevolence cannot avoid weeping over their spiritual
condition. In many cases, the society admitted into their houses is of a
most pernicious class. Uninfluenced by the sentiments of David, who said,
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee," the friendships they form
are but too plainly indicative of their own principles. You will not see
them, like Martha and Mary, choosing the excellent of the earth, and
welcoming Christ or his disciples to their tables, to share their
comforts, to refine and improve their intercourse; but if they occupy a
high station in life, the gay, the dissipated, or the thoughtless--if in
an inferior situation, the vulgar, the sordid, the intemperate, and the
profane, frequent their dwellings. Religion is in both cases too often
treated with ridicule and contempt, vilified as mean-spirited in its
principle, and enthusiastic in its pretensions; and the truth of the
Gospel treated, as its Author was when upon earth, and would be were he
still incarnate, with contemptuous rejection.
Some pleasing exceptions may be found to these observations. In many
families exist at least _one_ example of genuine piety--an Abijah in the
impious family of a Jeroboam. There is reason to congratulate young
persons especially who dare to be singular, to incur reproach, and to
dismiss prejudices. The conquest in such instances is proportionably
honorable as the propensity in human nature is powerful to follow a
multitude to do evil. Such holy daring possesses great attractions, and
the most beneficial consequences have been known to result. The child has
become instrumental to the conversion of the parent, the parent to that of
the child; the brother has proved a blessing to the sister, the wife to
her husband: "for what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shall save thy
husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shall save thy wife?" In
other instances the sword of division is sharpened, and the discordances
already existing become more settled, more irreconcileable, and more
violent. The natural mind betrays its malignant animosity against the
spiritual principle, "and he that is born after the flesh persecutes him
that is born after the Spirit." But here the whole family was of "one
heart and of one soul." Religion was the law of the family, and the bond
of delightful union. They were possessed of one spirit; and, as Bishop
Hall observes, "jointly agreed to entertain Christ."
Can it be doubted, that the favored dwelling of Martha and Mary contained
a very large portion of domestic felicity--a felicity founded on the
noblest basis, cemented by the tenderest affection, and stamped with an
immortal character? The religion of Jesus is indeed calculated to diffuse
real happiness wherever it prevails; although, as we have intimated, it
may become the _occasion_ of discord in consequence of the perverseness
of human nature. Sin has disordered the mental and moral constitution of
man, and thrown the world into a state of anarchy. The unbridled dominion
of the passions disturbs the peace of the individual, and the harmony of
society. Sin makes a man at variance with himself, with his neighbors,
with his nearest connections, and with the whole constitution of the
universe. He becomes restless as the ocean, impelled by every contrary
wind, and tost about by every sportive billow. The desire of happiness
exists, but he is ignorant how to obtain it, and pursues those means which
only plunge him into greater misery. To this cause may be attributed all
the mental distresses and all the bodily afflictions of individuals--the
disturbances which too often prevent domestic enjoyment--the bickerings
and jealousies of families with their various alliances--the animosities
that annoy social life--the intestine broils, ambitious emulations, and
endless contentions, that distract a state, with every other form and mode
of evil. Hence the importance of promoting that kingdom which is
"righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost;" the basis of which
is the truth which Christ came into the world to propagate. It is this,
and this only, which renders mankind happy in every connection. It will
harmonize and felicitate to whatever extent it is diffused. It will allay
the discord of families, pacify the turbulence of nations, and silence the
din of war. There will be "great joy" in the heart, in the family, in the
city, and in the world. Under this influence "the wolf shall dwell with
the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf, and
the young lion, and the fattling together, and a little child shall lead
them.... They shall not hurt nor destroy in all God's holy mountain."
One, however, as Martha and Mary were in principle, they differed in
character. When our Saviour first entered the house, it appears that they
both welcomed him, and listened for a time to his instructions. He was in
no haste for any refreshment, but eagerly improved every moment to benefit
his beloved friends. It was his meat and drink to do the Father's will,
and no kindness could afford him such satisfaction as a devout attention
to his words. It was, in fact, less to receive than to communicate that he
turned aside on his journey to visit these happy sisters. But if, at
first, they both attended to the "gracious words that proceeded out of his
mouth," Martha, anxious to furnish a suitable repast for their guest,
withdrew to make what she deemed the necessary preparations. Mary
continued riveted to the spot by a conversation which she could on no
terms relinquish. She would not lose a word. Every faculty was absorbed in
attention. Her eldest sister busied herself for sometime with her
preparations, till at length becoming impatient, she hastily demanded of
Jesus to send Mary to her assistance. This intrusion incurred the
memorable censure, "Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about
many things, but one thing is needful; and Mary hath chosen that good part
which shall not be taken away from her."
The defective points of Martha's character seem to have been two. The
first of these was domestic vanity and parade. Upon the arrival of her
divine guest she is "cumbered about much serving," anxious not only to
show a becoming hospitality, but to provide a great entertainment. In this
she betrayed a false estimate of our Saviour's spirit. He who willingly
submitted to every deprivation during his earthly career--who suffered
hunger, and thirst, and peril, and wretchedness, in every form, although
he could have commanded ten legions of angels to guard his life, or to
supply his necessities, could not have felt a moment's anxiety respecting
the abundance or the quality of the provision. This worthy woman not only
knew that he could have turned every stone of the wilderness into bread,
had he wished to pamper his appetite by luxurious living, but she had
surely sufficient opportunities to perceive his disposition, and the
perfect exemption of his mind from any kind of concern about his own
accommodation. Her anxiety was therefore mistaken in its object, as well
as excessive in its degree. And while remarking upon this subject, O that
we could impress upon all the ministers of his word the necessity of
imitating the conduct of their Master! It becomes them, as his avowed
disciples, and as persons who are perpetually exhorting others to
self-denial and courteousness, to manifest no care about their own
convenience, to give as little trouble as possible to those who, for the
sake of their office and their Master, treat tthemwith kind hospitality,
and to receive even a cup of cold water in a spirit corresponding to that
in which humble piety bestows it.
While thus betraying a false estimate of Christ, Martha's principal fault
becomes glaringly conspicuous. She is full of bustle, full of eagerness.
Her servants were, probably, dispatched in every direction to prepare a
sumptuous meal. Every thing must be in order; every dish in place. The
food, the arrangement, the preparation of every description, she was
probably solicitous should do her credit, as well as display the undoubted
affection which she cherished for her Lord. Who can tell what she lost by
her excessive care! He, "in whom dwelt all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge," was, during all this time, conversing with her sister; and
would have freely communicated the same instructions to her, had not she
precluded herself by needless anxieties.
But while we wonder at this voluntary sacrifice of spiritual advantages,
advantages too, which, generally speaking, she did not undervalue, let us
ask ourselves whether we have never merited a similar censure, whether we
have not been seduced by our worldly cares into a similar and culpable
remissness in religious duties? Happily, perhaps, like Martha, we love the
Saviour, we avow our attachment, we welcome him in the persons of his
representatives into our families; hut, at the same time, forfeit our
privileges, lose our opportunities, and suffer temporal concerns to
supersede the habitual impression of spiritual realities. Let pious women,
especially, take a lesson from this incident. Martha was by no means an
unique. She represents a very numerous class of female professors. Here is
a glass into which they may look and see a perfect reflection of
themselves; and we trust they will not retire from the salutary exhibition
of their own blemishes, _forgetting_ what manner of persons they are.
Domestic care, like every other, is liable to degenerate into excess.
There are many ladies whose piety excites universal admiration, but who,
from some constitutional proneness or some acquired habit, bestow a
disproportionate, and therefore, on many accounts, highly pernicious
concern upon their household arrangements. We are not the apologists of
uncleanliness or disorder; but it is possible to be over nice and over
anxious: by the former, we may injure the comfort of others, as well as
become burdensome even to ourselves; by the latter, we may soon interfere
with the superior claims of religion. The care of a family cannot
extenuate the guilt of neglecting private devotion or public duties; it
cannot exculpate a neglect of the word or the ordinances of God; and to be
"cumbered about much serving," is not only waste of time, but unfits the
mind for profitable intercourse, and is likely to produce an unhappy
effect upon the disposition.
This leads us to notice the second great defect in Martha, which the
present occasion tended to illustrate. This was fretfulness of temper. Her
language indicates extreme irritation. "Lord, dost thou not care that my
sister hath left me to serve alone? Bid her, therefore, that she help me."
It might be expected, that, overawed by the dignified and holy presence of
the Son of God, this woman would have felt ashamed to show her impatience,
and have been contented to remain silent. But nothing could restrain her.
Something went wrong. There was some mistake, some confusion, or perhaps
some dish out of order. She was bustling about to make preparations upon a
scale which no necessity existed to justify, and she wanted the assistance
of Mary. But Mary was bettor employed. She "sat at Jesus's feet, and heard
his word."
Let pious women beware of that anxiety which generates peevishness. It is
a greater fault than any which servants can commit by mere negligence, to
allow of those intemperate sallies against their misconduct, which, by
degrading their mistresses in their eyes, diminish the good effect a
genuine piety might otherwise produce. It is a weakness to be excessively
rigid about trifles--to be always contending, morose, and dissatisfied.
The particular sphere in which a woman is called to act, seems indeed
beset with temptations to this evil; but this consideration should serve
to awaken care and circumspection. Religion ought to be exemplified in
overcoming the difficulties of our situation, whatever they maybe; and
the more numerous they are, the more honourable the resistance. Private
life is a sphere of useful exertion. Though retired, it is important. If
it be not a field of valour, it is one for patience. If women cannot
obtain the laurels of heroism, they may win the better trophies of general
esteem and domestic attachment.
The animadversions we have thought proper to make upon the faults of
Martha, ought not however to obscure the view of her excellences. Jesus
Christ did not censure her concern, but the excess of it. It was the
unnecessary trouble she took, and as a consequence the extreme impatience
of temper she manifested, that produced this solemn remonstrance, and led
him to contrast her conduct with the silent piety of her sister. We must
still admire her generous hospitality, and her warm affection for Christ,
although her natural temperment and mistaken views betrayed her into an
improper mode of expressing it. She presents a lively contrast to those
who manifest no regard to religion or its ministers, and whose errors
originate not in mistake, but in cherished hostility and inveterate
prejudice. Her Master knew how to appreciate her character: and if he
censured her with a seriousness proportionable to her fault, the rebuke
was attempered with a kindness expressive of his friendship. The historian
distinctly records his personal affection for each member of this happy
family. "Now, Jesus loved Martha and her sister, and Lazarus." Let us
remember, then, that the real followers of Christ have their defects,
defects which perhaps appear the more conspicuous from their association
with such opposite excellences: and let us learn, like our divine Master,
to esteem even imperfect goodness, while we take every suitable
opportunity of affectionately, yet faithfully, correcting its follies.
Reader! pause for a few moments, to reflect upon the important apophthegm
pronounced by Christ upon this occasion, and the benediction upon Mary,
with which it was accompanied: "One thing is needful!" This was virtually
pronouncing religion, which involves a pre-eminent regard to the eternal
interests of the soul, to be supremely important--a principle of holiness,
a source of peace, and a pledge of immortal joy. It is, besides, of
universal concern, and comprehends whatever is essential to the present
and future felicity of a rational creature. "We should judge very ill of
the nature of this care, if we imagined that it consisted merely in acts
of devotion or religious contemplation; it comprehends all the lovely and
harmonious band of social and humane virtues. It requires a care, of
society, a care of our bodies and of our temporal concerns; but then all
is to be regulated, directed, and animated by proper regards to God,
Christ, and immortality. Our food and our rest, our trades and our labors,
are to be attended to; and all the offices of humanity performed in
obedience to the will of God, for the glory of Christ, and in a view to
the improving of the mind in a growing meetness for astate of complete
perfection. Name any thing which has no reference at all to this, and you
name a worthless trifle, however it may be gilded to allure the eye,
however it may be sweetened to gratify the taste. Name a thing, which,
instead of thus improving the soul, has a tendency to debase and pollute,
to enslave and endanger it, and you name what is most unprofitable and
mischievous, be the wages of iniquity ever so great; most foul and
deformed, be it in the eyes of men ever so honorable, or in their customs
ever so fashionable." [37]
How important is it, that we should make a similar choice with that of
Mary! This is obvious from the words of Christ, who represents it as "that
good part which shall not be taken away from her." Genuine piety is
calculated to prevent innumerable evils and sources of misery, by
preventing those indulgences which pollute while they gratify, poisoning
the constitution, impairing the reputation, and displeasing God: and by
elevating the affections to the purity of heaven. It augments incalculably
the pleasure which is derived from the possession of all other good of a
subordinate nature. While it possesses the power of extracting the
distasteful ingredients that imbitter the cup of adversity, it sweetens
the sweetest portion of prosperous life; and such is its prevailing
efficacy, that no changes can possibly deprive us of its consolations. It
shall "not be taken away." How strange, then, is the infatuation of such
as make a different choice, and how unfounded their seasons for such a
guilty preference! However their conduct may be artfully varnished over
with fair pretences, they betray consummate folly. The very foundation of
all their hopes will fail, the specious appearances of the world will
prove deceptive, like the rainbow that stretches its radiant curve over
half the heavens, but vanishes as you approach it into mist and
nothingness, and their condemnation will be no less remarkable than their
ultimate disappointment. O that, with Mary, we may sit at the feet of
Jesus, and by a prompt obedience to his comments "find rest to our souls."
Scarcely have we read of the privileges of the two sisters at Bethany,
when we are introduced to an account of their trials: so closely do
pleasures and pains follow each other in the train of human events! The
fairest fruit is often beset with thorns, the clearest day liable to be
overcast with clouds; and should the morning of life rise in brightness,
and the evening set in serenity, who can reasonably hope that no changes
shall occur in its intermediate hours? Religion indeed promises
consolation amidst afflictions, but not exemption from them: she is the
guardian of our spiritual interests, but not the disposer of our
terrestrial condition. How happily was the previous intercourse of Martha
and Mary with Jesus calculated to prepare them for their more gloomy
visiter, DEATH!
Lazarus, the brother of these excellent women, was taken ill, upon which
they immediately sent to inform their divine Friend of the distressing
circumstance. As soon as he heard it, he remarked to his disciples that
this event would prove the occasion of enhancing his own and his Father's
glory; but notwithstanding the ardent friendship which he cherished for
the family, and which the evangelist particularly notices, [38] he did not
hasten, as it seemed natural he should, to Bethany, but remained where he
was two days longer. It was his intention, doubtless, to prove the faith
of his disciples, to try the spirit of the two sisters, and to furnish an
opportunity of working the miracle with which he afterward astonished the
Jews. After this mysterious delay, he announced his purpose of proceeding
into Judea: upon which his disciples remonstrated with him, representing
the persecuting spirit of the people, which of late had been displayed in
attempts upon his life. To this he answered there were twelve hours in the
day, and consequently it was requisite to use despatch in the performance
of the labour assigned to him who would not stumble in the night, or leave
his work unfinished; and then intimating the departure of their friend
Lazarus, he said, "I go that I may awake him out of sleep." Mistaking his
meaning, and imagining that he had been speaking only of "taking rest," in
natural sleep, the disciples replied, that if this were the case, it was
probable he would soon recover, and therefore it was unnecessary to go to
Bethany. Jesus then said plainly, "Lazarus is _dead_." Seeing the
intrepidity of their Master, the disciples, stimulated by Thomas, resolved
to accompany him into Judea, and encounter every danger to which their
attachment might expose them.
When Jesus had arrived in the vicinity of Bethany, he found that his
beloved friend had been interred four days; and as this village was not
more than two miles from Jerusalem, many of the inhabitants who were
acquainted with the family, were come to condole with them upon their
loss. Martha hastened to meet Jesus, as soon as she heard of his approach;
but Mary, who perhaps was not yet informed of it, continued sitting upon
the ground, in the usual posture of mourners.
Having expressed her surprise at his delay, Martha intimated to Jesus that
she well knew that God would now grant every thing he might see fit to
request, and if he had been present before, the death of her brother might
have been prevented. Compassionating her distress, he replied, "Thy
brother shall rise again;" to which she answered, that she had the fullest
conviction of this fact, as she believed the doctrine of the final
resurrection. Her heart, however, was still overwhelmed with grief at her
present calamitous bereavement; and it was not without extreme reluctance,
that she admitted the idea of never seeing him more till that distant
period. Jesus then gave her the assurance of his being "the resurrection
and the life," and of the mighty power which he as the agent in
accomplishing this work, would display in elevating all his people to the
felicities of another and a better existence; in consequence of which
death ought not to be regarded with terror, but merely as the season of
repose previous to the morning of eternity, which would soon break with
ineffable splendour upon the tomb. Martha declared her full persuasion of
this sublime truth, founded upon her knowledge of him who addressed her as
the true Messiah, the Son of God, to whom all power in heaven and earth
was intrusted.
Upon this, she went by desire of Jesus to call her sister. As she had
communicated the information to Mary in a whisper, her friends who were
present supposed, when she rose up hastily, that she was going to visit
the sepulchre of Lazarus, there to renew her griefs and bewail her
bereavement. As soon as she found Jesus, she prostrated herself at his
feet, and expressed herself in terms similar to those of Martha,
indicative of a conviction that the death of her beloved relative might
have been prevented, if he had but hastened to Bethany upon the news of
his dangerous illness. This afflicting scene excited the deepest concern
in him, who, though he had every passion under the most perfect control,
now chose to indulge and to manifest his tenderness for Lazarus. He
inquired where they had laid him, and, as they conducted him to the spot,
he wept. Remembrance of the dead, sympathy for the living, and pity for
the impenitent Jews, drew forth his tears, which, while they sanction the
grief of his people at the loss of earthly connections, do not justify
its excess.
The spectators, in general, were affected with this testimony of
friendship: but some of them inquired among themselves, whether he who had
opened the eyes of the blind, could not have prevented the calamity which
he appeared so deeply to deplore. This was a very natural question; and he
was about to convince them that he _could_, by performing a miracle far
more splendid and important than such an interposition. The sepulchre of
Lazarus was a cave, with a large stone upon its mouth. Jesus commanded
them to remove this stone, not choosing to do it miraculously, in order to
avoid unnecessary parade. Martha, who seems to have been agitated by a
great conflict of feelings, very improperly exclaimed against this
proceeding; and alleged, that as he had been interred four days, the
corpse must have become offensive. Jesus with his characteristic
gentleness, reminded her that he knew well what he had ordered: and that
his previous assurance, that if she would only believe she should see the
glory of God, ought to have sealed her lips in silence.
The stone being removed according to the request of Jesus, he uttered a
short but expressive prayer to Heaven; and then with a loud voice, cried
out, "Lazarus, come forth." The realms of death heard his sovereign
mandate, and their gloomy monarch yielded up his captive; "and he that was
dead came forth, bound hand and foot, with grave clothes: and his face was
bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him
go." The effect of this miracle was considerable; for many of the Jews,
who had come to sympathize with the bereaved sister, believed in Christ,
though others instantly repaired to the Pharisees, to inflame their
malignity by reciting what they had witnessed. With similar diversity of
effect, is the Gospel now proclaimed to men; its facts and evidences
kindling the resentment of some, or hardening them into increased
obduracy; while they convince the minds of others, interesting their best
affections, conquering their prejudices, and operating their salvation.
If there were any exception to that universal law which consigns man to
the grave, it might be hoped that such as compose the church of God, being
redeemed by the blood of his Son, called according to his purpose, and
sealed by his Spirit to the day of redemption, would be freed from this
calamity; but death extends his dreadful dominion over the families of the
righteous, as well as the impious. The people of God might, if he pleased,
have been delivered from the present curse: his goodness might have
indemnified them from the common evils which afflict human life, and
appointed them some favoured region, the Goshen of the universe, where
they should have passed their days in a state of rich possession and
unmolested tranquillity; but, if he have ordained otherwise, it is for
wise reasons; some of which, perhaps, we may succeed in explaining.
Is not such a dispensation, for instance, calculated to impress an awful
sense of the malignity of sin? So abominable is it, that the blessed God,
who has made an ample provision for the future, felicity of his saints,
and who is daily imparting to them on earth the invaluable blessings of
his grace, cannot, it seems, consistently with his perfection, exempt them
from the stroke of death. It is requisite that his detestation of it
should be evinced in a complete and undistinguishing overthrow of the race
of mortals, amongst whom even those whose names are written in the book of
life, on account of their nature being contaminated with depravity must
suffer the punishment of temporal death, and show to admiring immortals,
that God is "of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and cannot look
upon sin."
Besides, this demolition of the corporeal frame is an essential means of
its purification. The leprosy has infected every part of the building, the
members of the body have become instrumental to the working of
unrighteousness; and, consequently, "the earthly house of this tabernacle
must be _dissolved_."
The infliction of this calamity upon believers in Christ as well as upon
others, is calculated also to maintain their faith in vigorous and
perpetual exercise. Were it permitted to them to pass into another world,
as Enoch or Elijah did, by a sudden transportation beyond the regions of
mortality to those of undecaying existence, without undergoing "the pains,
the groans, the dying strife," or without experiencing the frightful
alteration that occurs in other human beings, there would no longer exist
the same opportunity as at present for the display of one of the noblest
principles of a renewed mind. Who can contemplate the debased condition of
the body, who can realize the amazing change which "flesh and blood is
heir to"--the icy coldness, the stony insensibility, the universal
inanimation that pervades the whole frame, the putrefaction to which it is
subject, and the general loathsomeness of that which once appeared the
fairest structure amongst the works of God, without an instinctive
shuddering, and without perceiving that faith alone can give the victory
over death? There is nothing surely in the state of the body _after_ this
event to indicate a future existence, but rather every thing to perplex
such a sentiment, and to confound such an expectation. There is nothing
in its aspect which seems to foretel life--nothing to predict
resuscitation. In general, however desperate the case, hope is sustained
by the most trifling circumstances, the feeblest glimmerings of the yet
unextinguished lamp; if there be the gentlest breath, or the slightest
motion, the solicitude of wakeful tenderness is still maintained, and the
_possibility_ at least of a return to health is admitted as a welcome and
not irrational idea; but when the breath entirely fails, when motion is
paralyzed, when the lamp is extinct, whence can any thought of a revival
be obtained? What succeeds the fatal moment, but progressive decay? And
who can discover the least trace of an indication that the departed friend
will resume his life? Every hour seems to widen the breach, to increase
the distance that separates the dead from the living, and to complete the
triumph of our mortal foe. All the powers of nature in combination would
prove incompetent to produce life in the smallest particle--the most
insignificant atom of dust; and hope naturally expires when animation
ceases. When Christians, therefore, are required to part with their
companions, or to die themselves, their only confidence must be in God;
and whoever cannot receive _his_ word, and rely upon the assurances which
he has given with regard to the exercise of divine power in the recovery
of man from the grave, has no adequate consolation amidst the desolations
that await him.
Christians also must pass through the change of death, because the glory
of Jesus Christ in the resurrection could not otherwise be so
illustriously displayed. Never did the character of the Son of God appear
with more commanding majesty than when he recalled the spirit of Lazarus
from the invisible state, and at a word raised his body from the
sepulchre. "Lazarus," said he, "come forth:" the summons entered the ear
of death, and the "last enemy" felt himself "destroyed."
The scene is infinitely cheering. Though we "fade as a leaf," dropping one
by one into the tomb like the foliage of autumn; the eternal spring
advances, when "they that are in the grave shall hear his voice, and shall
come forth"--renewed in vigour, purified in character, perfected in
felicity--to return no more to this sublunary sphere, to descend no more
to the dust, to struggle no more with sin and sorrow, to be assaulted no
more with the "fiery darts of the devil."
Death is so truly alarming to human nature and to shortsighted reason, so
calculated by its external appearances to fill the mind with anxiety, that
in order to suppress our fears and cherish our hopes, it seemed requisite
to bring another existence into the nearest possible view, to render it in
a sense visible, and to embody immortality. In the resurrection of
Lazarus, as well as by other miraculous manifestations, this great purpose
was effected. We perceive incontestably that death is not annihilation,
and that the appearance which it assumes of an extinction of being is not
a reality. _That_ power which was exerted in one case, reason says _may_,
and revelation declares _shall_, be exerted in another; and that, by the
voice of Omnipotence, all the saints shall be raised at the last day from
the abodes of darkness and silence. It is here Christianity takes her
firmest stand--here she discloses her brightest scenes! Glorious
expectation of rising to eternal life, and through Jesus, "the first
begotten of the dead," becoming superior to our most formidable enemy!
What a train of happy beings will then be witnesses of his glory, trophies
of his power, and inhabitants of his kingdom! This will be the jubilee of
all ages, the anticipation of which is well calculated to suppress our
anxieties, and quicken us to every duty.
What mutual congratulations must have circulated through the family of
Lazarus, when he was restored to the affectionate embraces of his sisters!
What a renewal of love would take place on that happy day! How was their
sorrow turned into joy, and their lamentations info praises! What a
triumph of mind did they feel over the grave, and what expressions of
gratitude to their Deliverer burst from every heart! But who can imagine
the transports of that moment, when the same power that raised Lazarus
from the tomb, shall be exerted upon every believer in Jesus, who shall
"meet the Lord in the air," and be introduced to the eternal society of
kindred minds; when the redeemed world shall assemble on the celestial
shore, to recount their past labours and mercies, to renew their spiritual
fellowship, to hail each other's escape from the conflicts, the
temptations, and the diversified evils of mortal life, to behold the glory
of Him who has washed them in his blood and saved them by his grace, to
take possession of their destined thrones, and to mingle their strains of
acknowledgment with the holy by innings of the blest!
How _terrible_ then is death, but how _delightful_! Death is the _end_ of
life; death is the _beginning_ of existence! Death _closes_ our prospects,
and death _opens_ them! Death _debases_ our nature--death _purifies_ and
_exalts_ it! "Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end
be like his!"
Curiosity, ever disposed to pry into what the wisdom of God has not
thought proper to reveal, has frequently inquired into the history of
Lazarus after his resurrection. It has been asked, what were his feelings,
what the nature of his recollections, and what the topics of his
conversation? Did he communicate to his sisters any important intelligence
from the invisible state, or was he withheld by any divine interdiction
from explaining the secrets of his prison-house? Was it not to be
expected that some record of those transactions in which he afterward
engaged, or of the manner in which he was at last removed from the world,
should have been given in Scripture, or of the impressions of his mind
respecting the amazing changes which he had experienced?
The probability is, that Lazarus had no remembrance of the state into
which he had passed during the four days of his interment; and that, as it
could answer no good purpose to himself or others to perpetuate in this
world impressions suited only to the spirit in another condition of
existence, the images of those realities were obliterated from his mind,
like the visions of a dream that have for ever vanished away. It is
sufficient for _us_, as it was enough for _him_, to know that the doctrine
of the resurrection was exhibited to the Jews, with an evidence which, but
for the violence of their prejudices, must have proved to all, as it did
to many of them, irresistibly convincing.
Six days before the passover, Lazarus appears again upon the page of
Scripture history, at supper with Jesus at Bethany; but our attention is
less directed to him than to his sisters and their divine Guest. Martha,
as usual, was busied with domestic preparations; and Mary, with her
characteristic zeal and affection, "took a pound of ointment of spikenard,
very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her
hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment."
The disciples were displeased at what they deemed this _waste_ of the
rich balsam, and murmured against her. One of them especially, Judas
Iscariot, exclaimed, "Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred
pence, and given to the poor?" [39] But this objection, so far from being
dictated by any kindness for the needy, arose entirely from his eagerness
to increase the store with which he was intrusted, and which he was
intending to appropriate to himself. Aware of this design, and
disapproving the uncharitable disposition manifested by his disciples,
Jesus reproved them; and expressed his satisfaction with Mary's conduct as
indicative of a regard for which she should hereafter be celebrated
throughout the world. He intimated that he should soon leave them, and
that this might be considered as an expression of fondness towards a
friend who might be almost viewed as already dead, and to whom she would
have few other opportunities of testifying her affection.
And shall not we be ready to consecrate our most valued possessions to the
service of such a Master? Shall we hesitate to devote to him whatever he
claims, or whatever we can bestow? Shall we feel a moment's reluctance to
aid his cause by the application of some considerable part of our
pecuniary resources to his church and people? He has bequeathed his poor
to our care, and it is a solemn charge; neglecting which we shall miss the
honor of his final benediction; but fulfilling it, we may indulge the
delightful hope that he will recompense even the most trifling attention,
and inscribe upon each future crown, in characters visible to the whole
intelligent universe, _he_ or "_she_ HATH DONE WHAT SHE COULD."
The Poor Widow.
Chapter VIII.
Account of Christ's sitting over against the Treasury--He particularly
notices the Conduct of an obscure Individual--She casts in two Mites--it
is to be viewed as a religious Offering--the Ground on which it is
eulogized by Christ--the Example honorable to the female Sex--People
charitable from different Motives--two Reasons which might have been
pleaded as an Apology for withholding this Donation, she was poor and a
Widow--Her pious Liberality notwithstanding--all have Something to
give--the most trifling Sum of Importance--the Habit of bestowing in
pious Charity beneficial--Motives to Gratitude deduced from the
Wretchedness of others, the Promises of God, and the Cross of Jesus.
Uncharitableness does not seem to have been characteristic of the Jews at
any period of their history, who erred rather on the side of ostentation
than of parsimony. During the three great annual festivals, the offerings
to the temple were very considerable, and of various kinds; although, in
the time of Christ, the country was in a state of comparative depression,
as tributary to the Roman empire. Many individuals, however, were no less
distinguished for their liberality than their opulence. But it is common
to be deceived by appearances; and an action which we may estimate as
good, may be of little value in the sight of that Being who "searcheth the
reins and _hearts_," and who will "give to every one according to
their works."
In the history before us our Saviour is represented as sitting "over
against the treasury;" for though on every proper, and almost on every
possible occasion, he addicted himself to solitude, both for the purpose
of exemplifying the propriety of frequent retirement, and of obtaining
spiritual refreshment; yet, at other times, he mixed with society to
notice and to correct the follies of mankind. His observant eye could not
overlook the minutest diversities of human character; and he never
permitted a favorable opportunity of deducing from these appearances
salutary lessons for his disciples, to pass unimproved. Happy, thrice
happy men, to have such an Instructer at hand--to live so near the "Light
of the world"--to have constant and intimate access to him, "in whom dwelt
all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge!" And happy, thrice happy we,
notwithstanding our comparative disadvantages of time and circumstance,
who possess the recorded instructions of "the faithful and true Witness,"
in the page of inspiration, while "darkness covers" so vast a proportion
of "the earth, and gross darkness the people!"
In the situation which Jesus had chosen, he distinctly saw the people
casting money into the treasury, and particularly noticed the large sums
which many rich persons contributed to this sacred fund. Little did they
suspect what an eye was upon them, watching their movements, and
estimating their motives! It is probable that the majority of those who
came to present their gifts on this occasion, had no personal knowledge of
the Saviour, who assumed no extraordinary appearance, excepting that of
extreme poverty of condition and deep humiliation of spirit; and that of
those who might recognize him, some had been so discomfited by his
superior wisdom in the field of argument, as to feel no inclination either
to dare another contest, or to submit to his decisions; others were too
indolent to make inquiries after heavenly truth, too ignorant to penetrate
beyond his humble exterior, or too fearful to incur the censure of
ecclesiastical authority, for seeming by a respectful approach to become
his disciples; while few, if any, who passed by, were aware that "he knew
what was in man."
If there were many among the wealthy contributors to the treasury who gave
from motives of vanity and ostentation, it is reasonable to believe that
others were characterized by genuine benevolence, and as such approved by
their unknown observer. They were not influenced either by a spirit of
rivalry or pride, but devoutly wished to be serviceable to religion and
acceptable to God. If some came in the temper of the boasting Pharisee,
who is represented as professing to pray in these words, "God, I thank
thee that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or
even as this publican: I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that
I possess"--others, no doubt, as they cast in the liberal offering, felt
if they did not exclaim with the publican, "God, be merciful to me
a sinner."
Although the Son of God has reassumed his glory, being exalted "far above
all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that
is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come;" he
minutely investigates the characters and actions of men, and will
hereafter "appear in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory," for
the purpose of "rendering to every man according to his deeds." The
proceedings of that day will be marked by the utmost impartiality and
justice, founded upon a perpetual and complete inspection of all human
actions, and a most perfect knowledge of their motives.
"Can we think, O Saviour, that thy glory hath diminished aught of thy
gracious respects to our beneficence? or that thine acceptance of our
charity was confined to the earth? Even now that thou sittest at the right
hand of thy Father's glory, thou seest every hand that is stretched out
to the relief of thy poor saints here below. And if vanity have power to
stir up our liberality, out of a conceit to be seen of men; how shall
faith encourage our bounty in knowing that we are seen of thee, and
accepted by thee? Alas! what, are we the better for the notice of those
perishing and impotent eyes, which can only view the outside of our
actions; or for that waste wind of applause, which vanisheth in the lips
of the speaker? Thine eye, O Lord, is piercing and retributive. As to see
thee is perfect happiness, so to be seen of thee is true contentment
and glory.
"And dost thou, O God, see what we give thee, and not see what we take
away from thee? Are our offerings more noted than our sacrileges? Surely,
thy mercy is not more quicksighted than thy justice. In both kinds our
actions are viewed, our account is kept; and we are as sure to receive
rewards for what we have given, as vengeance for what we have defaulted.
With thine eye of _knowledge_, thou seest all we _do_; but we _do well_,
thou seest with an eye _of approbation!_" [40]
After stating the general notice which Jesus Christ took of the variety of
opulent contributors to the treasury, the sacred narrative informs us of
his particularly remarking the offering of a certain individual, whom he
exhibited to his disciples as a pattern of unrivalled generosity. The
comparative value and magnitude of this gift are recorded; and though the
name of this honorable character is concealed, the benevolent deed can
never be forgotten.
We are not informed of the sums given respectively by wealthy persons upon
this occasion, but only in general that they were very considerable:
"many that were rich cast in much." It is astonishing what large
contributions have been sometimes advanced for charitable and other
religious purposes: and from knowing that Jesus Christ selected for
remark, and distinguished by an extraordinary eulogium, the offering of a
certain woman to the treasury, we are eager to inquire who was the donor,
and what the gift so celebrated.
But we must suspend our prejudices. Let us remember, that "God seeth not
as man seeth"--that our calculations of value and of magnitude are often
false, because we do not use the balances of the sanctuary, but are
governed by the erroneous opinions of mankind--and then we shall be
prepared to learn, that on that memorable day, when Jesus sat over against
the treasury beholding the numerous and splendid donations of the rich, a
_female_, a _widow_, "cast in more than they all"--more than any one
individually, and more than all collectively!
What then were her resources? Was she some Eastern potentate, who, like
the queen of Sheba, "came to Jerusalem with a very great train, with
camels that bare spices, and very much gold and precious stones"--a queen
who was able to present Solomon with "a hundred and twenty talents of
gold, and of spices very great store, and precious stones?" No, she was a
_poor_ widow! Our astonishment increases. But some poor persons have great
future prospects, or great present connections. Had she then sold an
hereditary reversion, or borrowed extensively of some wealthy friends, and
impelled by a zeal for God, given it to the treasury? No--she gave only
out of her _poverty_--"she threw in _two mites_, which make a FARTHING,"
or about _two pence_, according to the proportionate value of English
money. [41] This was the donation that led Jesus to call his disciples,
and address them thus, "Verily, I say unto you, that this poor widow hath
cast more in than all they which have cast into the treasury: for all they
did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that
she had, even all her living."
It is proper to remark, that this gift was rather religious than
charitable, the offering of piety as distinguished from that of
almsgiving. This will be obvious, upon considering that the contributions
to the treasury were not for the support of the poor, but for the supply
of sacrifices and other necessary services. Dr. Lightfoot states that
there were thirteen treasure-chests, called _Shopheroth_, and collectively
_Corban_ or _Corbonah_, which were placed in that part of the temple
denominated the Court of the Women. Two of these chests were for the half
shekel, which every Israelite was to pay according to the law; and eleven
others were appropriated to the uses specified in their respective
inscriptions. 1. _For the price of the two turtle-doves, or two young
pigeons_. 2. _For the burnt-offering of birds_. 3. _For the money offered
to buy wood for the altar_. 4. _For those who gave money to buy
frankincense_. 5. _For those who offered gold for the mercy-seat_. 6. _For
the residue of the money for the sin-offering_. 7. _For the residue of the
money for a trespass-offering_. 8. _For the residue of an offering of
birds_. 9. _For the surplus of a Nazarite's offering_. 10. _For the
residue of a leper's trespass-offering_. 11. _For whosoever would offer an
offering of the herds_.
Our Saviour eulogized the gift of this good woman less, probably, on
account of its comparative superiority to the more splendid donations of
opulent contributors to the treasury, whose circumstances were so widely
different from hers, than because her motives were more pure and pious.
The intention to purchase renown or self-approbation, diminishes the
excellence of the most costly offering; while the simple desire to honour
God and promote his cause, superadds substantial worth to the meanest
donation. Jesus Christ perceived the workings of genuine faith and love in
this woman's heart, and estimated them at a price above the choicest
jewels or the purest gold.
He saw and he approved the holy zeal of her mind, and well knew that the
operations of her benevolence were restricted solely by the limitation of
her means. These alone presented an impassable barrier to a liberality of
spirit which impelled her far beyond the allowance of a timid policy, or a
calculating prudence; and we may reasonably conclude, that she knew no
regret at the scantiness of her pecuniary resources, and the
inferiority, of her condition, save what originated in perceiving her small
capacity of usefulness. She who could cast into the treasury the only two
mites that she possessed, would have adorned a higher station. Had
Providence placed her amongst the princesses of the earth, while she
retained such a disposition, what an extensive blessing to society would
she have proved! Such, however, in two many instances, is the corrupting
influence of large possessions, that it is always questionable, whether in
the very great majority of cases an increase of riches would not
deteriorate the principle of benevolence; and whether, if placed amidst
the splendid scenes of elevated rank, our eyes would not be soon so
dazzled, as to incapacitate us either for seeing the wants of the poor, or
the necessities of the church of Christ.
How exquisite and how enviable must have been the feelings of this pious
woman, when she cast her last two mites into the treasury! What a noble
generosity! what disinterested zeal! She could not delay a moment to
inquire respecting the means of her future subsistence, or the comfort of
the present day; the impulse was too powerful to be resisted, and was
amply recompensed by an instantaneous enhancement of her happiness.
This example is highly honorable to the female sex. It is not the language
of flattery, but of truth, to say that they are distinguished by acute
sensibility, quick sympathy, and persevering patience in doing good. They
are naturally compassionate, and have the best opportunities of gratifying
a charitable disposition. From constitution they are more susceptible,
from habit more considerate, and from character more prompt than the other
sex in promoting benevolent purposes. They generally require less urging
to useful measures, and the flame of charity often burns with more
brightness and perpetuity in their bosoms.
In the church of Christ, women have ever been pre-eminent in numbers and in
character; they have been the first to profess Christ, and the last to
dishonour him; they have joined the train of his followers, borne the
reproach of his accusers, sustained the cross of self-denial, and aspired
to the crown of martyrdom; they are recorded with marked distinction by an
apostolic pen, "Women received their dead raised to life again, and others
were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better
resurrection;"--in a word, whenever they have been required to suffer for
Christ, they have willingly surrendered life with all its joys; and
whenever called to maintain his cause by pecuniary supplies, they have
been found ready, like the poor widow, to give even to their last
_two mites_.
Some persons will not be liberal, unless they can be praised. They are
anxious to see their names exciting public attention, and their
benefactions proclaimed upon some public list. If you will allow them to
be "seen of men," they will reconcile themselves to make some sacrifice
for the good of others; and overcome their heartfelt reluctance to give,
when they are assured of being repaid in a proportionate measure of fame.
And thus, in fact, their charity is nothing but a sordid traffic; they
barter for renown, and aim to insure the recompense before they hazard the
gift. But we may be assured, that this is of all speculations the meanest,
the most detestable, and ultimately the most ruinous. The poor widow had
no suspicion of the kind of observance to which she was exposed, and no
wish to attract attention. She silently dropped her money into the chest,
and departed. The whole world was, in her estimation, ignorant of the
deed; and the whole world could not have bestowed upon her so rich a
gratification.
Persons of the class alluded to will sometimes admit of concealment. They
adopt many measures to hide their virtue from the eyes of others; they
will by no means court public attention, or allow a formal publication of
their deeds: but if perchance they are whispered abroad, if any
indiscretion betrays them, if though not _written_, they are _stated_;
they are the last persons on earth to feel any offence, and congratulate
themselves on having effectually secured the applauses of mankind.
"Good actions," as the admirable Achbishop Leighton remarks, "cannot well
be hid; and it may sometimes be necessary for example and exciting others,
that they know of it; but take heed that vanity creep not in under this.
And further than either unavoidable necessity, or some evident further
good of thy neighbour carries it, desire to be unknown and unseen in this.
When it must be public, let thy intention be secret; take no delight in
the eyes of men on thee; yea, rather count it a pain; and still eye God
alone, for he eyes thee. And remember it even in public acts of charity,
and other such like, _he sees in secret_; though the action be no secret,
the spring, the source of it, is; and he sees by what weights the
wheels go, and he still looks upon that, views thy heart, the bidden bent
and intention of it, which man cannot see. So then, though in some cases
thou must be seen to do, yet in no case do to be seen: that differs much;
and where that is, even the other will be as little as it may be."
There are other persons who, though they cannot in all cases be censured
for penuriousness, have imbibed a very pernicious error. They plead that
they have scarcely sufficient for themselves, that they cannot therefore
afford to contribute even to a good cause; and that if they were to do any
thing, it must necessarily be so little as to be useless. What, say they,
could our insignificant donations avail in aid of a fund which requires
the most liberal and constant supplies? Could our drop of charity
materially increase the tide, or swell the ocean? Would it become us to
take from our few necessities, what could not much augment the comforter
minister to the wants of others? Or does God require that his cause should
be sustained by the poor, and the poorest of the poor, when he can command
the purses of the opulent, or turn the stones of the desert into gold.
To this reasoning the instructive history we are considering is a direct
reply. There were two circumstances in her lot, which not only merited
compassion, but would have furnished as strong arguments against her
contributing to the treasury as it is perhaps possible to adduce.
She was in the first place POOR--poor in the extreme; for when she cast in
"two mites" it was "all her living" Poverty is helpless. It does not
possess the means of alleviating its own distresses, much less of
assisting others to any considerable extent. "Wealth," says Solomon,
"maketh many friends, but the poor is separated from his
neighbour"--separated by his neighbour's _selfishness_, who is too much
occupied with his own concerns to cast his eyes beyond the narrow limits
of personal interest--separated by his neighbour's _insensibility_, whose
heart is often cold and motionless to pity as the stone which paves his
doorway--separated by his neighbor's _avarice_, who idolizes gold, and
grasps it with unyielding tenacity--separated by his neighbour's _pride_,
who looks with contempt upon his unoffending inferior--separated by his
neighbour's _servility_, who flatters greatness even by acquiescing in its
unfounded dislike of the poor--ah! "the poor is _separated_ from his
neighbour!"
You plead poverty as an excuse for disregarding every claim upon you; but
are you as destitute as this obscure yet excellent woman, who had but a
farthing, and gave it even without solicitation? Be encouraged by
recollecting who observes and who can repay you. Indeed the poor of every
class were the particular objects of the Saviour's attention during his
residence on earth; and he has rendered the tattered garment of poverty
respectable by having worn it himself.
There is one consideration, above all others, which seems to appeal most
forcibly to the inferior classes of society in behalf especially of the
cause of Christ, and to urge some, even the smallest donations, to the
_treasurer_, of the Christian temple, however incapacitated they may be
for other benevolent exertions, namely, that _poverty appears to be the
peculiar object of divine complacency and provision._ It is the common
condition of the people of God, who "hath _chosen_ the poor of this world,
rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that
love him." The vale of poverty seems to be the favourite walk of celestial
mercy. Here she distributes her charities--here she spreads her
table--here she sends her ministers of grace. It was here the Saviour
"went about doing good." The discourses he delivered were adapted to the
poor--he consulted their capacities, instructed their minds, felt for
their circumstances, and relieved their necessities. Whom others despised
he honored--whom others forsook he sought--whom others suffered without a
sigh to perish, he supplied, and comforted, and saved!
The Gospel itself was expressly addressed to the poor, and is peculiarly
suited to their condition; and the messengers of heaven are directed to go
out into the highways and hedges to compel men to come in. The promises of
Scripture are peculiarly appropriated to the necessities of the poor. They
have no _money_; hence the blessings of the everlasting covenant are
described as "wine and milk," and are to be procured "without money and
without price." The poor are subject to _fatigue_ through excess of labor;
hence it is "the weary and heavy-laden," whom Christ invites to "come to
him," promising them "rest." The poor, being deprived of those means of
mental cultivation which the rich enjoy, are usually _ignorant_; hence the
source of the Redeemer's grateful appeal to the Father, "Thou has hid
these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto
babes." The poor are the _servants_ of others; hence we read of "the
liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free," and "if the Son make you free
ye shall be free indeed." The felicities of the invisible state are
represented in terms which form a complete contrast to the present
condition of the poor. Are they now the tenants of the lowly cottage? "In
my Father's house are many mansions"--"we have a _building of God_, a
house not made with hands, _eternal_ in the heavens." Must they now look
on all the fields around them, and sigh to think that they belong to
another?' Through the grace of the Gospel they anticipate "an inheritance
incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away." Are they now clothed
in wretched attire?--they may expect to be adorned with "white robes" and
"a crown of glory." Are they now in a state of obscurity--their names
unknown--their condition mean and despised?--hereafter they shall have a
"name better than of sons and daughters;" they shall "shine as the
brightness of the firmament," and "as the stars, for ever and ever." Is
their condition on earth eminently "the _house of mourning_?" Do a scanty
meal, a starving family, a pining partner, a wasting disease for which
poverty forbids their procuring the most skilful means, frequently excite
the bitter, the burning, the unavailing tear? In heaven "the days of our
mourning shall be ended," and "God himself shall wipe away all tears from
our eyes."
Had this poor woman been disposed rather to have evaded the gift to the
treasury than to have volunteered so large a donation as that of "all her
living," the circumstance of her being A WIDOW would seem to have been a
sufficient apology. No condition of life can be conceived more wretched. A
widow is deprived; "of the object of tenderest regard, the soother of her
cares, the defence of her weakness, and the staff of her life." She is left
to bewail in solitude--to suffer alone; or, if her children surround her,
by tracing in their features the resemblance of her departed husband, she
perpetually opens afresh the wound that time was kindly healing, and
blends her fond caresses with tears of unavailing regret. She must now
support herself--and perhaps struggle to supply them, whose childhood both
disqualifies them from affording any assistance, and renders the incessant
vigilance of maternal care essential to their very preservation. If, in
addition to this, her poverty incapacitates her for resisting the arm of
oppression, or vindicating herself against the unmerited reproaches of the
censorious and the impious, her situation is inconceivably deplorable.
Some part of this description certainly applies, and perhaps all, to the
character under consideration. She was a poor widow: and yet the miseries
of her own state did not prevent her casting in a liberal supply, even
"all her living," into the treasury of God. She trusted for to-morrow to
that Providence which had supplied her to-day; a confidence which we
cannot doubt experienced its appropriate reward.
In addition to these considerations, and as a reply to the sophisms
already adverted to, by which so many in far superior circumstances to
this good woman endeavour to fence themselves against the charge of
illiberality, we remark--
1. It is by no means evident that you have absolutely _nothing_ that can
be applied to the purposes of a pious charity. In order to prove this, it
would be requisite to show that all your labour is scarcely sufficient to
procure your subsistence--a subsistence that does not require or admit the
smallest redundancy or the least indulgence. You must prove that you never
pamper one appetite or gratify one lust; and that, in compliance with the
exhortation of Christ, you "take no thought for the morrow." This is a
case of so extreme a nature that its occurrence seems a bare possibility,
and will not surely exonerate those who, if they are but scantily
supplied in comparison with the ample abundance which enriches the
condition of others, have nevertheless the means of a sufficient and
perhaps a comfortable support. From those who possess much, much is
required; and of those who have little _something_--to prove that the
spirit of benevolence is not extinct, nor the claims of humanity and
religion disregarded. You may be unable to pour in gold and silver, but
surely you can contribute _two miles_'. It is an excellent piece of
advice, "If thou have but a little, be not afraid to give according to
that little; for thou layest up a good treasure for thyself against the
day of necessity."
2. Whatever may be our estimate of the merit or utility of a small
donation, the most trifling addition is of some importance. The seed which
is sown in the field of benevolence will bear some fruit and help to swell
the harvest. The immeasurable extent of sand upon the sea-shore is made up
of grains, and the loftiest mountains are composed of diminutive particles
of dust. If the millions who are able to contribute their mites could be
induced to do so, the treasury would soon be full; but if they withhold
them, the uncertain, capricious, and ostentatious, though large
contributions of the opulent, may fail to replenish it.
3. The _habit_ of giving, however small the sum, is inconceivably
beneficial to the contributor himself. It is an important means of
cherishing in the breast that divine principle, which without exercise and
use would be likely to languish: for whatever sentiments we feel, whatever
theories we adopt, and in whatever eloquence of language and warmth of
spirit we expatiate upon the excellences of liberality, unless we _give_
to the necessitous ourselves, the heart will become hardened and cold;
and a _theoretical religion_ can never preserve us from a _real impiety_.
"The peculiar nature of our religion," observes Dr. Barrow, [42]
"specially requires it, and the honour thereof exacts it from us; nothing
better suits Christianity, nothing more graces it, than liberality;
nothing is more inconsistent therewith, or more disparageth it, than being
miserable and sordid. A Christian niggard is the veriest nonsense that can
be; for what is a Christian? What but a man who adores God alone, who
loves God above all things, who reposes all his trust and confidence in
God? What is he, but one who undertaketh to imitate the most good and
bountiful God; to follow, as the best pattern of his practice, the most
benign and charitable JESUS, the Son of God; to obey the laws of God and
his Christ, the sum and substance of which is charity; half whose religion
doth consist in loving his neighbour as himself! What is he further, but
one who hath renounced this world, with all the vain pomps and pleasures
of it; who professes himself in disposition and affection of mind to
forsake all things for Christ's sake; who pretends little to value,
affect, or care for any thing under heaven, having all his main
concernments and treasures--his heart, his hopes, and his happiness, in
another world? Such is a Christian: and what is a niggard? All things
quite contrary. One whose practice manifestly shows him another thing
besides and before God; to love mammon above God, and more to confide in
it than in him; one who bears small goodwill, kindness, or pity towards
his brother; who is little affected or concerned with things future or
celestial; whose mind and heart are rivetted to this world; whose hopes
and happiness are settled here below; whose soul is deeply immersed and
buried in earth; one who, according to constant habit, notoriously
breaketh the two great heads of Christian duty, '_loving God with
all his heart, and his neighbour as himself_. It is, therefore, by comparing
those things very plain, that we pretend to reconcile gross contradictions
and inconsistences, if we profess ourselves to be Christians and are
illiberal. It is indeed the special grace and glory of our religion, that
it consisteth not in barren speculations, or empty formalities, or forward
professions; not in fancying curiously, or speaking zealously, or looking
demurely; but in really producing sensible fruits of goodness, in doing
(as St. Paul signifies) _things good and profitable, unto men_."
The story of the poor widow is eminently calculated to inspire gratitude
in the hearts of those who are mercifully exempted from the wretchedness
of such extreme poverty, which exposes to the temptation of repining at
the dispensations of Heaven, and of pursuing improper measures for
obtaining relief. Nor is its least evil that of cherishing an envious
spirit towards those who are in superior circumstances. From the abodes of
penury and want it is indeed a pleasing fact that Divine Grace has chosen
its objects, and from lowly vales and humble cottages elevated them to
thrones of immortality. We hear apostles saying, "Silver and gold have we
none;" and Bartimeus, brought into the train of disciples from "the
highway-side," where he was "blind" and "begging." And though it is a
delightful consideration, that religion Can alleviate the rigours of want,
and infuse sweetness into the bitterest waters of sorrow; yet poverty,
with its concomitant evils, is an affliction from which, in its extreme
form, we may pray to be relieved. Though in the strictest sense, the
Christian, like the apostle, while "having nothing," may yet be said to
"possess all things;" yet that degree of necessity which arises from
extreme poverty is far from being desirable either for the body or
the soul.
In the most destitute circumstances, however, the promises of our Father
in heaven, and the examples which we find upon sacred record, are
encouraging. "I have never seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed
begging bread"--"He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for
the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; and
wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine,
and bread which strengtheneth man's heart." Of Zion it is asserted, "I
will abundantly bless her provision; I will satisfy her poor with bread:"
and "He that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly; he that
despiseth the gain of oppressions, that shaketh his hands from holding of
bribery, that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood, and shutteth his
eyes from seeing evil; he shall dwell on high: his place of defence shall
be the munitions of rocks: bread shall be given him; his waters shall
be sure."
Remember the interpositions of God to supply the necessities of the
destitute. Go to _Egypt_ and _Canaan_, and trace the wonderful
appointments of that providence which supplied the famished household of
Jacob! Go into the wilderness of _Sin_, and behold an extraordinary kind
of dew covering the camp of Israel and sparkling in the morning sun, in
fulfilment of the prediction, "I will rain bread from heaven for you!"
Observe the famished prophet at "the brook Cherith, that is before
Jordan," and see the ravens of heaven descending with bread and flesh to
supply Elijah! Follow Jesus into a desert place, where five thousand
weary, wayworn strangers, besides women and children, are fed by his
liberal hand and his miraculous power! "Behold the fowls of the air; for
they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your
heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of
you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? and why take, ye
thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field how they grow; they
toil not, neither do they spin: and yet I say unto you, that even Solomon
in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so
clothe the grass of the field, which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into
the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or What shall we
drink? or Wherewithal shall we he clothed? (For after all these things do
the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of
all these things."
O, how sweetly does that spirit rest which reclines upon the lap of
providence, and feeds contentedly on "daily bread!" The storms may rise
and the winds may blow--the clamours of human competition may fill the
air; but nothing can disturb his repose. "Thou wilt keep him in perfect
peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee." When
Solomon was about to ascend his throne, how earnestly did he implore
superior wisdom, and how readily leave the disposal of earthly good to his
God and Father! And what was the consequence? "God said unto him, Because
thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life;
neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine
enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment;
behold, I have done according to thy Words: lo, I have given thee a wise
and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before,
neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. And I have also given
thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour: so that
there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee all thy days."
Finally, let us deduce motives for consolation under the pressure of
sorrow, and for the limitation of our wishes to the necessary subsistence
of life, from "a greater than Solomon." Who was it that stooped to a
manger and a cross? Who fasted forty days and forty nights in the desert,
refusing to employ his power in furnishing a miraculous table? Who had not
"where to lay his head?" Who lived on the scanty fare of a small purse in
common with the family of his disciples? Who withdrew from the
entertainments of Jerusalem to the humble cottage of Mary and Martha,
cheerfully subsisting on the most homely and casual provision?--HE, who
has taught us to limit our desires of temporal good within the narrow
circle of _one short_ request--"GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD."
Sapphira.
Chapter IX.
Mixed Constitution of the Church of Christ--benevolent Spirit of the
primitive Believers at Jerusalem--Anxiety of Ananias and Sapphira to
appear as zealous and liberal as others--Ananias repairs to the Apostles
to deposit the price of his Possessions--is detected in Deception and
dies--similar Deceit and Death of Sapphira--Nature and Progress of
Apostasy--peculiar Guilt of Sapphira--Agency of Satan distinctly
marked--diabolical influence ascertained--consolatory Sentiments
suggested to Christians.
"The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his
field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the
wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought
forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the
householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in
thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy
hath done this.... The field is the world; the good seed are the children
of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the
enemy that sowed them is the devil."
This parable, so descriptive of the mixed constitution of the church of
Christ, from the primitive times down to the present age, is strikingly
exemplified in the history of Ananias and Sapphira. These were some of the
first tares that appeared in the apostolic field of labour; and we should
feel grateful that their names and characters are transmitted to us upon
whom the ends of the world are come, for the purpose of salutary warning.
Their singular atrocity was but a more full development of the very same
evil principles that exist in embryo in the hearts of mankind in general;
and their signal and immediate punishment, which was some deviation from
the more ordinary methods of Providence, which permits the tares and the
wheat to grow together till the harvest or "end of the world," was, under
all the circumstances, a necessary expression of divine displeasure.
During the first age of Christianity, when it was propagated by apostles
and their holy coadjutors, and when Jesus Christ, having so recently
departed from the world, had left an unusual glow of ardor and affection
in their minds, it seems natural to anticipate not only extensive success
in the establishment of Christian churches, but a peculiar purity in the
sentiments and conduct of their members. And where shall we find such
union, such fervour, such simplicity, such energy, as prevailed in that
golden age? Persecution separated them indeed, but could not dissolve
their attachment either to the cause or to each other; it could not
extinguish their ever-burning zeal. But in vain should we hope for
perfection even in the purest societies on earth. If a Judas insinuated
himself amongst the apostles during the personal residence of Christ on
earth, and under his immediate eye, it is not surprising that an Ananias
and a Sapphira intruded into the earliest and best of his churches; nor
should it prove unduly discouraging to his ministers or people at any
period, when they witness similar instances of deceit and impiety. The
more valuable the coin, the greater is the reason to apprehend its being
counterfeited; and the more excellent religion appears, and the more
highly it is esteemed, the greater will be the probable number of
hypocritical professors.
The history of these two offenders is intimately blended. Their sin and
punishment were similar; but there, were some circumstances connected with
the transaction which exhibit the guilt of Sapphira in characters of more
conspicuous enormity. While reviewing the inspired narrative, let us not
cherish the feeling of Hazael, who indignantly demanded of the prophet,
"Is thy servant a dog, that he should do this!" but, deeply aware of our
inward propensities and our moral dangers, let us unite fervent prayer
with sleepless circumspection, "lest we enter into temptation."
The church at Jerusalem possessed one peculiarity, resulting from the
remarkable exercise of a pure, exalted, disinterested benevolence. Rising
superior to every selfish interest, and, in the spirit of unbounded love
and liberality, concurring in every measure that was devised to promote
the general good; "as many as were possessors of lands or houses, sold
them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them
down at the apostles' feet; and distribution was made to every man
according as he had need." The great proportion of converts were probably
indigent, for in no age have "the mighty and the noble" been attracted by
the unostentatious simplicity of the religion of Jesus; but some were
persons of property. They had lands and houses, with which, however, they
willingly parted to supply the necessities of their poorer
fellow-Christians. This was a generosity which could not fail of exciting
the admiration of the whole society, and of acquiring for them
considerable influence. While the apostles approved their
disinterestedness, the widows, the orphans, and the indigent of every
class, would pour their best benedictions upon their heads, and look up lo
them as the ministering angels of Providence. Too often, indeed, the
supplies of benevolence are received with a coldness which is truly
repulsive, and which bespeaks a secret conviction in the minds of the
wretched, that they have a right to expect, and that the opulent are bound
to bestow them; but these were _Christian poor_, and were influenced, we
should hope, by a gratitude which such benefactions were calculated to
inspire. At the same time, even the unthankfulness of the recipient ought
not to shut up our "bowels of compassion."
Ananias and Sapphira were anxious, amidst such fine specimens of
disinterested goodness, not to appear backward. They might be conscious
that the respectability of their situation, and the zeal of their
profession, excited expectations amongst the other disciples; and though
they were certainly under no obligation to practise this profuse charity,
they seemed unwilling to lose the opportunity of enhancing their fame: We
may justly suspect, that a long struggle was maintained between the love
of money and the love of applause. They consulted together;--they were
anxious to devise an expedient by which they might gratify their vanity,
and yet retain at least the principal part of their property. Ambition and
avarice were to be alike gratified, but they were to contrive the
concealment of their hypocrisy. With this view, they agreed upon a course
of meanness and dissimulation, which involved the most tragical
consequences. Ananias seems to have proposed, and Sapphira to have
abetted, the transaction. With her consent, which he chose to obtain, and
which might have been legally necessary, their estate was sold; and _part_
only of the purchase-money was laid at the apostles' feet, as if it were
the whole, and as if Christian charity had dictated this liberal
distribution of it.
Hypocrites, we perceive, are frequently very much influenced by example
and popular applause. How many ostentatious charities may be traced to
this polluted source! It is not to do good, to assist the needy, to
promote the cause of Jesus Christ; but to escape censure, or to purchase
renown, that men often unite in pious contributions. They will slot be
outshone by others, or submit to the dishonor of being reputed niggardly
and ungenerous. But however such persons abound in _visible_ acts of
benevolence, their charity does not resemble the subterraneous rivulet,
that revives the drooping flower, and refreshes the languishing herb,
wherever it directs its _secret_ and _silent_ course.
What a fine opportunity was afforded on this occasion to Sapphira, for
fulfilling the high but difficult duties of her situation! How would she
have immortalized her name, had she suggested proper advice to her
husband, and acted with an upright firmness herself! If, instead of
coinciding with his impious plan, she had objected to the proposal, and
warned him of the probable consequences of his dissimulation, a strong
remonstrance from so dear a relative might have produced the happiest
effect upon his mind; and had he still persisted, would at least have
vindicated her refusal. Wives are indeed required to "submit to their
husbands," but there are cases in which resistance is a virtue of the
noblest class. If, transgressing the proper bounds of civil dominion, he
attempts to lord it over her conscience, and urges, however
authoritatively, her concurrence in iniquity, she must steadfastly oppose
temptation. However painful the contest, it is honourable. It will be
owned in heaven as a war of duty and necessity.
In some cases, the woman proves the first instigator to evil, or the prime
coadjutor in mischief; but, in others, her sentiments may be sought with
advantage. A wise man will seldom engage in an affair of considerable
importance without soliciting advice, for "in the multitude of counsellors
there 5s safety;" but who so naturally expects, or who so much deserves to
be consulted, as the wife of the bosom? Her opinion is likely to be the
most disinterested and the most affectionate of any that can be obtained;
and if we could obtain a faithful history of domestic life, it would
appear that a consultation so natural and proper, has often proved the
means of guiding in perplexity and rescuing from error.
In the full confidence that their scheme had been concerted with the
utmost privacy, Ananias, after the sale of his possessions, hastened to
deposit a part of the price in the hands of the apostles. He, no doubt,
expected to be welcomed in the warmest terms of commendation. With what
astonishment and horror, therefore, must be have heard the terrible appeal
of Peter, "Why bath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and
to keep back part of the price of the land? Whiles it remained, was it not
thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast
thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou hast not lied unto men, but
unto God!" Instantaneous as the lightning of heaven, Almighty vengeance
descended upon the unhappy criminal, and withered him in a moment.
"Ananias hearing these words, fell down and gave up the ghost; and great
fear came on all them that heard these things." He was immediately buried,
and about three hours afterward, his wife, totally unacquainted with the
melancholy fate of her infatuated husband, and glowing with expectation of
sharing the praises which the assembled disciples, as she supposed, were
bestowing upon their generosity, presented herself to the apostles. Peter
immediately demanded an explicit answer to the question, whether the sum
which Ananias had subscribed were the real purchase-money of their estate?
To this she deliberately replied in the affirmative. "How is it," said
Peter, excited to holy indignation, "how is it that ye have agreed
together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Behold, the feet of them which
have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out."
Immediately, to the universal astonishment and terror of all the
spectators, "she fell down at his feet and yielded up the ghost; and the
young men came in and found her dead, and carrying her forth, buried her
by her husband."
The apostle, by representing the atrocious sin of these offenders as
"lying unto God," and "tempting the Spirit of the Lord," intended to
intimate that as the ambassadors of heaven, and endowed with miraculous
powers and discernment, they who attempted to deceive them, virtually
offered an insult to that Holy Spirit that resided in them. They were his
representatives and agents, acting by his authority and under his
influence. God was present with the apostles in a manner totally different
from the mode of his manifestation to any other persons; and in attempting
to deceive them, they virtually denied the agency of the Omniscient
Spirit, in communicating to them a capacity to discern the inmost motives
of the mind.
It is not with a view to extenuate the guilt of Ananias or Sapphira, but
merely to detect character and illustrate the progress of sin, that we
suggest the probability that when they first determined upon the sale of
their estate, it might be under the impulse of a momentary benevolence,
and that the device of retaining a part of the price was a subsequent
consideration. Hypocrites are not profoundly acquainted with their own
hearts, or with all the secret operations of a spirit of self-delusion. A
sinner does not always, nor perhaps often, imagine the extreme lengths of
impiety to which one erroneous step may ultimately conduct him. If he
could be brought to see at the period of first indulgence the odious
outline, not to say the finished picture, of his _future self_, he would
start with instinctive horror, and blush with unutterable confusion.
Secret wickedness is frequently long concealed from all but the eyes of
God, by a religious deportment. It remains buried deep in the recesses of
the soul till occasion exhibits it, as the needle continues at rest till
the magnetic influence approaches. Hence the church of Christ is sometimes
astonished and alarmed by the misconduct of a character in whom, perhaps,
it had reposed the utmost confidence, or placed the warmest affection; and
which, though immediately produced by some sudden temptation, was really
the result, the natural, easy, and almost necessary result of a previous
course of secret iniquity. The train had been long preparing, but it
required some kindling touch to produce the explosion.
The progress to apostacy is, indeed, usually gradual, though rapid,
resembling the irresistible haste of persons travelling down a precipitous
path, or the descent of a heavy body towards the earth, whose velocity is
accelerated in proportion as it approaches its destination. The first
compliance with temptation is accompanied with misgivings--trembling--
restlessness--the very thought of sin is admitted with difficulty, and the
determination to practise it, is formed amidst a thousand relentings and
prickings of conscience. Still the mind lingers with the object--still the
fancy plays about the forbidden fruit, till the hand is stretched forth to
gather it--an increased appetite is superinduced, accompanied with a
diminished resolution. How many youthful persons, deterred for a time by a
religious education and sedate habits, have paused--and paused--and paused
on the brink of danger; like Caesar ere he crossed the Rubicon; their
passions and their conscience have held a warm debate--till induced in
some fatal hour of illusion to comply, they have progressively advanced
to a state of confirmation in guilt, and have made a covenant with hell!
The character of Sapphira seems marked with even a deeper stain of guilt
than that of her husband. She had more time for reflection, and received a
salutary premonition by the question of Peter. Not to advert to the period
in which she might probably be left alone during the various transactions
of the sale of the estate, three hours elapsed between the infliction of
judgment upon Ananias, and her coming to the apostolic assembly. If her
concurrence in this base action had resulted in any degree from mistake,
from momentary illusion, or from mere persuasion, she had time to correct
her error by immediate repentance: or if she had hitherto sinned with
deliberation, it was a time in which conscience might hive been heard, and
the wretched backslider have yet been reclaimed. This was the golden
moment, the period of long-suffering and mercy, the "accepted time!"
Repentance was not yet too late--return to reason and duty was not even
now impossible--she might still have retracted her steps, though her
worthless husband had suffered for his iniquity, and had passed the
boundaries of time, the sacred enclosure, the hallowed ground where
celestial mercy dispenses her pardons. Every thing was favourable to
penitence. She was alone, and solitude has sometimes shaken the purpose of
the sinner, and opened his eyes to an awful perception of the
atrociousness of guilt. But Sapphira was "hardened through the
deceitfulness of sin." Long since she had dismissed every compunctious
feeling, and was hurried on to perdition by the fiends of avarice and
vanity, to whom she had resigned the dominion of her soul. The inquiry of
Peter, pointed and abrupt--"Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much?"
Would have startled an ordinary transgressor, and produced those
sensations of shame and confusion which a consciousness of detection is
calculated to excite--O, if she had even then trembled, confessed her
iniquity, and sought forgiveness through the blood which cleanseth from
all sin, who will affirm that she could not have obtained mercy, and
perhaps escaped both temporal and eternal punishment! But she was
obdurate. The falsehood which Ananias had _acted_, she deliberately
_affirmed_, and justice instantly dismissed her to the society of her
kindred transgressor in a state of condemnation. Here, then, we read in
characters too legible to be mistaken, that "it is a fearful thing to fall
into the hands of the living God."
If we pursue this subject, it will conduct us far beyond the sight of mere
temporal punishment. Sin not only incurs present misery, but has opened
the gates of despair, and kindled inextinguishable flames. That wrath
which must have inevitably consumed the whole of Adam's posterity, but for
the Redeemer's interposition, will rage forever against the impenitent and
the apostate. "Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies; thy right hand
shall find out those that hate thee. Thou shall make them as a fiery oven
in the time of thine anger; the Lord shall swallow them up in his wrath,
and the fire shall devour them." "Upon the wicked he shall rain snares,
fire and brimstone, and a horrible tempest; this shall be the portion of
their cup."
It is surely wonderful to holy angels, that by persevering acts of impiety
and rebellion, men should voluntarily reduce themselves to a state in
which it "had been good for them if they had never been born." Can there
be a more important gift than life, or a more valuable quality attached to
it than immortality? Yet apostates, by their degeneracy, convert this
greatest of blessings into a curse--this noblest good into an infinite
evil. "As righteousness tendeth to life, so he that pursueth evil,
pursueth it to his own death." Who can paint the horror of that moment,
when the final, the irrevocable sentence will be passed upon a guilty
race--when INFINITE LOVE will denounce INFINITE WO--when every word
proceeding from the mouth of eternal justice will prove a poisoned arrow,
struck into the destiny of transgressors--when that face which has always
illuminated the regions of glory with smiles of ineffable grace, will
gather blackness and look despair! O what a crush!--what a ruin!--what a
wreck!--How many human temples, defiled by intolerable abominations, will
in a moment fall into the gulf of perdition to supply its everlasting
fires!--What lightnings will accompany the "thunder of his power!"--What
fervid heat will melt these elements--what terror shake the lowest abyss
of hell! O, could we descend to the regions of despair, whence "the smoke
of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever;" or, transported on a
seraph's wing, rise to listen only for a single moment, to those rapturous
sounds which warble from immortal harps, and bespeak infinite
felicity--with what feelings should we return to this probationary state!
How should we be alarmed and allured--terrified and enraptured--deterred
by "sights of wo," excited by scenes of glory! but, "if we hear not Moses
and the prophets," Christ and the apostles: if "God who at sundry times,
and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the
prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son," to no
purpose: "neither should we be persuaded though one rose from the dead."
This dreadful history ought not to excite despondency in trembling saints.
Ministerial anxieties are principally excited by a presumptuous state of
mind. It is not the timid, the diffident, the cautious, that awaken
apprehensions, but the forward, the fearless, the bold. That solicitude
which agitates the pious mind, is an effectual antidote against the evil
it dreads, while that confidence which possesses the hypocrite, prevents
the good it anticipates. The one obtains through fear, the other loses
through presumption. The one is victorious, by maintaining a constant
petty warfare with all his corruptions; the other is over-thrown through
rushing fearlessly forward, and falling into the ambuscade which Satan has
prepared for him. Hypocrisy is contriving, full of artifice, and
arrogant--sincerity is quite the reverse, aiming to be right--fearing
mistake--avoiding even trifling deviations and slight compliances--
"sitting at the feet of Jesus"--"clothed with humility,"--and in a "right
mind!"
Let us adore the grace which has hitherto prevented our falling, and
humbly depend upon it for future preservation. Conscious of our infantine
weakness, let us lean upon the arm of Omnipotence. Under the conduct of
him who directed the march of ancient Israel by the pillar of cloud by day
and of fire by night, wo may hope to be upheld, protected, and guided in
our journey to Canaan. Hail, happy hour, which shall put us in possession
of our rest! Hail, celestial morning, whose bright beams shall disperse
the shadows of death, and diffuse the splendours of immortal day upon our
inheritance!
In the account of the crime by which Ananias and Sapphira have acquired
such an awful celebrity, the agency of SATAN is distinctly marked--"Why,"
said Peter, hath _Satan_ filled thine heart?--This a subject so seldom
treated, and yet of such great importance, that it seems proper to avail
ourselves of this statement, in order to examine it with some attention,
and to suggest some consolatory reflections to the timid Christian.
The earliest mention we have of Satanic influence is at the fall. Assuming
the body of a serpent, this evil spirit attacked the first woman and
seduced her into a transgression which "brought death into the world, and
all our wo." If Satan were permitted to practise his detestable
machinations in the earthly paradise, who will presume to say that it is
improbable he may yet be able to tempt man in the wilderness? He knew the
position of human affairs, he manifested extraordinary skill in the
adaptation of the means which he employed to promote his purposes, and in
the incidental conversation, which he contrived with our first parent; and
although Christians have run into great extremes in their estimate of his
powers, he unquestionably possesses superior knowledge and capacity. His
talents like those of other wicked beings, are probably not impaired by
his fall, but even sharpened and invigorated by malignant practice. In the
aspect of this creation, and in the character of a degenerate world, we
may perceive the infernal fiend. We may see his dark hand in the strifes
of society, supplying the burning fuel to intemperate passions and
discordant societies. We may mark his detestable footsteps in the field of
death, staining provinces with blood, where human brothers are polluted
with the guilty spirit of assassination, and sacrifice to the glory of
war, the hopes of nations, the comforts of life, and the earthly existence
of infuriated millions, unprepared to enter an eternal state. In these
mighty tempests and desolating whirlwinds, we may hear the hissing breath
of his malice, and the yell of his infernal joy. If he seduced our parent
in innocency, is it incredible he should seduce her race in their
apostasy? if he were the chief agent in the _first_ of sins, is it
improbable that he should instigate other crimes peculiarly connected with
human misery and degradation?
Scripture, which we take as the "lamp to our feet, and light to our
path," represents _delusion_ as the appropriate work of the arch-fiend. It
is not for us to inquire by what means he operates upon the mind, because
we know so little of the economy of the spiritual world, of the manner in
which spirit can operate on spirit, and consequently of the nature of that
influence which superior beings are capable of exercising upon others in
this world, that we could at best only make a vague conjecture. It is
sufficient for all moral purposes to ascertain the fact, that such an
influence is possible to evil spirits, and permitted by Providence, that
it forms a part of the trial of good men in this state of existence, and
often tends to accelerate the too rapid progress of human impiety.
Satan then is possessed of great subtlety, and addicted to _wiles,
snares_, and _devices_, for the purpose of deluding mankind. He is thus
described by Christ: "He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not
in the _truth_, because there is no _truth_ in him. When he speaketh a
_lie_, he speaketh of his own; for he is a _liar_, and the father of it."
Peter, in addressing Ananias said, "Why hath _Satan_ filled thine heart to
_lie_ to the Holy Ghost?" "We are not ignorant," says the same apostle,
"of Satan's _devices_." "If our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are
lost: in whom the god of this world _hath blinded the minds_ of them which
believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the
image of God, should shine unto them."
"I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent _beguiled_ Eve through his
subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in
Christ." In speaking of the deceptive practices of false apostles, he thus
alludes to infernal power--"No marvel; for Satan himself is transformed
into an angel of light." And in writing to the Ephesians, Paul exhorts--"
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the
_wiles_ of the devil." Antichrist is described by a similar allusion:
"Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and
signs, and _lying wonders_, and with all _deceivableness_ of
unrighteousness." "And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the
key of the bottomless pit, and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold
on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the devil, and Satan, and bound
him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him
up, and set a seal upon him, that he should _deceive_ the nations no more,
till the thousand years should be fulfilled; and after that he must be
loosed a little season."
Satan doubtless attacks mankind by diversified modes of operation, and
deceives them on various occasions and by different means. In the
parabolical representations of our Lord, he is described as "_sowing
tares_ in the field," and as "coming immediately" where the _word is
sown_, "to take away the word that was sown in their hearts." This is
indeed a _figurative_ statement, but nevertheless descriptive of a fact.
The essence of the representation is _real_, though decked out in the
attractive garb of imagery, to win attention and to excite inquiry. To
suppose otherwise in this or in other cases, would be to reduce Scripture
to the standard of Tales for Children, or Arabian Nights' Entertainments.
What, then, is the truth intended to be conveyed here? It is that Satan
possesses some mode of access to the human mind, that he is peculiarly
attentive to the impression which the ministry of the word is producing,
and that he uses his utmost skill to neutralize its effect: probably, by
tempting the hearer to doubt its truth, to dispute its importance, or to
defer immediate regard to its holy requisitions. And in the human heart
there is such an ample supply of materials upon which to work--such a
tendency to evil--such depravity of spirit--such corruption of
nature--such love of the world--such enmity against God, that he soon
succeeds in erecting an edifice of delusory hope, in which the deluded
soul takes shelter from the sharp-pointed arrows of ministerial fidelity
and scriptural appeal.
"Your adversary the devil," is represented as walking "about, seeking whom
he may devour;" which intimates the _settled enmity_ of this spirit. He is
your _adversary_--at once the most malignant, most subtle, most invisible,
and often least suspected of all others. This passage describes his
_powerful superiority_; he is a _roaring lion_--remarkable for fury,
strength, and zeal. It represents his _incessant activity, secrecy, and
watchfulness_; "he _walketh about_." It proclaims his _destructive
purpose_--"to _devour_." He is not, it seems, confined to place, but fixed
in torment, and destined in all ages to suffer a perpetual aggravation of
his misery, in consequence of the increase of his guilt, and the frequent
discomfiture of his devices.
The severest contests of the Christian are with this adversary, who, being
possessed of insinuating subtlety, powerful resources, constant vigilance,
distinguished sagacity, and invisible means of operation, combined with
infernal malignity, must be acknowledged to be a most formidable foe. It
is both needless and unscriptural to assign ubiquity to Satan, but by
himself and his emissaries he undoubtedly possesses a very extensive range
in this lower world, and his favourite employment is to cherish the
rebellious principle, to perpetuate the backsliding character, and thus to
form the finished apostate. He observes with a vigilant inspection every
tree planted in the garden of the Lord, and provided there be no real
fruits of righteousness, he is not displeased at the leaves of
profession. He knows this will never prevent the decree, "Cut it down, why
cumbereth it the ground?"
Pregnant with horrors as this subject appears to be, the Scriptures supply
two most desirable sources of consolation, with the mention of which I
shall hasten to conclude it.
1. While considering the terrific facts of the existence and works of the
devil, recollect the _limitation of his agency_. If no kind of restraint
were imposed upon his efforts, if his untractable malice were allowed to
act with all its diabolical force, and were absolutely under no
restrictions, the idea of his being and of his malignity would be
unutterably appalling: but the giant foe is held in the mighty grasp of
Omnipotence. His power is only permitted to operate to a certain extent,
and under the regulations of certain laws ordained by the eternal mind. He
who says to the raging ocean, "Here shall thy proud waves be stayed,"
assigns the sphere of infernal influence, and places impassable barriers
of a moral nature to his further encroachment. Evil of every description,
and evil beings of every order, are under divine superintendence and
control. The lion is chained--the dragon cannot add one cubit to his
stature--a point to his tongue--or a drop to his venom. The serpent may
hiss, but he cannot devour.
The influence of Satan resembles every other test that Divine Wisdom sees
fit to apply to human character. It is probationary. The people of God are
put to the proof, and their principles subjected to fiery trials. But gold
will endure the furnace, and real piety will "resist the devil, and he
will flee." He could tempt the Son of God, and he can torment his
followers; but he possesses no compulsory power. His attacks can never be
successful, unless _we_ give them efficacy by our criminal negligence and
compliance.
Nor is it just to suppose, as many good people do to their inexpressible
but useless alarm, that every individual is under his constant power, or
every moment exposed to his incessant attacks. This would be to assign him
a degree of omnipresence wholly incompatible with his nature and the
economy of providence. Like other evil beings he _walketh about_. His
movements may be more rapid as a spirit, and his capacities more extended
and certainly his malignity more violent, than those of other wicked
beings; still he is hut a creature--he has his appointed sphere of
exertion--his capacities are finite--and he is observed by the unsleeping
eye of God. He may prowl around the sheepfold of Christ, but the guard is
too strong for him; and if he seize, or attempt the feeblest of the flock,
Omnipotence will ultimately rescue the prey from the hand of the terrible.
2. Let us realize with holy satisfaction the _destruction of Satanic
power_. "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might
destroy the works of the devil." The apostle John, in his Revelation,
describes "the devil" as "cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where
the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night
forever and ever."
In conceiving of the destruction of this hateful dominion, we may realize
it as _certain_. Although the issue of the war between good and evil,
Christ and Belial, heaven and hell, be deferred to a distant age, it is
not doubtful or precarious. It is ever present in the eye of God, and
forms a part of that irresistible destiny which infernal power cannot
avert. There is no escape from the chains of darkness which Omnipotence
will finally rivet on; and this irreversible doom of fallen spirits is
essential to the final arrangements of that wonderful period, which will
develope "the consummation of all things."
It is the glory of the religion of Christ, that none of its promises or
plans are precarious. The hopes of Christians cannot be lost in the crush
of nature or the wreck of the world; and the condemnation of impenitent
sinners and of Satan cannot be averted by any mistake of evidence, by any
confusion, of multitude, or by any unevenness of balance in the scales of
justice in the day of judgment.
The destruction of Satan and his power may be considered as _gradual_ in
the mode of its accomplishment. The whole system of revealed truth, from
the period of the first prediction, points to this predestined end; and
the whole scheme of Providence, including the rise and fall of empires,
the work of Christ, and all the events of time through successive
generations, respects this mighty and this marvellous result--a result
connected so essentially with the glory of God, the honour of Christ, and
the felicity of a redeemed universe.
"For this purpose the Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the
works of the devil." But it was not deemed fit to do it at once, and at a
single blow; if it had, he who commanded the boisterous winds and the
raging seas, and they were still--he who expelled demons at a word, and
cured diseases by a touch--he whose creative energy restored lost limbs to
the victims of misery--who reanimated the dead and the putrifying, and
remanded their spirits from an invisible state--could have withered at a
touch the power of hell, crushed in a moment the throne of diabolical
authority, and bound the dragon himself in his eternal chain. But the
wisdom of God, which at first permitted evil to stain his moral creation,
designs to admit the reign or influence of Satan for an appointed period,
and to overturn his dominion by a gradual establishment of truth and
righteousness in the earth. The great adversary was smitten by his hand
when the first promise of salvation was given to our race; the stroke was
repeated, in successive predictions to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and the
death-blow inflicted when the expiring Redeemer exclaimed on the cross,
"_It is finished_!" Still, like a dying monster, who raves amidst his
agonies, and terrifies spectators by his terrific aspect and more terrific
efforts, and destroys or mangles all who venture within the reach of his
arm, Satan still rages and raves--sometimes languishing into comparative
inaction, at other times breathing out threatening and slaughter against
the church of God--still conscious that his power is declining, and that
the whole system of providence is preparing for his final overthrow.
This overthrow will be _complete_. He will never more ascend from his
confinement, to fill the earth with plagues or the church of Christ with
terror. The "new heaven and earth wherein dwelleth righteousness," will
never be exposed to his awful revisitings--the contest will have for ever
ended--the struggle eternally ceased; and the harps of angels, with the
holy hymnings of ten thousand times ten thousand before the throne--
"Blest voices, uttering praise!"
will proclaim the full, the final, the everlasting victory. And in the
heavenly city "there shall be no more curse; but the throne of God and of
the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: and they shall
see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be
no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the
Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever." (See
APPENDIX.)
Dorcas.
Chapter X.
Joppa illustrious on many accounts, particularly as the residence of
Dorcas--she was a Disciple of Christ--Faith described as the Principle
of Discipleship--the inspired Testimony to the Character of Dorcas--she
was probably a Widow or an aged Maiden--Remarks on the Reproaches
commonly cast upon the latter Class of Women--Dorcas exhibited as a
Pattern of liberality, being prompt in the Relief she afforded--her
Charities abundant--and personally bestowed--Observations on the
Propriety of visiting the Poor--the Charities of Dorcas often free and
unsolicited--wise and conducted upon a Plan--the Pretences of the
uncharitable stated and confuted--Riches only valuable as they are used
in bountiful Distribution.
Seven of the most celebrated cities of antiquity (Smyrna, Rhodes,
Colophon, Salamis, Chios, Argos, and Athens) are said to have disputed the
glory of having given birth to Homer; and it must be admitted that places
and families acquire an importance from their connection with names which
appear conspicuous on the page of history, and have been praised by the
united voices of successive generations. We cannot hear, without an
instinctive glow, of the cities of Rome, Athens, Sparta, Syracuse, and
others which respectively produced a Caesar, a Demosthenes, a Lycurgus,
and an Archimedes; of the islands of Samos and AEgina, whence emanated the
resplendent genius of a Pythagoras and a Plato; of the villages of Alopece
and Andes, immortalized as having produced a Socrates and a Virgil.
But let not the enchanting annals of Roman literature or Grecian wisdom
detach our minds from the nobler records of inspiration, or diminish the
conviction which religion must ever inspire, that the birth place of
benevolence and piety is more illustrious than the birthplace of genius
and philosophy. On this principle we look with admiration upon the town of
Joppa, which, if it cannot boast a prodigy of valour, talent, or learning,
is nevertheless conspicuous as the residence of one "of whom the world was
not worthy." She was not, indeed, rich in wealth, but in good works. She
was not a conqueror of nations or a distributor of crowns, but a giver of
alms. She had no name on earth beyond the limits of a small Christian
church, but her record was on high, and her memorial has not perished
with her.
Joppa was the nearest seaport to Jerusalem on the Mediterranean. It was
situated in the tribe of Dan in a fine plain, and has acquired the modern
name of Jaffa. This place is frequently mentioned in Scripture. The
materials for the construction of Solomon's temple were sent thither in
floats, by Hiram, the king of Tyre, whence they were easily conveyed by
land to Jerusalem. Jonah, in his flight from the presence of the Lord,
embarked at this port, and gave occasion to the mythological fable of
Andromeda. Here the apostle Peter enjoyed that remarkable vision, in which
he saw heaven opened, and a great sheet descending to the earth, which
seemed to contain every variety of beasts, and creeping things, and fowls
of the air; intimating to him the abolition of the Mosaic law, and the
removal of those distinctions which had so long separated the Jews and the
Gentiles. It is probable Philip preached the Gospel here in his progress
through various cities to Cesarea; but the history of Dorcas, or, as she
was originally called in the Syriac dialect, Tabitha, has given it
peculiar prominence in the sacred page.
The memorial of this excellent woman is short, but replete with
instruction. Her character is sketched at a stroke, and by the
introduction of an incident as full of significance and interest as can
well be imagined. Dropping those minute details and accidental
circumstances which are not necessary to character, and which the New
Testament so seldom mentions, the most instructive part of her story is
preserved and set in the most brilliant point of light.
She is simply announced, in the first place, as "a certain disciple," or
one that embraced the faith of Christ, and professed it by baptism and a
public union with his church. Whatever might be her situation in other
respects was of little consequence; this was her best, her most
substantial distinction. It invested her with a real glory, which however
overlooked by those who are chiefly attracted by exterior splendour,
surpassed every vain and glittering honour of the world. It raised her to
the dignity of a name in the volume of inspiration, and the unfading
distinction of a place in the annals of eternity.
How poor and how perishable is human fame; and yet with what eagerness is
it universally sought! What is it but like a bubble, excited by some
accidental cause, to sparkle for a moment on the stream of passing ages,
and then to disappear for ever! And yet the love of fame has been called,
and perhaps with propriety, the ruling passion; for so much does it blend
itself with human motives, that there are comparatively few of our
actions, at least such as are visible to the public eye, which may not be
traced to this feeling, or which do not receive a tone from its influence.
But how shall we describe that faith which is often mentioned in the New
Testament, which so marked the character of Dorcas, and which, perhaps,
may not be inaptly called the _principle_ of discipleship?
This term is of various import, and of very extensive application in
Scripture. It signifies belief, and refers to testimony either human or
divine; but is restricted in its evangelical use to the latter. Revelation
in general is the object of faith: and those invisible realities which it
discloses to the mental eye are seen with equal distinctness, and believed
with equal conviction, as if they were capable, from possessing some
material quality, of impressing the corporeal senses. Faith glorifies its
great Object and Author by paying an implicit deference to his authority.
It asks no other bond than his promise, no other evidence or attestation
than his veracity. It not only ranges through worlds which mortal eye
could never explore, but which human reason could never discover: and as
by transgression man has fallen under the dominion of his senses, it
delivers its happy possessor from this state of degradation and
wretchedness.
But though this be a general signification of the word, its more precise
and appropriate use in the Gospel is expressed by the phrase, "believing
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." Here the general and the
particular use are necessarily blended. Faith is belief--but belief in
"the truth as it is in Jesus." To believe, in the ordinary sense, is to
admit a fact, to assent to the statement of an accredited or respectable
witness; to believe in Jesus as the Son of God, is to acknowledge his
real character, to perceive his true dignity, to view and to love him,
not only as distinguished by perfect excellence; but as specifically the
Saviour of lost sinners; for "whosoever believeth that Jesus is the
Christ, is born of God." Faith comprehends what he is, contemplates him in
all his glorious offices, and from the manger of meanness traces him to
the throne of power, relying upon what he has suffered and said as the
infallible pledge of what he will accomplish. It is not only well
informed, but humble. It resided in his heart who exclaimed, "Lord, save
me!" It dictated his language who cried out, "Lord, remember me when thou
comest into thy kingdom." It gave efficacy to the prayer of that humble
petitioner who said, "Speak the word only, and my servant shall be
healed." It is pleasing to God, essential to salvation, and his own gift:
for "Enoch had this testimony, that he pleased God"--"a man is justified
by faith"--and "by grace ye are saved through faith, and that not of
yourselves, it is the gift of God."
Faith is not dormant, but active and operative. It resembles good seed
sown in the cultivated soil, which expands, and grows, and produces fruit.
This holy vegetation exists in very different degrees of vigour, according
to the diversities of Christian character, but it is apparent in all--the
mark of true religion, the pleasing verdant hue that covers the whole
surface of the spiritual creation. We cannot point to every pious person
as a Dorcas, who presents a singular fertility of some of the noblest
graces; but of all it may be said, "the root of the matter is found in
them," and "their root shall not be rottenness, nor their blossom go up
as dust."
It is the nature of genuine faith to stimulate to the most laborious
duties, to sustain amidst the most poignant sufferings, to produce the
greatest purity of character, to communicate the noblest kind of happiness
of which a creature in the present state can be susceptible, to nerve the
feeblest arm with strength, to give the dullest eye perception, above all,
to "work by _love_." For these reasons, and because of its transforming
influence, we denominated it the principle of discipleship. It operates by
love to its object and to all its subjects, as well as to the divine
commandments in general; and influences its possessor to practise
universal philanthropy. To the latter our particular attention is now
directed by the example of Dorcas; but it must not be forgotten, that
though the particular specimen of her excellence be taken from the common
offices of kindness and the act of almsgiving, the existence and
proportionate vigour of the great principle from which her minor charities
resulted must be presupposed, as by observing the fertility of a branch,
or the verdure of a twig, or even the greenness of a leaf, we infer the
growth of the tree, its root, its stem, and all its various ramifications.
While we contemplate this flourishing plant of grace, we know that it was
deeply "rooted and grounded" in faith.
The inspired testimony is as follows: "This woman was full of good works
and alms-deeds, which she did." Amongst other acts of beneficence, she was
accustomed to make "coats and garments" for "the widows." Her own
circumstances are not specified. If she were _poor_, as the mass of
Christian converts in the apostolic times appears to have been, her
readiness in furnishing these supplies was admirable indeed. As Paul
testified of the Macedonian believers, she contributed to the utmost, yea,
and beyond her power: nor are these solitary instances of persons
willingly impoverishing themselves in obedience to the fine impulse of a
pious sympathy. While others have calculated, they have acted, incapable
of a cold arithmetic and a measured benevolence. If Dorcas were _rich_,
she is perhaps entitled to a still higher commendation. So many are the
obstructions which "great possessions" cast in the way of charity, so many
temptations to a lavish expenditure, beset the opulent, and to support
this, on the other hand, to a parsimonious, _saving_ habit; so easy is it
to frame excuses, and by trifling precautions to escape importunity, or at
once to silent it; that it may well excite both wonder and delight to find
charity associated with splendour. It is surprising, however, and no less
deplorable than surprising, that persons of this class will not consider
for a moment, how easily, with how few sacrifices even of time or money,
they might be extensively useful. A single drop of supply from their
replenished cup of worldly prosperity, would often make "the widow's heart
sing for joy," and prove a healing cordial to the sufferings of perishing
humanity. A slight taxation upon even acknowledged superfluity, would in
some cases produce an ample revenue for many indigent families, although
religion claims on their behalf more than a scanty and unwilling pittance;
for "he which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which
soweth bountifully, shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he
purposeth in his heart, _so let him give_; not grudgingly or of necessity,
for God loveth a cheerful giver."
From the sacred narrative, we are led to infer that Dorcas was either a
widow herself, possessed perhaps of a moderate competence, a state which
seems of all others the most favourable to a benevolent disposition; or
one of the class of females, sometimes designated by the reproachful
epithet of _old maids_. And having introduced the term, it may not be
improper to make a short digression upon this subject.
It cannot be doubted that a life of celibacy is unnatural, and contrary to
the general appointment of Infinite Wisdom; consequently, a voluntary
seclusion of this kind from the duties of our proper sphere as social
beings, unless the case be very remarkable, and the counteracting
obligation singularly clear, must deserve censure. By this conduct
whatever important results are connected with the marriage union by the
law of Providence, are deliberately opposed, and the principle is no less
sinful than it is pernicious. But the case of determined celibacy is far
less common among females than with the other sex, and where it does
exist, is usually attended with less evil effects upon the good
of society.
In respect to the two most frequent occasions of continuing single, among
women of piety, the one demands admiration, the other pity; but neither
can, without a total dereliction of all reason and propriety, excite
ridicule. The first which has been made, is that of a voluntary
resignation of the pleasures and solicitudes of matrimony, for the sake of
more extensive usefulness, and at the call of duty. Such is the case of
women who deem themselves required, or are considered by others as
remarkably qualified for foreign and missionary service in the cause of
God, or who, from the high tone of their irreligious feeling, have
ascended to an unusual degree of spiritual elevation of character, and
whether called to labour abroad or at home, are desirous of an entire and
incessant self-devotement to Jesus Christ. These instances are indeed rare,
and can scarcely be estimated by ordinary rules, but they were not
unprecedented in the primitive age of Christianity. Dorcas might possibly
be a woman of this extraordinary character. Her works were at least worthy
of one who was thus bearing the cross, for "the kingdom of
heaven's sake."
The second class of aged single females presents a subject for
compassionate sympathy. They are not solitaries by choice, but necessity:
and whoever sports with their destiny, betrays a cruel, if not a wicked
mind. They have already been the prey of disappointments the most
agonizing to the mind; let them not be the objects of unmeaning contempt
or impious sarcasm. There was a time when the morning of life rose upon
them in all its enchantment and beauty. Every thing around them smiled,
and their yet unwithered hopes were alive to every delightful impression.
Who knows but the object of their tenderest earthly affection was severed
from them by death, whose murderous instrument inflicted an incurable
wound? Who can say, but that the very sex which dares to load them with
contumely for their solitary condition, was, by its base flatteries and
delusive promises, the very occasion of their unhappiness? Who can deny,
but that religion itself might have been honoured by their noble heroism,
in refusing the solicitations of some, who, although distinguished for
many accomplishments, possessions, and connexions, were either enemies to
the Gospel or indifferent about it? They trembled, perhaps, to please
their taste, and "lose their own souls."
Nameless and numberless may be the occasion of an involuntary, and
therefore justifiable celibacy. Besides, how has this condition been
improved! How have some of these venerable women gone about doing good!
What a wise and holy improvement have they made of the dispensations of
providence! Their very disappointments have become the means of increased
zeal in the best of causes, and given an impulse to their activity. They
have arisen from the golden dreams of pleasure and promotion, to the
dignity of the saint indeed. Their temporal sorrows have awakened their
spiritual energies. They have lost the blessings of a family, but have
from that moment adopted, under that sacred name, the whole community of
mankind. Let ridicule be abashed before the majesty of such characters!
The excellent woman in question seems to have partaken much of the spirit
which pervaded the church at Jerusalem in these times of primitive
simplicity and zeal, when all temporal considerations appear to have been
overwhelmed by the hope of eternal blessedness. "And the multitude of them
that believed were of one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them
that aught of the things which be possessed was his own; but they had all
things in common.... Neither was there any among them that lacked; for as
many as were possessors of lands or houses, sold them, and brought the
prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles'
feet; and distribution was made unto every man, according as he had need."
Although this community of goods is not to be regarded as an absolute
precedent for our imitation, considering that it is impracticable in all
cases, was chiefly restricted to one Christian society in a very peculiar
situation, and is never enjoined upon others; yet, no duty is more
expressly commanded, or more solemnly inculcated in Scripture, than that
of liberality to the poor. In the enactments of Moses it is vigorously
enforced, it is urged by the prophets and apostles; and represented by
Christ himself as an evidence of the highest perfection of character; "If
thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor."
In those passages where a summary of religion is presented by an
enumeration of its most important points, this virtue is distinctly
mentioned. It is stated as an invariable characteristic of the most
eminent saints, as Abraham, Job, and others; it is often called
_righteousness_, is represented as a fulfilment of the divine law, or the
best expression of our love to God; and while tremendous judgments are
threatened to those who disregard this sacred duty, the most ample rewards
are promised to the pious benefactors of mankind. "Blessed," said Christ,
"are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." "To do good and
communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased."
Such persons are described as "making themselves bags which wax not old, a
treasure in the heavens that faileth not"--as "making themselves friends
of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when they fail, they may he
received into everlasting habitations"--and as "laying up in store for
themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay
hold on eternal life." The equitable decisions of the last day are to be
founded upon a reference to these principles, as the basis of that
sentence which will irreversibly fix our destinies. "When the Son of man
shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he
sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all
nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd
divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right
hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his
right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared
for you from the foundation of the world. For I was an hungered, and ye
gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and
ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I
was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him,
saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee? or thirsty, and
gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked,
and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto
thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you,
Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye
have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand,
Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil
and his angels: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat: I was
thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in:
naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an
hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and
did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I
say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye
did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but
the righteousness into life eternal."
The history of Dorcas is very instructive as to the genuine character of
charity, and the best mode of distribution. It teaches us not only to
cultivate this heavenly temper, but in what manner it may become most
useful. We have here, indeed, a fine and finished picture; and we cannot
do better than study it closely, and copy it with all possible accuracy.
This venerable woman was _prompt_ and _undelaying_ in the relief she
afforded to the necessitous. She was not all promise and all tardiness,
quick to feel but slow to succour. It is not uncommon for the most
parsimonious persons to be liberal in good words, and to superadd the pang
of disappointment to the already almost insupportable sufferings of the
destitute. What is the language of commiseration unaccompanied with
substantial assistance, but a drop of burning caustic poured into the
wounded heart, instead of a healing cordial? To listen to the tale of wo,
and to solicit by apparent kindness its minute and tragical details, only
to mock expectation by professed incapacity, is the very perfection of
cruelty, the forfeiture of a solemn pledge which is given in the very
assumption of a listening attitude, and highly dishonourable; for we have
no right to know the history of distress, if we feel indisposed to relieve
it. "If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, and one
of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled,
notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the
body; what doth it profit?"
There is a posthumous charity which often purchases to the dispenser
considerable reputation when he little deserves it, and which is utterly
vain to him who is inevitably beyond the reach of human applause or
censure. If the charity of Dorcas had been of this questionable nature, we
should not have read of the widows that stood Weeping by her death-bed,
and exhibiting the various articles of clothing she made "_while she was
with them_." Assured that life was the proper time of action, and that
opportunities of usefulness could never be recalled, she "did with her
might whatever her hands found to do." It is deplorable to see the numbers
who, while possessing ample means and rich opportunities of feeding the
hungry, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick, consume their lives in
forming their plans, or proclaiming their intentions. They are indeed
great benefactors in their _wills_, and with unsparing liberality
distribute their wealth, when they can no longer keep it. They were
bountiful, only because they were mortal; and notwithstanding the
misplaced commendations of their survivors, bestow reluctantly what death
extorts. Dorcas was "full of good works and alms-deeds which she DID." A
person, with whom the writer is acquainted, had specified a large sum in
his will to be appropriated to the purpose of erecting convenient
alms-houses for the poor; but bethinking himself of the possibility that
his life might be extended to a distant period, and that in the meantime
the poor would continue to buffer, and many of them perish without the
projected aid, he became the instant executor of his own will, and lived
for years to be a gratified witness of that comfort which must otherwise
have been so long delayed. It is descriptive of the "good man," that "he
HATH dispersed, he HATH given to the poor."
Another feature in the beautiful portrait of female excellence before us,
is the _abundance and variety of her charities_. Dorcas is represented as.
"_full_ of good works and alms-deeds?" and though I the coats and garments
which she gave to the widows are only mentioned, they are to be considered
as one specimen only of a very extended system of benevolence. She was
neither capricious, nor merely occasional in her bounty; but "glorified
the Father, by bearing _much_ fruit."
Some persons are the mere creatures of impulse. When affected by any
violently exciting cause, they start into momentary vigour, and by a kind
of convulsive effort resist the inwrought habit of their minds, but
instantly relapse into greater insensibility. If a necessitous case be
presented to their attention under deeply afflicting circumstances, with
powerful recommendations, especially from those whom they are solicitous
of pleasing, or with whom they expect to be enrolled in the popular and
widely circulated list of donations, they may at times he found
"_willing_ to communicate," but even then never attain the noble
pre-eminence of "_a cheerful_ giver." It would have pleased them, however,
to have remained unasked; and if by any petty artifice they could have
evaded the application, they would most readily have adopted it, provided
they could have saved their reputation as well as their pence.
You may sometimes meet with persons who are indeed charitable, but their
charity is sectarian. They do good within certain limits, but never take a
wider range; and if they do not "forbid" others, who "follow not with
them," they afford no encouragement to their exertions. They have chosen a
particular spot to cultivate, and beyond the encircling fence which
bigotry has marked out, they cannot he persuaded to impart even a drop of
refreshing supply. What they do seems, in some measure, an apology for
what they omit; but what they omit detracts from the value of what they
do. They are not "FULL of good works."
Others have certain stated charities; and though they have passed the
narrow boundary of party prejudice, have made no provision in their plans
for cases of singular and sudden calamity. Their charity walks in
particular districts, and cannot go a step out of the beaten track. They
have allotted a certain portion of their income to the regular calls of
necessity, which cannot be exceeded, and have a specified circle of
objects which cannot be changed; and, if one may judge by their
comparative callousness to all other claims, it would be natural to infer
that they had taken a certain _quantum sufficit_ from their stock of
sensibility, which bore an invariable proportion to their calculations. In
vain you plead for the most urgent distress, in vain you solicit the
smallest contribution; they have no sympathies left; and, beyond u certain
sphere, they are relentless, impenetrable, and cruel.
In proportion as charity is methodical, it is apt to become cold; and
though we cannot plead for that diffusiveness which is bounded by no
prescribed limits, regulated by no order, or influenced by no preferences,
yet care should be taken lest it suffer by restriction. If this holy fire
be too much confined, it will be in danger of extinction.
Another and a pleasing peculiarity in the benevolence of Dorcas, is, that,
so far as appears from her brief history, her benefactions were
_personally bestowed_. She is represented as _making_ the garments given
to the poor widows herself; and doubtless to ascertain what they wanted,
and the proportion of their respective necessities, she was in the habit
of visiting their habitations, for the purposes of inquiry and inspection.
These visits, besides, would afford favourable opportunities for pious
conversation. How often she wept over their sorrows--what words of peace
and consolation she uttered--what salutary instructions she
communicated--what fervent petitions she uttered, cannot indeed now be
ascertained; but there is a book which has recorded them in imperishable
characters, and a day approaching when they shall be disclosed and
rewarded. "For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that
every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he
hath done, whether it be good or bad."
It would be easy to specify many reasons why the charitable should _visit_
the poor. Independently of the inferiority of the impression which is
produced on the mind by the mere recital of the sufferings of others, it
is scarcely possible to obtain correct information respecting their actual
and diversified necessities, without repairing to their cottages. The most
faithful narrator will not deem it necessary or proper to enter into
certain particulars, which the vigilant eye of sympathizing benevolence
would at once discover, and the heart of pity must deeply feel. Owing to
the different effects which the same distress produces on persons whose
natural constitutions are dissimilar, it may often happen that the most
afflicting part of their condition is overlooked; and the prompt
assistance which would otherwise be afforded, is lost through some
omission or unintentional misstatement. "To visit the fatherless and the
widows in their affliction," is no less represented by an apostle as
constituting the best exemplification of "pure religion," than "to keep
himself unspotted from the world;" and in the transactions of the final
judgment, the supreme Arbiter is described as noticing with peculiar
approbation, as even making the very determining point of his people's
character and destiny, their _visiting_ the sick and those in a state of
imprisonment, in order to supply them with the necessaries or comforts of
existence.
Ladies are respectfully urged to these labours of love, from the
consideration that they possess the most leisure and the best
opportunities of doing them. It would prove a wise and pleasurable mode of
employing some of the intervals of domestic engagement, and furnish both
useful and interesting subjects of reflection to fill up the vacuities of
thought. But if the multiplicity of their concerns furnish some plausible
excuse for, at least, a less constant and busy attention to the wants of
poverty; single ladies, on whom the cares of a family have not yet
devolved, should feel it their duty, and will ever find it their
privilege, to be thus devoted to the cause of suffering humanity. Their
time is their own, their property at their command. They are responsible
alone to God and their own consciences; and by these services to the
community are every day and hour giving a practical and unanswerable reply
to the scoffings of an illiberal world. How much better are these visits
of mercy than visits of ceremony, in which useless hours are squandered
away amidst the butterflies of fashion, insufferable fatigue is sustained,
scandal circulated, and religion outraged! Sweet and refreshing is the
sleep of active benevolence: it knows no tossings, is visited by no bitter
compunctions or terrific visions; it is cradled in innocence, lulled to
rest by the music of gratitude, and guarded by the sleepless eye of
Providence.
The habit of visiting the abodes of misery is an important means of
improving our sympathies. They will become less sickly and less
capricious. Those who have only wept over fictitious sorrow, will learn to
shed tears of real feeling at the sight of real grief; and will gradually
associate the idea of doing good with the strong emotions of a genuine
liberality. It is of importance for our own sakes, as well as for the
welfare of others, that sentiments of this kind should fill the mind, and
that the fine edge of sensibility should never be blunted. Some, it is
true, are very little solicitous for the improvement of any of their
faculties; but let them remember that the faculty which is not improved,
usually and almost necessarily suffers deterioration; and that he who does
not warm and expand into benevolence, is likely to contract into
contemptible selfishness.
Mere pecuniary aid, or indeed any other form of donation, is after all a
cheap description of charity. The most avaricious persons may sometimes.
resort to annual or other stated contributions, as expedients to save
trouble and to pacify conscience; and while we duly appreciate this
periodical goodness, it is insufficient as the basis of a claim to
philanthropy of spirit. How many in the carpeted walks of wealth will
readily purchase, by this means, an exemption from the inconvenience of
soiling their shoes, or hurting their delicacy, by going to witness scenes
of real distress.
Ladies of opulence or of leisure should reflect further, that in paying an
occasional visit to the dwellings of poverty and suffering, they are not
only likely to discover many cases of silent, unobtrusive wretchedness,
which but for their personal inquiries and researches might sink into the
grave without the smallest relief, while clamorous wo sometimes gains the
ear of the most thoughtless passenger, but they become the means of
imparting a twofold blessing. In addition to what they give, the sense of
their sympathy enhances the favour, and it is received with double
pleasure. Man is possessed of a social principle, which operates with
peculiar energy in cases of affliction. As a consciousness of neglect
excites disgust and resentment, so a conviction of being the object of
solicitude and sympathy produces the most grateful emotions. It may,
therefore be safely asserted, that a donation to the poor, when
_personally_ bestowed by the donor, is, in consequence of the effect
produced on the _mind_ of the sufferer, of incalculably greater importance
and use than the same or even a superior sum contributed by the cold
agency of some unfeeling distributor. Besides, a charitable soul has a
perpetual feast. Who can remain an unaffected spectator of the tearful
eye--the speaking look--the thankful smile? The very silence which an
overwhelming sense of kindness imposes, is more delightful to a benevolent
spirit than dainties to the taste or music to the ear.
In dispensing charity, many valuable acquisitions may be gained. It is, in
fact, a profitable service; and he makes an excellent exchange indeed,
who, while bestowing money or goods to assist the poor, obtains
substantial instruction. Here then, in the meanest hovel, in the most
shattered and weather-beaten shed, amidst cries of distress and sights of
sorrow, the wisest may gain knowledge. What a lesson of gratitude is
taught in every scene and circumstance! Who maketh thee to differ from
another in point of temporal possession, mental superiority, or religious
distinction? What hast thou, that thou hast not _received_? That humble
cottager is human, like thyself! That nest of callowness and weakness
contains the same species with thyself, on whom Providence has bestowed
wings to soar to heights of prosperity and enjoyment. Thou art descended
from the same common Father, and art heir of the same common dust! Thy
life is no less precarious, if it be less wretched, than that which
animates a meaner clay, and breathes in a less decorated exterior! If the
one be porcelain, and the other earthen ware, both are brittle! "God hath
made of one blood all nations of men." Sometimes a cottage furnishes an
impressive lesson respecting the _independence of happiness upon external
circumstances_. It teaches the salutary truth, that it is in the power of
religion to impart substantial felicity in every condition, to communicate
exalted enjoyment, to form an ennobled character in the meanest
habitation, and to inspire the sublime sentiment of the poet:
"Give what thou wilt, _without_ thee I am poor,
And _with_ thee rich, take what thou wilt away."
COWPER.
Poverty has been the lot of the most distinguished of the human species;
and if ever the vanity of riches, and the incurable emptiness of temporal
splendour are felt, surely it must be when visiting the dwellings of the
_pious_ poor. No riches can inspire their songs of praise, or purchase a
title to their immortal inheritance. No rank or dignity can attract the
eyes of those holy spirits that hover round the spot to which affliction
has confined an outcast Lazarus, or kindle such rapturous sensations and
holy congratulations, as they manifest at the repentance of a sinner.
Piety hallows the dwelling which it inhabits, and felicitates as well as
sanctifies the heart, the family, and the city which it pervades. In the
primitive ages of Christianity, the disciples of our Lord could see the
rapacious oppressor seize the last portion of their worldly goods, and
"take it joyfully;" they could "most gladly glory in their infirmities,
that the power of Christ might rest upon them;" they could hail the
martyr's stake, while they anticipated the martyr's crown; and, in the
days of Paul and Silas, if there were a spot on earth where celestial joy
took up her residence, it was, at least for one happy night, in the very
dungeon of persecution.
To return to Dorcas. Her character is so described, as to imply that hers
were _free_, and often _unsolicited charities_. She did not indolently
wait for applications, or contrive a thousand delays, while misery was
pining into the grave; but, like her Divine Master, "_went about_ doing
good." She penetrated the obscurest retreats, not waiting to be pressed
and urged to afford a trifling relief; but her benevolence resembled the
course of the sun, which pours its beneficent radiance upon the earth with
undistinguishing liberality. It ought not to be forgotten, that
sometimes minds of the most delicate constitution are involved in all the
miseries of poverty, and placed in a situation of all others the most
painful, that of persons reduced from former competency and comfort. The
privations of life are far more sensibly felt by those who have once known
plenteousness. To them the wind of adversity blows with tenfold keenness,
and the crust of want seems peculiarly unpalatable. They are reluctant,
not to say "ashamed, to beg." The blushes of an instinctive sensibility
suffuse their countenances, and petitions for assistance falter on their
tongues. They have to contend not only with the afflictions of poverty,
but with all the timidity which a consciousness of degradation
superinduces. In many cases of this description, persons of eminent worth
have been found, who could not overcome their scruples, till absolute want
forced them abroad to suffer the rebuffs of an unfeeling world, or to gain
the scanty pittance which mere importunity extorted from reluctant
opulence. Dorcas is celebrated for having particularly selected such a
class of sufferers. She had sought out the _widows_, who had lost their
dearest relatives, by whose daily and cheerful labours they were perhaps
enabled to live in decent sufficiency, or by whose sympathizing tenderness
they were at least consoled amidst inevitable sorrows. The weakness of
their sex, or the infirmities of their advanced age, prevented their
contending with the storms of life; and, no doubt, many of them surrounded
by a numerous family, at the decease of the beloved of their hearts, were
left to struggle with accumulated difficulties.
Women on whom Providence has bestowed a sufficiency, might here find ample
means of usefulness among persons of their own sex. A helping hand might
rescue many a widow from the deep waters of overwhelming grief: a trifling
sum would in many cases prove an inestimable boon; and a very small
expense of time and trouble might produce the most valuable results. A
well-constructed system of benevolence resembles a fine adjustment of
mechanism: by a gentle force or a moderate supply, judiciously applied,
the whole machinery is kept in motion, and the greatest burdens
are removed.
This leads us to remark another characteristic feature in the charity of
Dorcas. It was _wise_ and _prudential_. She had a _plan_ which was not
only unexceptionable, but singularly excellent and worthy of imitation.
This consisted in furnishing the poor with substantial assistance, and
providing for the proper application of her aid to their real and most
pressing necessities. She made "coats and garments" for widows. It is to
be feared, that the good intentions of persons charitably disposed are
often frustrated by the improper manner in which they render assistance to
the poor. They fulfil the impulse of a benevolent spirit by sending or
giving their money, leaving the mode of its expenditure to their own
judgment. But it is notorious, that such as are in reduced circumstances,
and who feel the particular pressure of the moment which they are most
anxious to relieve, have very little sense of the real value of money and
of the propriety of providing against the difficulties of futurity. They
take the cordial to-day, draining out every drop, forgetting that the
phial will be empty to-morrow. In consequence of this extreme improvidence
and inconsideration, the pecuniary help they receive frequently does
little good, and fails of all the purposes which a pious charity intended.
The depravity of mankind, which must be expected to operate in the poor
as well as in the rich, is another occasion of the misuse of benevolent
aid. The friendly supply is consumed upon their lusts. Abandoned in
character and selfish in principle, many heads of poor families addict
themselves to bad company, despoiling their families of their earnings and
of charitable supplies, and stupifying their consciences in the cup of
intoxication. The discovery of such a misapplication ought not to
extinguish the feeling of sympathy, but rather excite it afresh; both
because the individuals themselves are to be doubly pitied for their
destitution of moral feeling and want of religion, as well as of necessary
subsistence, and because their outraged families demand renewed attention.
It ought also to render liberal persons particularly watchful of the use
which is made of their benefactions. It should not shut the heart, but
regulate the course of feeling. The sin of others does not exempt us from
the duty of contributing to the alleviation of their miseries, though it
ought to induce us to study the best expedients for counteracting it. It
is in fact quite as requisite that we should see to the application of
what is given as to give, in all cases where this is possible or
convenient. Dorcas appears to have adopted the useful plan of expending
the money which she appropriated to the poor widows, _for them_; partly
because she was probably better able to judge of the most useful mode of
assisting them, and partly because the very same sum would prove doubly
efficient in consequence of the savings which would acrue from working
with her own hands.
The pretences by which men excuse themselves from giving to the poor are
stated, and satisfactorily answered, by Dr. Paley, [43] in the following
words: "1. 'That they have nothing to spare,' _i.e._ nothing for which
they have not provided some other use: nothing which their plan or
expense, together with the savings they have resolved to lay by, will not
exhaust: never reflecting whether it be in their _power_, or that it is
their _duty_, to retrench their expenses, and contract their plan, 'that
they may give to them that need: or rather that this ought to have been
part of their plan originally.
"2. 'That they have families of their own, and that charity begins at
home.' The extent of this plea will be considered when we come to explain
the duty of parents."
_N. B._ The explanation is, that the duties of parents comprehend
"maintenance, education, and a reasonable provision for the child's
happiness in respect to outward condition.... A father of a family is
bound to adjust his economy with a view to these demands upon his fortune;
and until a sufficiency for these ends is acquired, or in due time
_probably_ will be acquired (for in human affairs _probability_ ought to
content us,) frugality and exertions of industry are duties. He is also
justified in declining expensive liberality: for, to take from those who
want, to give to those who want, adds nothing to the stock of public
happiness. Thus far, therefore, and no farther, the plea of 'children,' of
'large families,' charity begins at home,' &c. is an excuse for parsimony,
and an answer to those who solicit our bounty. Beyond this point, as the
use of riches becomes less, the desire of _laying up_ should abate
proportionably.
"3. 'That charity does not consist in giving money, but in benevolence,
philanthropy, love to all mankind, goodness of heart,' &c. Hear St. James:
"If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, and one of
you say unto them, Depart in peace; be ye warmed and filled;
notwithstanding _ye give them not those things which are needful to the
body_; what doth it profit?" James ii. 15, 16.
"4. 'That giving to the poor is not mentioned in St. Paul's description of
charity in the thirteenth chapter of his first epistle to the
Corinthians.' This is not a description of charity, but of good nature;
and it is not necessary that every duty be mentioned in every place.
"5. 'That they pay the poor-rates.' They might as well allege that they
pay their debts: for the poor have the same right to that portion of a
man's property which the laws assign to them, that the man himself has to
the remainder.
"6. 'That they employ many poor persons:'--for their own sake, not the
poor's;--otherwise it is a good plea.
"7. 'That the poor do not suffer so much as we imagine; that education and
habit have reconciled them to the evils of their condition, and make them
easy under it.' Habit can never reconcile human nature to the extremities
of cold, hunger, and thirst, any more than it can reconcile the hand to
the touch of a red hot iron; besides, the question is not, how unhappy any
one is, but how much more happy we can make him.
"8. 'That these people, give them what you will, will never thank you, or
think of you for it.' In the first place, this is not true; in the second
place, it was not for the sake of their thanks that you relieved them.
"9. 'That we are liable to be imposed upon.' If a due inquiry be made, our
merit is the same; besides that the distress is generally real, although
the cause be untruly stated. "10. 'That they should apply to their
parishes.' This is not always practicable: to which we may add, that there
are many requisites to a comfortable subsistence which parish relief does
not supply; and that there are some, who would suffer almost as much from
receiving parish relief as by the want of it; and lastly, that there are
many modes of charity to which this answer does not relate at all.
"11. 'That giving money encourages idleness and vagrancy.' This is true
only of injudicious and indiscriminate generosity.
"12. 'That we have too many objects of charity at home, to bestow any
thing upon strangers; or that there are other charities, which are more
useful, or stand in greater need.' The value of this excuse depends
entirely upon the _fact_, whether we actually relieve those neighbouring
objects, and contribute to those other charities.
"Besides all these excuses, pride, or prudery, or delicacy, or love of
ease, keep one half of the world out of the way of observing what the
other half suffer."
The sentiments expressed by the profound Dr. Barrow [44] will form an
appropriate conclusion to the present chapter.
"If we contemplate our wealth itself, we may therein descry great motives
to bounty. Thus to employ our riches, is really the best use they are
capable of; not only the most innocent, most worthy, most plausible; but
the most safe, most pleasant, most advantageous, and consequently in all
respects most prudent way of disposing of them. To keep them close,
without using or enjoying them at all, is a most sottish extravagance or a
strange kind of madness; a man thence affecting to be rich, quite
impoverished himself, dispossesseth himself of all, and alienateth from
himself his estate; his gold is no more his than when it was in the
Indies, or lay hid in the mines; his corn is no more his than if it stood
growing in Arabia or China; he is no more owner of his lands than he is
master of Jerusalem or Grand Cairo; for what difference is there, whether
distance of place or baseness of mind sever things from him? whether his
own heart or another man's hand detain them from his use? whether he hath
them not at all, or hath them to no purpose? whether one is a beggar out
of necessity or choice? is pressed to want, or a volunteer thereto? Such
an one may fancy himself rich, and others, as wise as himself, may repute
him so; but so distracted persons, to themselves and to one another do
seem great princes, and style themselves such; with as much reason almost
he might pretend to be wise or to be good. Riches are [Greek: Chremata] things
whose nature consists in usefulness; abstract that, they become nothing,
things of no consideration or value; he that hath them is no more
concerned in them than he that hath them not. It is the heart, and skill
to use affluence of things wisely and nobly, which makes it wealth, and
constitutes him rich that hath it; otherwise the chests may be crammed,
and the barns stuffed full, while the man is miserably poor and beggarly;
'tis in this sense true which the wise man says, '_There is that maketh
himself rich, yet hath nothing_'"
Lydia.
Chapter XI.
Account of Paul and his Companions meeting with Lydia by the River-side
at Philippi--the Impression produced upon her Heart by the Preaching of
Paul--Remarks on Conversion as exemplified in the Case of this
Disciple--its Seat the Heart--its Accomplishment the Result of divine
Agency--the Manner of it noticed--the Effects of a divine Influence upon
the human Mind, namely, attention to the Word of God and the Ordinances
of the Gospel, and affectionate Regard to the Servants of
Christ--Remarks on the Paucity of real Christians--the multiplying Power
of Christianity--its present State in Britain--Efforts of the
Bible Society.
The historical part of the New Testament, called the ACTS or THE APOSTLES,
contains a faithful record of the early propagation of the Gospel and the
incessant exertions of the first labourers in the vineyard. They were not
men who "wasted their strength in strenuous idleness," or dissipated the
time of action in "laboriously doing nothing;" but were endowed with
extraordinary qualifications and an inextinguishable zeal for their novel
and interesting employment. They reflected the light of the Sun of
Righteousness upon a dark age, and glowed with the very spirit of their
ascended Lord. Remarkable effects were produced upon the moral world,
notwithstanding the counteracting influence of human prejudice and
opposition; and as they quitted the world, amidst the whirlwinds of
persecution and in the flames of martyrdom, they dropped from their
ascending chariots the mantle upon their successors in office, who
"entered into their labours," and continued "with great power" to give
"witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; and great grace was upon
them all."
So wonderful are the appointments of Providence, that we find a youth who
took an active part in the murder of the first martyr to the Christian
cause, and afterward breathed forth an unrelenting hostility against all
its adherents, selected as the chief instrument of its extension in
various countries. That mighty energy which "commanded the light to shine
out of darkness," as he was on a persecuting expedition to Damascus,
"shined into his heart," and by a miraculous interposition not only
checked him in his career, but communicated to him "the light of the
knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ Jesus," and turned all
the energies of his character into a new and most important course of
exertion. He became a Christian, a preacher, an apostle, and a missionary
to the Gentile world: and while by his indefatigable labours he benefitted
so large a proportion of his contemporaries, by his inspired epistles he
has instructed the church 'of God in every succeeding age of the world.
Paul appears to have travelled over a considerable portion of Asia and
part of Europe. Barnabas, and afterward Silas and Timotheus, accompanied
him. In many places he suffered great personal injury, and his valuable
life was repeatedly endangered. Having passed through Phrygia and the
proconsular province of Asia, of which Ephesus was the capital, Paul and
Silas came at length to Troas, where the former had a vision, in which he
saw an inhabitant of Macedonia standing before him, and uttering this
request, "Come over and help us." This impressed his mind with a
conviction that he was called in providence to preach the gospel in that
part of Greece; and he immediately sailed down the Aegean Sea by the
island of Samothracia and the port of Neapolis, and from thence to
Philippi, which was a Roman colony. [45]
In this city, whither it seems probable from the history, that Luke had
accompanied them, they remained some days; and here we are introduced to
the brief but instructive account of the excellent woman whose name is
prefixed to this chapter.
Paul, and the companions of his missionary tour, first met with Lydia at
one of the Jewish places of prayer by the river-side, which ran near the
city. The Temple at Jerusalem, and previously the Tabernacle, were the
appointed places for the public worship of God, in the open court of
which, before the altar, the people assembled. But such as lived at a
distance, or from local inconveniences could not constantly repair to the
place of general association, were allowed to build _Proseuchiae_, or
_Oratories_, in one of which our Saviour continued all night in prayer.
They had no covering like synagogues, but were surrounded by porticoes, to
afford shelter from the inclemency of the weather, and were erected in the
suburbs of a city, by the baths or near rivers, on account of the
purifications so frequent with the Jews, and usually on very elevated
spots of ground. The proseucha signalized by the devotions of Christ was
on a mountain. Some have supposed that Isaac went out to meditate in the
evening in a place of this description. These were probably the _high
places_ of ancient times, in or near which groves were planted, and which
are only condemned in Scripture when appropriated to idolatrous purposes.
"I am like a green olive tree," says the Psalmist, "in the house of God."
Availing themselves of the opportunity afforded by the resort of devout
persons to these religious retirements, these zealous ministers of the
Gospel conversed and preached to the people, who on this occasion were
chiefly women. But though many were addressed, it does not appear that
more than one was substantially benefitted. Her attention was excited, her
heart opened, and her profession of the name of Jesus immediate and
public. The several points of her character deserve particular and
distinct illustration.
Lydia is said to have been of the city of Thyatira; but whether she had
removed to Philippi, or was only come for the purpose of trade, is not
certain. She was one who "worshipped God," that is, one who, in
distinction from the heathen around her, had learned the character of
Jehovah, and was probably a Jewish proselyte. [46] Instructed in the
ancient records of that extraordinary nation, which had been so many past
ages the only depository of divine truth, she was expecting the predicted
Messiah; and while, from the natural aversion of mankind to the
humiliating doctrine of salvation through a crucified person, the greater
proportion of Jews rejected him, she experienced a true conversion, not
only from the principles of heathenism, but from those of Judaism, to the
Gospel of Jesus Christ. A few instances of this description occur in the
evangelical record to show the sovereignty and diversified operations of
the grace of God.
That moral change, that spiritual renovation, which has been called
CONVERSION, is, we are aware, and ever will be, the subject of profane
ridicule amongst unbelievers. It does not indeed produce any astonishment,
although it awakens extreme regret, that one of the most obvious effects
resulting from the publication of the Gospel of Christ should be so
unblushingly denied by this class of mankind. "The natural man discerneth
not the things of the Spirit of God, because they are spiritually
discerned." The scriptures themselves predict this incapacity, even in
some of the most refined and intellectual of our species, to form a
conception of this marvellous change; and experience evinces the truth of
what they affirm, and which originates in the very nature of things. It
is characteristic of human perversity to disbelieve what is imperceptible
to reason or invisible to sense, and to vaunt itself upon that very
infidelity as a distinctive mark of pre-eminence, which is, in fact, a
proof of debasement and guilt. If a system of religion were to be so
constructed as to be exempt from the ridicule of the profane, it must be
itself ridiculous; because their distorted minds cannot discern the
beauties of truth, and their depraved feelings will not admit her claims.
To secure their approbation religion must change her character, alter her
doctrines, new cast her precepts, and new modify her principles.
Lydia presents an interesting specimen not only of the reality but of the
nature of the great work of conversion; and, however contemptible the
subject may appear in the eye of a dissipated world, or to the mind of a
prejudiced reader, we hesitate not to state the sentiments which
necessarily arise out of the present example respecting the seat and
source of this change, the agent by whom it is accomplished, and the
corresponding effects produced.
1. Our attention is, in the first place, to be directed to _the seat of
this spiritual renovation_. It is said of Lydia, that her HEART was
opened. This change, therefore, is of a moral nature, not merely
circumstantial, but radical. It does not consist in assuming a new name,
professing new opinions, using a new language, performing a few rites and
ceremonies, or reforming a few exterior vices, These are only
branches--the tree itself must be made good--the crab stock of nature must
be grafted with spiritual principles, and by being planted in the garden
of the Lord be brought under a heavenly culture. It is then only "the
fruits of righteousness" may be anticipated, "which are to the glory and
praise of God."
The disordered state of the passions is a striking evidence of human
degeneracy. In consequence of this a thousand mistakes are committed, and
a thousand follies practised. Each passion is fixed on a wrong object,
pursues an unworthy end, and is susceptible of false impressions. Indeed,
the will is totally perverted, and chooses, with obstinate resolution,
whatever is erroneous and criminal; on which account men are represented
in the metaphorical language of Scripture, as "loving darkness rather than
light." So astonishing is the degree of this perversion, that the Supreme
_Good_ is dreaded and avoided as if he were the only _evil_ in the
universe; and, however vain the attempt, guilt is continually seeking
concealment in some secret covert, some supposed security from his
omniscient inspection. Captivated by deceitful appearances, human
confidence is perpetually misplaced, and therefore perpetually betrayed;
the siren song of pleasure soothes the unhappy captives of her bewitching
charms into the bosom of destruction--the splendour of earthly
distinctions dims the eye of sense, and prevents its perception of the
bright realities of heaven. In fact, such has been the melancholy effect
of sin upon the perceptions of the human soul, that every thing is seen
through the medium of sensual passions in an inverted position--good seems
evil, and evil good--and till this disorder become rectified by a divine
touch, the heart will remain at enmity against God, the refuge and resort
of the worst dispositions, and the great central pandemonium of every
diabolical affection. Such is the statement of Jesus Christ himself, "From
within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries,
fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit,
lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness; all these
things come from within, and defile the man."
As the intellectual and moral state of man are, in a religious view,
closely connected, the renovation of the heart is essentially connected
with an important change in the understanding. The latter may, indeed, be
considerably improved and informed when no spiritual effect is produced
upon the former, but the former cannot be renewed without corresponding
and coincident effects on the latter; and the illumination of the
understanding is so universal, that believers are said to be "light in the
Lord." Their perceptions of truth are not mere gleamings and streaks of
divine radiance thrown across the obscurity of the mind, but all is light.
Nor is it merely new light diffused over objects familiar to the thoughts,
but a discovery of new scenes. The soul, in a sense, changes its
hemisphere, emerges from darkness, ascends to the summits of Pisgah, and
contemplates the ineffable glories of a new creation. "If any man be in
Christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away, behold all
things are become new." How touching and how worthy of adoption the
poet's language:
"Celestial light
Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers
Irradiate; there plant eyes, all mist from thence
Purge and disperse!"
MILTON.
The total renovation of the heart is evinced by susceptibility of
conscience. This moral faculty, in an unregenerate state, is either
perverted or hardened. In the former case, our obligations are not
clearly discerned, or are easily dispensed with; in the latter, the most
powerful appeals to love or fear are resisted. In the progress of sin to
its most awful consummation, those gentle whispers which were at first
noticed, and made the transgressor tremble till he sometimes let fall the
forbidden fruit, are at length unheard. Every intimation is silenced by
guilty merriment, which perhaps was at first forced, but soon becomes
habitual. Where conscience is not lulled into total inaction, it is, in
this state of character, violated with little remorse. The mind loses
sight of the glory of God, its best regulating principle; it is alive to
personal interests only, and discards every thing of a nobler nature. But,
in the sincere and humble Christian, conscience is tender, easily offended
with evil, and gradually approximating that state of susceptibly in
respect to sin, in which it resembles a well-polished mirror, that shows
the slightest particle of dust or damp upon its surface. Such a conscience
is no less _rigorous_ than it is tender, and repels temptation with
persevering energy. It will hold no debate with the tempter; and so far
from seeking to ascertain how far it may advance towards sinful
compliances without contracting actual guilt, it will "abstain from all
_appearance_ of evil."
In stating that the heart is the seat of those principles and the source
of that transformation of character which is comprehended in the term
_conversion_, it is intended to express the _permanent_ nature of the
change. It is not an opinion or an emotions resembling the morning cloud
and early dew that pass away, but an abiding and deep-wrought alteration.
"He which hath begun a good work in you, will carry it on until the day of
Christ Jesus;" in consequence of which, "the path of the just is as the
shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day."
"That such improvements of character often _have_ occurred, and are often
taking place now, cannot be denied by any philosophic observer of human
nature: to disregard them, or to neglect an investigation of their use, is
to neglect one of the most interesting classes of facts observable amongst
mankind. Who has not either heard of or witnessed the most extraordinary
changes of conduct, produced through the _apparent_ influence (to say the
least) of religious motives? I say nothing here of the _three thousand_
converted in one day at the feast of Pentecost--of the conversion of St.
Paul and others mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles--because those are
usually ascribed to the miraculous and _extraordinary_ influences of the
Holy Spirit in the apostolic times. But I may call your attention
ttomatters of more recent occurrence. You have witnessed instances of men
running eagerly the career of folly and dissipation, who have been
suddenly arrested, and changed from 'lovers of pleasure' to 'lovers of
God.' You have known others who have devoted themselves early to the
military profession, who literally knew _no_ fear, who have spent their
lives in the pursuit of glory, who have approached the verge of life full
of scars and full of honours, still panting after 'glory, honour,
immortality,' but thinking nothing of 'eternal life;' till, touched by an
irresistible hand, they have been transformed from good soldiers to 'good
soldiers of Jesus Christ,' have buckled on 'the armour of God,' 'fought
the good fight of faith,' and following 'the Captain of their salvation,'
have obtained 'the victory,' and been rewarded with _unfading_ laurels.
Others again, you have known, who have been strong and _high-minded_,
professing never to be subdued but by the force of argument, and
dexterously evading an argument when it _was_ forcible, if it were
calculated to expose the sophistry of 'free-thinking,' (as it is called,)
or to exhibit the reasonableness and advantages of being pious; you have
seen them increase in the dexterity of unbelief, and in callousness to
_moral_ impression, year after year,
'Gleaning the blunted shafts that have recoil'd,
Aiming them at the shield of truth again;'
and when a band of them has gone to church for the purpose of quizzing, or
of staring out of countenance some preacher of rather more than usual
energy and zeal, have known one of this band pierced by 'a dart from the
archer,' convinced that religion is 'the one thing needful,' and though he
came 'to scoff, remaining to pray.'" [47]
II. The second observable circumstance in the inspired account of Lydia's
conversion is, _its accomplishment by divine agency_. It is stated that
the LORD opened her heart. The effect is not ascribed to the apostle Paul,
or his illustrious coadjutors in the Christian ministry. They might speak
with the tongue of angels, and hum with the zeal of seraphs; to them might
be given in trust "the everlasting Gospel," which, like the apocalyptic
angel, they were carrying through "the midst of heaven" to the inhabitants
of the earth, "to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people;" they
might indeed possess the power not only of placing facts in the clearest
light, or urging arguments in the most forcible manner, but even of
working miracles; still they could not "open the heart." Indefatigable as
they were in their labours, they could not command success. At this
precise point human instrumentality ceases, and divine agency commences.
It is by no means an unfrequent effect of ministerial fidelity, to confirm
the native aversion of the impenitent to the doctrines of Christ. Pride
resists conviction, and fosters prejudice; and however unanswerable the
statements, or fervent the appeals which may be addressed to them, the
mind still remains unsubdued, the heart is still unopened. It requires the
interposal of a mightier power than either reason, remonstrance, or
miracle, to accomplish this wonderful transformation of character. Hosts
of apostles and legions of angels would be incompetent by their own
unaided exertions, to do "any thing as of themselves;" to give light to
_one_ blind eye, or to rectify _one_ prejudiced heart.
Human agency, then, cannot be of itself effectual. It is the _Lord_ who
opens the ear, the eye, the conscience, the understanding, and the
_heart_. The weapons of that spiritual warfare, in which Christian
ministers are engaged, can alone "pull down strong holds, cast down
imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the
knowledge of God," and "bring into captivity every thought to the
obedience of Christ," being "mighty _through God_." What would the weapon
accomplish, if the hand of Almighty power were not to grasp and wield it?
The experience of modern preachers, no doubt, resembles that of their
apostolic predecessors in the same field of holy labour. When
stout-hearted sinners have been attacked by all the force of argument, all
the power of eloquence, all the fire of zeal, all the holy violence of
appeal, all the tenderness of tears, and all the terrors of
denunciation--and when it might have been expected that a heart of marble
thus smitten must yield and break, and yet no emotion, at least no
repentance, no relinquishment of sin, and no obedience to Christ has
resulted--how often have they retired exclaiming, "_O the impotence of
human instrumentality!_" But when returning to their work, desponding or
deeply apprehensive, "going forth weeping, bearing precious seed," they
have at length seen the rebel struck, and in a moment abashed, humbled,
penitent--melted at a word--his prejudices dashed to the ground, like
Lucifer from heaven--his heart opened, like that of Lydia, and the bitter
stream of his enmity turned into the sweetness of Christian love--They
have paused--inquired--wondered--beheld the "_excellency_ of the power,"
which was "not of man, but of God;" and have retired exclaiming, "_O the
omnipotence of divine grace!_"
It is an extraordinary circumstance, that the agency of God, in the
production of the natural world, should be universally admitted, because
no other adequate cause can be assigned; and yet that it should, with so
little hesitation, be denied in the moral world. Why is God to be excluded
from this superior creation, but because men "do not like to retain him in
their knowledge," and because corrupted reason would deify itself and
dethrone the Almighty?--And here we have the characteristic distinction
between religion and irreligion. The former assigns God as the cause and
agent in every thing, born interior and exterior to us. It places him upon
the throne, subordinates every thing to his will, attributes every thing
to his influence. It contemplates his dominion as infinite, and his will
as the law of nature and of nations. It fully believes, that naturally and
spiritually "in him we live, and move, and have our being."
Irreligion--and we may comprehend in the term, not only extravagant
immorality or gross impiety, but a system which is found to exist under
the cloak of religion, and the pretence of doing God service--irreligion
of every class and in every form is perpetually limiting the empire of the
Deity, prescribing bounds to his influence, criticising and defining his
prerogatives, and refusing him the "right to reign over us."
The Scriptures uniformly ascribe the first principle, all the successive
actions, and the final consummation of religion in the heart, to the
Spirit of God. It is the subject of express promise: "And the Lord thy God
will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord
thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soul, that thou mayest
live."--"This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of
Israel: After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their
inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, and
they shall be my people."--"A new heart also will I give you, and a new
spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of
your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh; and I will put my Spirit
within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my
judgments and do them." The nature of this moral transformation is
distinctly stated in such passages as the following--"_Born_, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God"--"Ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be the Spirit of
God dwell in you. But if any man have not the Spirit of God, he is none of
his"--"As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of
God"--"We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works,
which God hath ordained, that we should walk in them." In the same manner,
the increase of religion is ascribed to the Spirit. "He which hath begun a
good work in you, will perform it unto the day of Jesus Christ"--"Now the
God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great
Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make
you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which
is well pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ." Let us then, as
Moses expresses it respecting the bush which he saw at the back of Horeb,
burning, but still unconsumed, "turn aside and see this great sight." "God
is every where by his _power_. He rolls the orbs of heaven with his hand,
he fixes the earth in its place with his foot, he guides all the creatures
with his eye, and refreshes them with his influence; he makes the powers
of bell to shake with his terrors, and binds the devils with his word, and
throws them out with his command, and sends the angels on embassies with
his decrees.... God is especially present in the hearts of his people, by
his Holy Spirit; and indeed the hearts of holy men are temples in the
truth of things, and in type and shadow they are heaven itself. For God
reigns in the hearts of his servants: there is his kingdom. The energy of
grace hath subdued all his enemies; this is his power. They serve him
night and day, and give him thanks and praise; that is his glory. The
temple itself is the heart of man; Christ is the high priest, who from
thence sends up the incense of prayers, and joins them to his own
intercession, and presents all together to his Father; and the Holy Ghost,
by his dwelling there, hath also consecrated it into a temple; and God
dwells in our hearts by faith, and Christ by his Spirit, and the Spirit by
his purities; so that we are also cabinets of the mysterious Trinity; and
what is short of heaven itself, but as infancy is short of manhood, and
letters of words?" [48]
How inconceivably glorious is the beauty of holiness in the renovated
soul! That "God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness," should
"shine into our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of
God in the face of Christ Jesus"--that the vileness of our nature should
be superseded by the purity of grace--that sinners should be pardoned and
sin subdued--that the good seed should vegetate in such a barren and
overgrown wilderness of desolation--that we who were "sometime darkness"
should become "light in the Lord," is truly marvellous. This establishment
of "the kingdom of God _within_ us," excites the gratitude of saints, the
wonder of angels, and the loud anthems of triumph that vibrate from the
harps of heaven. When God made a fair world from a formless mass of
matter, "the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted
for joy;" but when he devised the plan to make a holy human being from a
base and fallen rebel, they sung "Glory to God in the HIGHEST."
How animating the consideration, that the hope of salvation inspired in
the soul by the Spirit of God, can never be extinguished! The grace that
powerfully impels him to take the first step in the Christian life, as
forcibly urges him forward to the end of his course. The light which is
kindled in his bosom will burn and brighten, and consummate his immortal
bliss. It is itself the pledge of this increase and perfection. The
felicity of the Christian here is similar in its essence to his glory
hereafter, as the first ray of morning is the same in nature with the
noontide brightness. It may struggle through obscurities, but will rise to
perfect day. Death indeed is rapidly approaching: but as the solar orb
plunges for a short season into darkness, to reappear with new splendour;
so will the righteous eventually ascend above the tomb and, the worm, to
"shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father."
The manner of Lydia's conversion ought not to be overlooked. Her heart was
_opened_. There is something gentle, as well as effectual, in the
representation. The Spirit of God not only operates by a variety of
instruments, but by a considerable diversity of modes. He descends on
Sinai in tempests, and on Calvary in smiles. Sometimes his manifestations
are terrible, and sometimes soothing; sometimes he breaks, and sometimes
opens the heart. In scripture we are furnished with illustrations of this
diversified operation. Manasseh, who "made Judah and the inhabitants of
Jerusalem to err, and to do worse than the heathen," and who "would not
hearken" to divine monitions, was taken by the Assyrians "among the
thorns, and bound with fetters, and carried to Babylon." He who was
unaffected, either by mercies or menaces, in his prosperity, "when he was
in affliction, besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself greatly
before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto him; and he was entreated
of him and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into
his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord he was God." Paul, who
breathed out threatening and slaughter against the Christian church, was
suddenly struck to the earth by a miraculous light from heaven, and from a
persecutor transformed into an apostle. The Philippian jailer exclaimed
amidst his terrors, "What must I do to be saved?" and was not only
prevented from committing suicide, but directed to heaven by the doctrine
of his apostolic prisoner, which through grace he cordially received:
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shall be saved, and thine
house." On the other hand, Samuel, Timothy, and Lydia, were "drawn with
bands of love." They heard the whispers of mercy, and felt the attractions
of grace. Each of their hearts, like that of Lydia, was _opened_. Passion
subsided, prejudice withdrew, ignorance melted away. They were not taken
by storm, but made "_willing_ in the day of his _power_."
The importance of this change is intimated in the remarkable declaration
of Jesus Christ to Nicodemus, "Except a man be born again, he cannot see
the kingdom of heaven." It is essential to the possession of paradise; it
constitutes the very basis of the Christian character; and to be
indifferent to it is a mark of condemnation. Its present influence, and
its future consequences, are so wonderful, that it becomes us to cherish
an immediate and incessant solicitude upon the subject. Look
upward--Almighty love "waits to be gracious"--Is it not recorded, and can
it ever be forgotten, that "every one that asketh receiveth; and he that
seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened? If a son
shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone?
or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? or if he shall
ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? If ye then, being evil, know how
to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly
Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"
III. The account of Lydia is further illustrative of the _effects
resulting from a divine influence upon the human heart_.
The first of these effects is intimated by the statement, that "she
attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul." Her spirit was
exceedingly different from that of the hearers of Ezekiel: "Thou son of
man, the children of thy people still are talking against thee by the
walls and in the doors of the houses, and speak one to another, every one
to his brother, saying, Come, I pray you, and hear what is the word that
cometh forth from the Lord. And they come unto thee as the people cometh,
and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they
will not do them; for with their mouth they show much love, but their
heart goeth after their covetousness And lo, thou art unto them as a very
lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an
instrument; for they hear thy words, but they do them not." Lydia, on the
contrary, heard to profit. She listened, reflected, and "inwardly
digested," the truths of the Gospel. She heard with seriousness and with
self-application. The doctrine was to her novel and interesting. The
Gospel came to her, "not in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy
Ghost, and in much assurance;" for she "received the word of God which she
heard, not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God,"
which "effectually worketh" in believers.
And is this descriptive of _our_ views and feelings? Do we _pay attention_
to divine instructions, and "hear so that our souls may live?" Is the word
of God to us like descending manna from the skies, which we go forth with
eager haste to gather for our spiritual subsistence? Whenever we repair to
"the house of God," are we "more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice
of fools?" Do we dwell upon the lips of the preacher? Do we aim to
remember, seek to understand, and humbly resolve to practise what is
taught? Or, do we go to public worship with reluctant and hesitating
steps, compelled alone by the force of habit, education, example, or
terror? When _arrived_, do we enter with irreverence, assume a careless
and familiar attitude, give the rein to our wandering thoughts, resign our
bodies or our consciences to unhallowed slumber, or watch with frequent
glances the slowly revolving hour that will free us from an irksome
service? When _retired_ from public engagements, do we forget God our
Maker, dissipate consecrated hours, and at length lose every salutary
impression amidst the cares of life, and the subordinate concerns of
a moment?
It is possible you may even plead temporal anxieties and business, as an
extenuation of the guilt of religious negligences, or as a sufficient
ground of exemption from the claims of piety. You are forsooth too busy,
too needy, too perplexed in establishing connections or conducting
commercial transactions, to pay an immediate regard to the interests of
the soul and eternity; and although you at present defer such
considerations, you apologize for your folly by saying, it does not arise
from aversion, but inconvenience. You do not deny, you only procrastinate.
But who has insured your life? Who has perused for you the page of
destiny, which numbers the years of your mortal existence? Who has given
you any evidence, that the distant day of intentional repentance, shall be
a day of health, seriousness, and leisure? Who can tell that the sun,
which illumines the path of your prosperity at this period of
irresolution, will not, upon the arrival of the predicted hour of
penitence, shine only upon your grave? Who has given you authority to
invert the order which Christ has established in the admonition, "Seek ye
FIRST the kingdom of God and his righteousness?"
But we have a valuable example to cite. Go to Philippi. Learn of a woman,
whose name cannot perish, though generations pass away, and the stars
become extinct. _Lydia_ was not a person of leisure; she was a "seller of
purple," or cloths, which were died of a purple colour, or purple silks.
[49] She had surely sufficient occupation, and yet she has no apologies
at hand. She was not too much engaged to be concerned about her eternal
salvation; but when the apostle of the Gentiles preaches, she _must_ go,
she _must_ hear, she _must_ attend. She was "diligent in business," but
this did not preclude her being "fervent in spirit." As a seller of purple
she could only have become _rich_--the acme, indeed, and summit of human
wishes, but a miserable barter for real and everlasting happiness; as a
hearer of Paul, she might and did become "_wise to salvation."_
Every thing is beautiful in its season. We must not wander from our proper
business under pretence of religion, nor must we neglect religion upon a
plea of business. Religion does not require a relinquishment of our
calling and station in society, but no civil engagements can justify a
disregard of religion. We may sell our purple--but we must also attend to
the instructions of the ministry and the word of God. If we imitate Lydia
in diligence, let us not forget to imitate her in piety. It is vain and
wicked to aver, that, the concerns of this world and those of another
interfere; because an ardent religion is not only compatible with worldly
occupations, but promotes both their purity and integrity, if it do not
secure their success.
Another effect of divine influence upon the heart of Lydia, and
essentially connected with her reception of the great principles of
Christianity, was an immediate attention to the ordinance of baptism. "She
was baptized and her household." In the true spirit of that apostle from
whose lips she received the truth of heaven, and by whom she was directed
to "the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world," "she conferred
not with flesh, and blood." With a promptitude which was at once
expressive of the sincerity of her faith and the zeal of her mind, she did
not hesitate to observe the baptismal institution of her Lord and Saviour.
What were to her the wonder of ignorant spectators--the ridicule of her
fellow-traders--the reflections of her heathen neighbours--when balanced
against the approbation of God and her own conscience? She had "bought the
truth," and would not sell it--she had found "the pearl of great price,"
and went and sacrificed every temporal consideration for it--she had
"found the Messiah," and was resolved to follow his foot-steps
whithersoever they conducted her. She did not dispute or hesitate, but she
obeyed. May the bright example of Lydia stimulate us to a similar conduct!
In the primitive times it is obvious that whoever received the Gospel was
baptized in the name of Christ, and to express a resolution to adhere to
him. And this obedience is a part of that decision of character which
should distinguish the genuine disciple of Christ. He demands it as a
proof of love, and by virtue of his supreme authority in the church. The
command to be baptized is, in the New Testament, usually connected with
the exhortation to repent, because this is the order of things which the
Son of God has established, and the most convincing evidence that we have
voluntarily devoted ourselves to his service. Baptism was significant of a
burial and resurrection with Christ, of being regenerated by his Spirit,
renewed by his influence, and separated from all the unholy principles of
a depraved nature, and from the sinful practices of a corrupt world. The
abundant use of water in this institution was considered as illustrative
of the purifying influences of the Holy Spirit, of his miraculous descent
on the day of Pentecost, and of the overwhelming sufferings of the
crucifixion. The precursor of our Lord predicted Christ as coming to
"baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire." John immersed our
Saviour himself in the river Jordan; when, as he "went up straightway out
of the water," he beheld the "heavens opened unto him," saw the descending
Spirit of God like a dove, "lighting upon him," and heard a voice saying,
"This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Viewing in awful
perspective the tragical scenes of his life, which were to terminate in
the more tragical sufferings of his last hour, he exclaimed, "I have _a
baptism_ to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be
accomplished!"
Happily, Lydia was not alone in her public profession of religion. She had
the satisfaction of seeing her household introduced by baptism into the
church of Christ. We are not informed either of their number, sex, or age.
The circumstances of the case seem most naturally to point out her
servants or adult children, to whom, as in the instance of the jailer, the
word of the Lord might be addressed. She no doubt felt extreme solicitude
for their spiritual interests, and from the moment of her own conversion
would give them every opportunity of attending the apostolic instruction.
To have witnessed in them the kindlings of divine love, the workings of
genuine penitence, the dawnings of true religion, must have afforded her
the richest pleasure, in comparison with which all the accumulations of
trade and commerce dwindled into perfect insignificance.
But let us inquire whether we resemble Lydia. Do we monopolize the hopes
of salvation and the cup of spiritual blessing? or are we active
distributors of the heavenly bounty? What do we _feel_ for our families,
our children, our domestics, our dependants, our friends and connections?
What have we _done_ for them? They need instruction--they possess souls to
be saved, or lost--they are responsible creatures--they are given us in
charge by providence, and will finally meet us at the tribunal of God.
Should it not awaken alarm to be accessary in any degree to their
destruction by negligence, if not by compulsion or by bad example? Is it
not worthy of a holy ambition to become instrumental to their eternal
welfare? Do you lead them to the domestic altar? Do you watch over their
conduct with a vigilant and paternal eye? Do you guide them to the house
of God?--To show them the path to heaven--to be instrumental in lodging
_one_ important sentiment in their minds--to sow, if but a single grain,
that may vegetate and rise into a tree of holiness, is incalculably more
satisfactory and more honourable than to obtain the victories of an
Alexander, or the riches of a Croesus. O, let us never remain content with
a solitary religion; but aim, like Lydia, to multiply our satisfactions,
and in the spirit of an exalted charity, to distribute happiness in the
earth! "None of us liveth to himself, and no man (as a Christian,) dieth
to himself."
A third and most visible effect of Lydia's conversion, was an affectionate
regard to the servants of Christ. With the zeal of a new convert and the
generosity of a genuine Christian, she invited Paul and the companions of
his labours to "come into her house and abide there." She thus proved
herself "a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men;" which although it
be one of the appropriate characteristics of "a bishop," or spiritual
overseer and pastor, enters into the very elements of a religious
character in every station. We are exhorted "to do good to all men,
especially to them that are of the household of faith:" and Jesus Christ
has represented love to the brethren as an indication of discipleship.
The invitation of Lydia was not cold and formal. She did not merely pass
the compliment of asking these holy guests to her board, but solicited it
as a favour, and with an unusual degree of importunity. She entreated--she
"constrained" them. Her plea was modest, but so expressed as to be
irresistible. They could not deny her request when put upon this basis:
"If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house."
Gratitude was undoubtedly a principal occasion of this urgency. She had
received through their instrumentality the best gift of Heaven. The eyes
of her understanding had been enlightened--the affections of her heart had
been excited and sanctified to a noble purpose. They had proclaimed to her
with surprising effect, "Jesus and the resurrection;" and, although she
had been a devout proselyte of the Jewish religion, she would not, humanly
speaking but for them, have become acquainted with the Christian, of which
the former was only a pre-figurative shadow. They had unlocked the door
of wisdom, and put her in possession of the ample treasures of truth;
they had taught her the evil of sin, and shown her "the Lord our
righteousness;" they had dispersed her doubts, dispelled her fears,
removed her darkness, satisfied her inquiries, and conducted her to "the
light of the world," new risen upon benighted nations, and whose blessed
radiance was already diffused in every direction. Lydia was anxious to
repay these benefits, or rather to testify her overwhelming sense of their
immensity. What could she do but invite them home? They were "strangers,"
amongst senseless idolaters and persecuting foes, and she "took them in,"
conscious of having incurred an obligation which she could but imperfectly
discharge. And have we cherished similar sentiments? Have we revered and
ministered to the servants of our Lord? Have we supplied their
necessities--cherished their persons--guarded their reputation? Have we
thus "rendered honour to whom honour is due"--esteeming them very highly
in love for their work's sake--and having made "partakers of their
spiritual things," considered it our "duty to minister unto them in carnal
things?" Respect for the truth itself ought to generate a suitable
predilection for such as faithfully dispense it. We should value the
"earthen vessels" for the sake of "the heavenly treasure" they contain. If
in any instances the professed ministers of the Gospel act inconsistently
with their character, a mind like that of Lydia, would not become
dissatisfied with the truth itself, nor hastily utter extravagant censure.
We have known persons take an apparent pleasure in detailing the faults of
persons eminent either for character, or for official situation. They have
betrayed, by their triumphant air, significant inuendoes, or needless
circumstantiality, a secret and criminal gratification, whilst loudly
protesting their sorrow. But a sincere piety, which sympathises with all
the adversities and prosperities of the Christian cause, and knows the
general and especially the personal consequences of such deplorable
inconsistencies, will commiserate, and weep, and pray.
The importunity of Lydia was no less honorable to Paul and his coadjutors
than to herself. It proves their delicacy and consideration. They felt
unwilling to accept her hospitality, lest it should prove burdensome or
troublesome. These were not men to take advantage of the impressions they
produced, and to gain a subsistence by art and fraudulence. They knew how
to use prosperity, and how to sustain adversity, how to "abound, and to
suffer want." They were not ashamed of poverty, nor afraid of labour.
Hardship, imprisonments, scourgings, and even death, had lost their
terrors; and on every occasion they were solicitous of evincing a
disinterestedness of spirit that might compel their bitterest enemies to
attest the purity of their motives. Hence Paul could appeal to the elders
of the Ephesian church, "I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or
apparel. Yea, you yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto
my necessities, and to them that were with me;" and to the Corinthian
believers, "what is my reward then? Verily, that when I preach the gospel,
I may make the gospel of Christ without charge; that I abuse not my power
in the gospel." His language to the Thessalonians is still more
remarkable: "We did not eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with
labour and travel night and day that we might not be chargeable to any
of you."
Lydia might probably be influenced in making this request by another
consideration. She expected great advantage from more familiar intercourse
with her guests. In the social hour--at the friendly table--in the
retirement of home--she could propose inquiries, which such a man as Paul
would be happy to hear, and ready to answer. He who could thus address the
saints at Rome--I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some
spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established; that is, that I may be
comforted together with you, by the mutual faith both of you and me--"must
have proved an interesting companion to so pious and inquisitive a woman."
She would receive him as a father and honour him as an apostle. Happy,
thrice happy for us, when we make a proper selection of our bosom friends,
and improve the hours of social intercourse to the purposes of spiritual
improvement! Nothing is more advantageous than reciprocal communication;
it elicits truth, corrects mistake, improves character, conduces to
happiness, animates to diligence, and gives anew impulse to our moral
energies. "Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another, and
the Lord hearkened and heard it; and a book of remembrance was written
before him for them that feared the Lord and that thought upon his name.
And they shall be mine, saith the Lord of hosts in that day when I make up
my jewels; and I will spare them as a man spareth his own son that serveth
him. Then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the
wicked; between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not."
In reviewing this history, we cannot help regreting the specimen it
affords of the paucity of real Christians. The whole city of Philippi
furnished only Lydia, the jailer, and a few others, who attended to the
preaching of Paul. Immersed in business, devoted to superstition, or
depraved by sensuality, the glad tidings of salvation were despised or
disregarded. They had neither eyes to see, ears to hear, nor hearts to
feel. The God of this world blinded them, that they did not believe. There
was not even a Jewish synagogue in Philippi--not one altar erected to the
true God--and only a small retreat by the river-side, to which a few
female inquirers resorted unnoticed or abhorred. Such is the world in
miniature! In reviewing the long track of ages, we can observe but here
and there a traveller along the road to Zion. The "narrow way" appears an
unfrequented path, while thousands and myriads crowd the "broad road that
leadeth to destruction." The page of history is not adorned with the
names of saints, but, blessed be God, they are recorded in Scripture, and
will shine forever in the annals of eternity.
The subject, however, presents another aspect. Lydia was the first convert
to the Christian faith in EUROPE! In her heart was deposited the first
seed that was sown in this new field of labour, in which so rich and
extensive a harvest has since sprung up. It was then, indeed, according to
the parabolical representations of Christ, but as "a grain of mustard
seed," which is the "least of all seeds;" but what a plant has it since
become, striking deep its roots, and waving wide its branches, so that the
nations recline beneath its refreshing shade, and feel the healing virtue
of its sacred leaves! At that distant period, while Asia was under
spiritual culture, Europe presented nothing to the eye but an outstretched
wilderness of desolation--ignorance spread over her fairest regions "gross
darkness," and the very "shadow of death"--and superstition reigned upon
his gloomy throne with triumphant and universal dominion. The particular
state of Britain may be inferred from the general condition of the world;
but if any difference existed, there is reason to suppose, from its
peculiar disadvantages and insular situation, that a blacker midnight
enveloped this region, than spread over the more civilized provinces of
the Roman empire. There was, indeed, no nation in which the grossest
practices of idolatry did not prevail, and where human nature did not
appear in a state of awful degeneracy. Their very reason was folly; their
very religion impiety. Let us, then, be unceasingly grateful to that
providence, which has not only sent the gospel to Europe, but has caused
the light to shine with peculiar glory in this favoured land, which, at
its first promulgation, was in a state of singular depravity; fixed, so
to speak, in the very meridian of the benighted hemisphere.
Britain has now emerged into day; and has not only caught the rising beam
of mercy, but is becoming the very centre of illumination to every kindred
and people of the globe. The different orders of Christians engaged in
missionary under-takings--_Moravian, Baptist, Independent_, and _Church
Societies_, ought to be mentioned with distinguished approbation, and
hailed as FELLOW LABOURERS in the vineyard. May they ever co-operate and
not control each other! May they be one in spirit, though diverse in
operation! May they unite their respective energies in one common cause,
while bigotry retires abashed from the glory of such a scene!
Above all, "the United Kingdoms may fairly claim, what has been freely and
cheerfully accorded by foreign nations, the honor of giving birth to an
institution, (the British and Foreign Bible Society,) the most efficacious
ever devised, for diffusing that knowledge which was given to make men
wise unto salvation.
"But although the approbation so generally bestowed on the British and
Foreign Bible Society, may be received as a gratifying homage to the
simplicity, purity, benevolence, and importance of its design, it is not
to the praise of men, but to the improvement of their moral and religious
state, that the Society aspires. Acting under the influence of an ardent
desire to promote the glory of God, and adopting the spirit of the
apostolic injunction, 'As we have opportunity let us do good unto all men,
especially to those who are of the household of faith;' its object is to
administer comfort to the afflicted, and rest to the weary and
heavy-laden; to dispense the bread and water of life to those who hunger
and thirst after righteousness; to feed the flock of Christ at home and
abroad; and to impart to those who sit in darkness the cheering rays of
the Sun of Righteousness.
"The theatre on which the Society displays its operations, is that of the
whole world. Considering all the races of men as children of one common
Father, who 'maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and
sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust;' and who wills 'that all men
should come to the knowledge of the truth;' the British and Foreign Bible
Society offers the records of eternal life to the bond and the free, to
Heathens and Christians,--in the earnest hope that they may become a lamp
unto the feet, and a light unto the paths of those who now receive them,
and of generations yet unborn.
"To support the character which the British and Foreign Bible Society has
assumed, to realize the hopes which it has excited, to foster and enlarge
the zeal which it has inspired, are obligations of no common magnitude,
and which cannot be discharged without correspondent exertions. 'As a city
that is set on a hill cannot be hid,' the eyes of nations look up to it
with expectation. Immense portions of the globe, now the domains of
idolatry and superstition; regions where the light of Christianity once
shone, but is now dim or extinguished; and countries where the heavenly
manna is so scarce, that thousands live and die without the means of
tasting it,--point out the existing claims on the benevolence of
the Society.
"To supply these wants, fill up these voids, and display the light of
revelation amidst the realms of darkness, will long require a continuance
of that support which the British and Foreign Bible Society has derived
from the public piety and liberality, and perhaps the persevering efforts
of succeeding generations. Let us not, however, be weary in well doing;
'for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.'
"Whatever may be the extent of the existing or increasing claims on the
British and Foreign Bible Society, it has ample encouragement to proceed
in its sacred duty of disseminating the Word of Life.
"'I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in
paths that they have not known; I will make darkness light before them,
and crooked things straight.'
"These are the words of the Almighty himself. Let the British and Foreign
Bible Society, uniting its prayers with those that are daily offered up at
home and abroad for the blessing of God on its proceedings, humbly hope
that it may become the instrument of his providence, for accomplishing his
gracious promises; and that, by means of the Scriptures distributed
through its exertions, or by its influence and encouragement, nations now
ignorant of the true, God, may learn 'to draw water from the wells of
salvation.' The prospect is animating, the object holy, its accomplishment
glorious; for the prospective efforts of the Society are directed to a
consummation, (whether attainable by them or not, is only known to Him who
knoweth all things,) when all the ends of the earth, adopting the language
of inspiration, shall unite their voices in the sublime strains of
heavenly adoration: 'Blessing and honour, and glory and power, be unto Him
that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever:
Hallelujah! for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth!"' [50]
Essay on What Christianity Has Done for Women.
At this distance of time, and possessing only the very brief information
with which it has pleased Infinite Wisdom to furnish us in the commencing
chapters of the book of Genesis, it is impossible to ascertain with
precision the nature of that disparity which originally subsisted between
the first parents of mankind. The evidence does not seem to be decisive,
whether their characteristic differences were merely corporeal or mental,
exterior or internal, natural and essential, or accidental. It is
questionable whether the superiority of Adam arose out of the revelations
he received, and the priority of his existence to his "fair partner Eve,"
or from an innate pre-eminence which marked him, not only as the head of
the inferior creation, but as the appointed lord of the woman. A close
examination of the subject, perhaps, would lead us to infer, that an
equality subsisted in all those respects which are not strictly classed
under the epithet _constitutional_; and that the authority which
revelation has conceded to the man, results from his present fallen
condition.
It is indeed observable, that when God determined upon the creation of the
woman, because it was not deemed good that the man should be alone, she is
represented as the intended "help meet _for_ him;" but this expression is
not perhaps to be understood, as referring so much to subserviency as to
suitability. The capacity of one being to promote the happiness of
another, depends on its adaptation. The virtuous and the vicious, the
feeble and the strong, the majestic and the mean, cannot be associated
together to any advantage, and a general equality appears requisite, to
render any being capable of becoming the _help meet_ to a perfect
creature. This idea of his new-formed companion pervades the language of
Adam, when she was first brought to him by her Almighty Creator: "This,"
said he, "is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be
called Woman, because she was taken out of man. Therefore shall a man
leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and _they
shall be one flesh_."
To this it may be added, that subjection to the man is expressly enjoined
as a part of the original curse upon the female. This infliction
necessarily implies a previous equality in rank and station. There was
evidently before, no competition, no struggle for dominion, and no sense
of inferiority or pre-eminence. The language of Jehovah in denouncing the
respective destinies of these transgressors, unquestionably conferred a
power or claim upon man, which he did not originally possess, and which
was intended as a perpetual memento of the woman having been the first to
disobey her Maker. "Unto the woman" he said, "I will greatly multiply thy
sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shall bring forth children; and
thy desire shall be to thy husband, and _he shall ride over thee_."
But, whatever were the original equalities or inequalities of the human
race, this, at least, is certain, that the influence of depraved passions
since the fall, is sufficiently conspicuous in rendering the claims and
duties of both sexes more and more ambiguous, and disarranging the
harmonies of the first creation. In proportion to the degree in which
society is corrupt, power will assume an authority over weakness, and they
who ought to be help meets will become competitors. Opposition generates
dislike, and dislike, when associated with power, will produce oppression.
It is in vain to plead the principle of right, to solicit attention to the
voice of reason, or to attempt to define the boundaries of influence, when
no means exist of enforcing the attention of him who can command
obedience. There is no alternative but submission or punishment. Upon this
principle, the female sex may be expected to become the sport of human
caprice, folly, and guilt. But Christianity tends to rectify the disorders
which sin has introduced into the universe, and both in a natural and
moral sense, to restore a lost paradise. Like that mighty Spirit, which in
the beginning moved upon the surface of the waters, when the earth was
without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep, it
corrects the confusion of the moral system, pervades and reorganizes the
formless mass of depraved society, and pacifies the turbulence of human
passions. With a majesty that overawes, a voice that will be heard, an
influence that cannot be resisted, it renews the world, and will
eventually diffuse its unsetting glory through every part of the
habitual globe.
The subject before us presents a large field of research, and it would
well repay the labour to walk with a deliberate step around its spacious
borders and throughout its ample extent; but we must content ourselves
with tracing out some of its principal varieties, and collecting
comparatively a few of its productions.
Our plan will require the induction _of facts_, as the necessary basis of
argument or illustration; and these refer to the state of women, in
countries and during periods in which the religion of the Bible was wholly
unknown, as in the nations of Pagan antiquity, in Greece and Rome; in
savage, superstitious, and Mahometan regions; and their condition
previously to the establishment of Christianity, in patriarchal time and
places, or during the Jewish theocracy.
I. The Pagan Nations of Antiquity demand the first consideration.
Our knowledge of the _ancient Egyptians_ is extremely limited, being
derived from the Greek writers, whose accounts are often contradictory.
Their testimony, however, is sufficiently precise respecting the
prevalence of domestic servitude. The Egyptians were a people remarkable
for jealousy, which was carried to such an extreme, that after the death
of their wives, they even entertained apprehensions respecting the
embalmers. [51] Having decreed it to be indecent in women to go abroad
without shoes, they deprived them of the means of wearing them, by
threatening with death any one who should make shoes for a woman. They
were forbidden music, probably with a view of preventing their possessing
so dangerous an attraction as that of an elegant accomplishment.
With regard to the _Celtic nations_, it is true, that the Romans were
surprised at the degree of estimation in which these barbarous tribes held
their women, and the privileges which they conceded to them; and it must
be admitted that certain stern virtues characterized those who were
addicted to military achievements, resulting partly from their incessant
occupation as warriors, and partly from some indefinite but splendid
ideas of fame and glory. Seduction and adultery were vices of rare
occurrence; the bridegroom bestowed a dowery upon the bride, consisting of
flocks, a horse ready bridled and saddled, a shield, a lance, and a sword;
[52] and they were often stimulated by their presence and excitement in
their warlike expeditions. But though generally contented with one wife,
the nobles were allowed a plurality, either for _pleasure_ or _show_; the
labours of the field, as well as domestic toil, devolved on the women;
which, though practised in very ancient times, even by females of the most
exalted rank, evidently originated in the general impression of their
inferiority in the scale of existence. Their great Odin, or Odinus,
excluded from his paradise all who did not by some violent death follow
their deceased husbands; and in time they were so degraded, that by an old
Saxon law, he that hurt or killed a woman was to pay only half the fine
exacted for injuring or killing a man. But the argument in favour of
Christianity, as assigning women their _proper place_ in society, is
corroborated by observing the extremes of oppression and adulation, to
which the Scandinavian nations alternately veered. While polygamy and
infanticide prevailed, the practice of raising into heroines,
prophetesses, and goddesses, some of their women, was no less indicative
of a very imperfect sense of the true character of the female sex. [53]
The public and domestic life of the _Greeks_ exhibit unquestionable
evidences of barbarity in the treatment of women. Homer, and all their
subsequent writers, show that they were subjected to those restrictions,
which infallibly indicate their being regarded only as the property of
men, to be disposed of according to their will. Hence they were bought and
sold, made to perform the most menial offices, and exposed to all the
miseries and degradation of concubinage. The daughters, even of persons of
distinction, were married without any consultation of their wishes, to men
whom, frequently, they had never seen, and at the early age of fourteen or
fifteen; previous to which period, the Athenian females were kept in a
state of as great seclusion as possible. Their study was dress; and
slaves, their mothers excepted, were their only companions. The duties of
a good wife were, in the opinion of the wisest of the Greeks, comprised in
going abroad to expose herself as little as possible to strangers, taking
care of what her husband acquired, superintending the younger children,
and maintaining a perpetual vigilance over the adult daughters. After
marriage, some time elapsed before they ventured to speak to their
husbands, or the latter entered into conversation with them. At no time
were wives intrusted with any knowledge of their husbands' affairs, much
less was their opinion or advice solicited; and they were totally excluded
from mixed society. One of the most excellent of the Athenians admitted,
there were few friends with whom, he conversed so seldom as with his
wife. [54]
Solon, in his laws, is silent with regard to the education of girls,
though he gave very precise regulations for that of boys. That legislator
imagined that women were not sufficiently secluded, and therefore directed
that they should not go abroad in the daytime, except it were in full
dress; or at night, but with torches and in a chariot. He prohibited their
taking eatables out of the houses of their husbands of more value than an
obolus, or carrying a basket more than a cubit in length. [55] The
Athenians had previously possessed the power of selling their children and
sisters; and even Solon allowed fathers, brothers, and guardians, this
right, if their daughters, sisters, and wards, had lost their innocence.
From various enactments, it appears that adultery was extremely common,
and female modesty could not be preserved even by legislative restraint.
Most of the Greeks, and even their philosophers, concurred with the
Eastern nations in general in associating with courtesans; who were,
indeed, honoured with the highest distinctions. The Corinthians ascribed
their deliverance, and that of the rest of Greece, from the power of
Xerxes, to the intercession of the priestess of Venus, and the protection
of the goddess. At all the festivals of Venus, the people applied to the
courtesans as the most efficacious intercessors; and Solon deemed it
advantageous to Athens, to introduce the worship of that goddess, and to
constitute them her priestesses. In the age of Pericles, and still more
afterward, prostitution, thus yoked with superstition, and sanctioned by
its solemnities, produced the most baneful effects upon public morals.
From idolatrous temples, the great reservoirs of pollution, a thousand
streams poured into every condition of life, and rolling over the whole of
this cultivated region, deposited the black sediment of impurity upon the
once polished surface of society, despoiling its beauty, discolouring its
character, and ruining its glory.
The Athenians did not hesitate to take their wives and daughters to visit
the notorious Aspasia in the house of Pericles, though she was the teacher
of intrigue, and the destroyer of morals. The most celebrated men lived in
celibacy, only to secure the better opportunities of practising vice,
which however did not conceal her hideous deformity in the shades, but
stalked forth at noonday, emblazoned by the eloquence of a Demosthenes,
and enriched by treasuries of opulence.
In many respects the Spartans differed from the other Greeks in their
treatment of the female sex. The women were as shamefully exposed as those
of the other states were secluded; being introduced to all the exercises
of the public gymnasium at an early age, no less than the other sex, and
taught the most shameless practices. The laws of Lycurgus were in many
instances utterly subversive of morality, and too outrageous for citation.
The depravity of the sex was extreme even at an early period, and
Xenophon, Plutarch, and Aristotle, impute to this cause the ultimate
subversion of the Spartan state.
The _Romans_ differed materially from the Greeks and the oriental nations
in one point with regard to their treatment of women; namely, in never
keeping them in a state of seclusion from the society of men: but the
husbands were very incommunicative: and it seems at least to have been an
_understood_, if not a written law, that they should avoid all
inquisitiveness, and speak only in the presence of their husbands. In the
second Punic war, the Oppian law prohibited the women, from riding in
carriages and wearing certain articles of dress; which was, however,
afterward repealed. The ancient laws considered children as slaves, and
women as children who ought to remain in a state of perpetual tutelage.
According to the laws of Romulus and Numa, a husband's authority over his
wife was equal to that of a father over his children, excepting only that
he could not sell her. The wife was stated to be in servitude, though she
had in name the rights of a Roman citizen. From the moment of her marriage
she was looked upon as the daughter of her husband and heir of his
property, if he had no children; otherwise she was considered as his
sister, and shared an equal portion with the children. Wives had no right
to make wills, nor durst they prefer complaints against their husbands;
and the power of the latter over them was as unrestricted as that which
they possessed over their children: in fact, the husband could even put
his wife to death, not only for gross immoralities, but for excess in
wine. [56]
Considerable changes took place in the laws after the period of the
destruction of Carthage, some of which allowed greater privileges to
females; but as divorces became more frequent, crimes multiplied. In the
latter periods of the republic women had the principal share in public
plots and private assassinations, and practised the worst of sins with the
most barefaced audacity.
The morals of women are indicative of the state of society in general, and
of the estimation in which they are held in particular. If the other sex
treat them as slaves, they will become servile and contemptible, a certain
degree of self-respect being essential to the preservation of real dignity
of character. The way to render human beings of any class despicable is
to undervalue them; for disesteem will superinduce degeneracy. If this be
the case, then the state of women in any age or country is a criterion of
public opinion, since the vices of their lives indicate their condition;
upon which principle, Greece and Rome exhibit wretched specimens of female
degradation.
But there is one circumstance in the history of the Romans which must not
be wholly overlooked. Their conduct was marked by _capriciousness._ Though
the usual treatment of their women resembled that of other Pagan nations
in barbarity, like some of them, too, they frequently rendered them
extraordinary honours. On some occasions they even transferred to their
principal slaves the right of chastising their wives; and yet, on others
they paid them distinguished deference: as in the case of vestals, and the
privileges conceded to them after the negotiation between the Romans and
Sabines. Various individual exceptions to a barbarous usage might be
adduced; sufficient, however, only to evince the general debasement of the
female sex, and the total absence of all fixed principles of moral action
in unchristianized man.
II. Next to the nations of antiquity, the state of women in SAVAGE,
SUPERSTITIOUS, AND MAHOMETAN COUNTRIES, comes under review.
In treating this part of the subject, it will be necessary to make a rapid
circumnavigation of the globe, touching at least at the most
remarkable places.
EUROPE.
GREENLAND. The situation of females in this country might well justify the
exclamation of an ancient philosopher, who thanked God that _he was born a
man and not a woman_. The only employment of girls, till their fourteenth
year, is singing, dancing, amusements, attending on children, and fetching
water; [57] after which they are taught, by their mothers, to sew, cook,
tan the skins of animals, construct houses, and navigate boats. It is
common for the men to stand by as idle spectators, while the women are
carrying the heaviest materials for building; the former never attempting
to do any thing but the carpenter's work. Parents frequently betroth their
daughters in infancy, and never consult their wishes respecting marriage;
if no previous pledge be given, they are disposed of to the first suiter
that chances to make the application. From their twentieth year, the usual
period of marriage, the lives of the women, says Cranz, are a continued
series of hardships and misery. The occupations of the men solely consist
in hunting and fishing; but so far from giving themselves the trouble to
carry home the fish they have caught, they would think themselves
eternally disgraced by such a condescension.
The Greenlanders have two kinds of boats, adapted to procure subsistence.
One of them is the great woman's boat called the _umiak_, from twelve to
eighteen yards in length, and four or five in width. These boats are rowed
by four women, and steered by a fifth, without any assistance from the
men, excepting in cases of emergency. If the coast will not allow them to
pass, six or eight women take the boat upon their heads, and carry it over
land to a navigable place.
Mothers-in-law are absolute mistresses in the houses of their married
sons, who frequently ill-treat them; and the poor women are sometimes
obliged to live with quarrelsome favourites, and may be corrected or
divorced at pleasure. Widows who have no friends, are commonly robbed of a
considerable portion of their property by those who come to sympathize
with them by an affected condolence; and can obtain no redress,--on the
contrary, they are obliged to conciliate their kindness by the utmost
obsequiousness. After a precarious subsistence in different families, and
being driven from one hut to another, they are suffered to expire without
help or notice. When widows have grown-up sons, their condition is much
superior to that in which they formerly lived with their husbands. When
aged women pretend to practise, or are suspected of witchcraft--if the
wife or child of a Greenlander happen to die--if his fowling piece miss
fire, or his arrow the mark at which it was shot--the supposed sorceress
is instantly stoned, thrown into the sea, or cut in pieces by the
_angekoks_ or male magicians. There have even been instances of sons
killing their mothers, and brothers their sisters. The infirmities of age
expose women to violent deaths, being sometimes with their own consent,
and sometimes forcibly, interred alive by their own offspring.
RUSSIA. Over this extensive empire, including sixteen different nations,
the condition of women is such as equally to evince the degraded character
of the men. Among the Siberians, an opinion is entertained that they are
impure beings, and odious to the gods; in consequence of which, they are
not permitted to approach the sacred fire, or the places of sacrifice. In
the eastern islands, in particular, there exists tribes to whom the
nuptial ceremony is unknown; and in cases where the daughters are
purchased by goods, money, or services, their fathers never consult their
children, and their husbands treat them as slaves or beasts of burden. In
Siberia, conjugal fidelity is bartered for gain, or sacrificed at the
shrine of imaginary hospitality. The sale of their wives is by no means
uncommon, for a little train oil, or other paltry considerations. To this
the women offer no objection, and at an advanced age frequently seek
younger wives for their husbands, and devote themselves to domestic
drudgery. [58] The same degrading facts apply to the Tungusians and other
tribes. In some respects the Kamtschadales differ from the rest, but the
extreme debasement arising from their libidinous brutality must not be
described, and can scarcely be credited. [59]
Among all the Slavon nations of Europe, wives and daughters have ever been
kept in a state of exclusion. Brides are purchased, and instantly become
slaves. Formerly sons were compelled by blows to marry, and daughters
dragged by their hair to the altars; and the paternal authority is still
unbounded. The lower classes are doomed to incessant labour, and are
obliged to submit to the utmost indignities. [60]
The picture of Russian manners varies little with reference to the prince
or the peasant.... They are all, high and low, rich and poor, alike servile
to superiors; haughty and cruel to their dependants, ignorant,
superstitions, cunning, brutal, barbarous, dirty, mean. The emperor canes
the first of his grandees; princes and nobles cane their slaves; and the
slaves their _wives_ and _daughters_. [61]
ITALY AND SPAIN. These two countries may be classed together, because the
condition of the female sex is very similar in both: the education of
woman is totally neglected, and they are not ashamed of committing the
grossest blunders in common conversation. Such is their situation that
they cannot intermeddle with the concerns of their husbands, without
exciting their jealousy. Girls are in early years left to the care of
servants who are both ill educated and immoral; the same may be said of
their mothers, whose conversation and public conduct tend to perfect the
growth of licentiousness in their uncultivated children.
PORTUGAL. Young women in this kingdom are not instructed in any thing
truly useful or ornamental; and even those who belong to respectable
families, are often ignorant of reading and writing. Parents keep their
daughters in the most rigid confinement, frequently not allowing them even
to go abroad to church to hear mass, and never unattended. They are
secluded from all young persons of the other sex, who are not permitted to
visit families where there are unmarried females. The consequence of this
austerity is an extended system of intrigue, for the purpose of evading
all this circumspection--by which means they are full of cunning
and deceit.
TURKEY. Women, in Constantinople, are confined in seraglios for life, or
shut up in their apartments. They are not permitted to appear in public
without a vail, and can only obtain their freedom by devoting themselves
to prostitution.
"The slave market," says Mr. Thornton, "is a quadrangle, surrounded by a
covered gallery, and ranges of small and separate apartments. The manner
of purchasing slaves is described in the plain and unaffected narrative of
a German merchant, which, as I have been able to ascertain its general
authenticity, may be relied on as correct in this particular. He arrived
at Kaffa, in the Crimea, which was formerly the principal mart of slaves;
and hearing that an Armenian had a Georgian and two Circassian girls to
dispose of, feigned an intention of purchasing them, in order to gratify
his curiosity, and to ascertain the mode of conducting such bargains. A
Circassian maiden, eighteen years old, was the first who presented
herself; she was well dressed, and her face was covered with a vail. She
advanced towards the German, bowed down, and kissed his hand: by order of
her master, she walked backwards and forwards in the chamber to show her
shape, and the easiness of her gait and carriage: her foot was small, and
her gesture agreeable. When she took off her vail, she displayed a bust of
the most attractive beauty. She rubbed her cheeks with a wet napkin, to
prove that she had not used art to heighten her complexion; and she opened
her inviting lips, to show a regular set of teeth of pearly whiteness. The
German was permitted to feel her pulse, that he might be convinced of the
good state of her health and constitution. She was then ordered to retire,
while the merchants deliberated upon the bargain. The price of this
beautiful girl was four thousand piastres, [equal to four thousand five
hundred florins of Vienna."] [62]
GREECE. The condition of females, in Modern Greece, may be inferred from
an anecdote or two related by _Lieutenant Collins_. He and his friends
were approaching _Macri_, on the coast of Asia Minor. "Encouraged to
proceed," he remarks, "we approached the second groupe, which we passed
in a similar manner; but some woman, who were near them, appeared to fly
at our approach, and view us at a distance with astonishment and fear. But
no sooner had we advanced, than, as with general consent, they all caught
their children in their arms, and with the fears of a mother apprehensive
for the safety of a beloved child, flew to their houses, and shut
themselves in, and we saw no more of them till our return.
"Our company during dinner consisted of Greeks only--it was served up by
the women, attended by one of her children, who with all the family
appeared in an abject state; for on offering her a little of the wine,
which they so kindly furnished us with, she shrunk back, with an
expression of surprise at our condescension, which excited ours also; and
the man understanding a little Italian, we inquired the reason; 'Such,'
says he, is the inferiority and oppression we labour under, that it is in
general thought too great honour for a Turk to present a person of this
description with, any token of respect, and forward in her to accept it,
which is the reason of her timidity, in not accepting the wine from
you.'" [63]
In Greece, the women are closely confined at home; they do not even appear
at church till they are married. The female slaves are not Greeks, but
such as are either taken in war or stolen by the Tartars from Russia,
Circassia, or Georgia. Many thousands were formerly taken in the Morea,
but most of them have been redeemed by the charitable contributions of the
Christians, or ransomed by their own relations. The fine slaves that wait
upon great ladies, are bought at the age of eight or nine years, and
educated with great care to accomplish them in singing, dancing,
embroidery, &c. They are commonly Circassian, and their patron rarely
ever sells them, but if they grow weary of them, they either present them
to a friend, or give them their freedom.
ASIA.
TARTARY. This immense country, in its utmost limits, reaches from the
Eastern Ocean to the Caspian Sea; and from Corea, China, Thibet,
Hindoostan, and Persia, to Russia, and Siberia; including a space of three
thousand six hundred miles in length, and nine hundred and sixty in width,
and comprehending all the middle region of Asia. Its two great divisions
are into Eastern and Western; the former chiefly belongs to the emperor of
China, the latter to Russia.
The Mahometan Tartars are continually waging war against their neighbours
for the purpose of procuring slaves. When they cannot obtain adults, they
steal children to sell, and even make no scruple of selling their own,
especially daughters. In case of any disgust, their wives share a similar
fate. Among the pagan Tartars incestuous practices are prevalent, and
their wives are generally dismissed at, or previous to, the age of forty.
The mothers of sultans, among the Crim Tartars, neither eat with their
sons, nor sit in their presence. They are, in fact, the slaves of their
caprice, often ill-treated by them, and sometimes even put to death. [64]
The _Calmucks_ are considered as remarkably lenient in their conduct to
the women: but fathers dispose of their daughters without their consent,
and even antecedently to their birth. Their chiefs and princes have,
besides, large harems or seraglios where domestic rivalship imbitters
existence. They are, moreover, regarded in general as servants, and
infidelity is compensated by a trifling offering to their
mercenary rapacity.
The _Georgians and Circassians_ are celebrated for their surpassing
beauty, and their young women are brought up to some industrious habits.
The daughters of slaves receive a similar education, and are sold
according to their beauty, at from twenty to a hundred pounds each, or
upwards. They consider all their children in the light of property,
exposing them to sale as they would their cattle, and too often obtain
large sums from the agents of despotism and depravity.
CHINA. In this, and almost all the countries of Southern Asia, the
condition of women is truly deplorable. Forced marriages and sales are
universal, and the Chinese are so excessively jealous, that they do not
permit their wives to receive any visitors of the other sex, and transport
them from place to place in vehicles secured by iron bars. Their
concubines are not only treated with the most degrading inhumanity, but
are slaves to the wives, who never fail to sway a despotic sceptre; they
are besides liable at any time to be sold. The children of concubines are
regarded as the offspring of the legitimate wife; hence they manifest no
affection for their real mothers, but often treat them with the most
marked disrespect. The laws of China and Siam allow the lawful wives and
sons, after the death of their husbands and fathers, to exclude concubines
and their children from all share in the property of the deceased, and to
dispose of their persons by public or private sale.
The wives of people of rank are always confined to their apartments from
motives of jealousy; those of a middle class are a kind of upper servants
deprived of liberty; and the wives of the lower orders are mere domestic
drudges. The handsomest women are usually purchased for the courts and
principal mandarins.
"We can readily," says a respectable writer, "give credit to the custom of
a landlord taking the wife of a ryat or peasant, as a pledge for rent, and
keeping her till the debt is discharged (in the kingdom of Nepaul;) since
we know, on the best authority, that their wise polished neighbours, the
Chinese, have found it necessary to enact a prohibitory statute against
lending wives and daughters on hire." [65]
Another writer observes, "Since the philosophical inquiry into the
condition of the weaker sex, in the different stages of society, published
by Millar, [66] it has been universally considered as an infallible
criterion of barbarous society, to find the women in a state of great
degradation. Scarcely among savages themselves is the condition of women
more wretched and humiliating than among the Chinese. A very striking
picture of the slavery and oppression to which they are doomed, but too
long for insertion in this place, is drawn by M. Vanbraam. [67] Mr. Barrow
informs us, that among the rich, the women are imprisoned slaves; among
the poor, drudges; 'many being,' says he, 'compelled to work with an
infant upon the back, while the husband, in all probability, is gaming,--I
have frequently seen women,' he adds, 'assisting to drag a sort of light
plough, and the harrow. The easier task, that of directing the machine, is
left to the husband.' [68] The Chinese value their daughters so little,
that when they have more children than they can easily maintain, they hire
the midwives to stifle the females in a basin of water as soon as they are
born.' [69] Nothing can exceed the contempt towards women which the maxims
of the most celebrated of their lawgivers express. 'It is very
difficult,' said Confucius himself, 'to govern women and servants; for if
you treat them with gentleness and familiarity, they lose all respect; if
with rigour, you will have continual disturbance.'
"Women are debarred almost entirely from the rights of property; and they
never inherit. Among the worst savage nations, their daughters are sold to
their husbands, and are received and treated as slaves. [70] When society
has made a little progress, the purchase-money is received only as a
present, and the wife, nominally at least, is not received as a slave.
Among the Chinese, the daughter, with whom no dowry is given, it uniformly
exchanged for a present; and so little is the transaction, even on a
purchase, disguised, that Mr. Barrow has no scruple to say, 'the daughters
may be said to be invariably sold.' [71] He assures us, that 'it is even a
common practice among the Chinese to sell their daughters, that they may
he brought up as prostitutes.' [72] [73]
BIRMAN EMPIRE. This extensive dominion comprehends the state of Pegu, Ava,
Arracan, and Siam. Women are not secluded from the society of men, but
they are held in great contempt. Their evidence is undervalued in judicial
proceedings. The lower classes sell their women to strangers, who do not,
however, seem to feel themselves degraded. In Pegu, Siam, Cochin China,
and other districts, adultery is regarded as honourable. Herodotus
mentions a people called Gendanes, where the debasement of the female
character is such, that their misconduct is an occasion of boasting and a
source of distinction.
HINDOOSTAN. The following extracts, from the letters of the Baptist
missionaries, in India, will speak volumes, and might, if it were
necessary, be corroborated by a thousand similar citations.
At an early period of the Baptist mission to India, Dr. Carey communicated
the following interesting account to a friend:--"As the burning of women
with their husbands is one of the most singular and striking customs of
this people, and also very ancient, as you will see by the _Reek Bede_,
which contains a law relating to it, I shall begin with this. Having just
read a Shanscrit book, called _Soordhee Sungraha_, which is a collection
of laws from the various Shasters, arranged under their proper heads, I
shall give you an extract from it, omitting some sentences, which are mere
verbal repetitions. Otherwise, the translation may be depended on as
exact. The words prefixed to some of the sentences are the names of the
original books from which the extracts are made.
"_Angeera._ After the husband's death, the virtuous wife who burns herself
with him, [74] is like an Asoondhatee, [75] and will go to bliss.--If she
be within one day's journey of the place where he dies, and indeed
virtuous, the burning of his corpse shall be deferred one day for
her arrival.
"_Brahma Pooran_. If the husband die in another country, the virtuous wife
shall take any of his effects; for instance, a sandal, and binding it on
her thigh, shall enter the fire with it. [76]
"_Reek, Bede._ If a wife thus burn with her husband, it is not suicide; and
her relations shall observe three days' uncleanness for her; after which
her _Shraddha_ [77] must he properly performed.--If she cannot come to the
place, or does not receive an account of her husband's death, she shall
wait the appointed ten days of uncleanness, [78] and may afterwards die in
a separate fire.--If she die in a separate fire, three days' uncleanness
will be observed; after which the _Pinda_ must be performed.--After the
uncleanness on account of the husband is over, the _Shraddha_ must be
performed according to the commandment.--Three days after his death, the
_Dospinda_ [79] must be made, and after ten days the regular _Shraddha_.
"_Goutam. Brahmmanee_ can only die with her husband, on which account she
cannot burn in another fire. When a woman dies with her husband, the
eldest son, or nearest relation, shall set fire to the pile; whose office
also it is to perform the _Dospinda_, and all the obsequies. He who
kindles the fire shall perform the _Dospinda_: [80] but her own son, or
nearest relations, must perform the _Shraddha_.--If a woman burn
separately, only three days' uncleanness will be observed for her; but if
in the same fire ten days.
"_Asouch Shunkar_. If another person die before the last day of
uncleanness for a death or birth, then the uncleanness on account of the
second person's death will be included in the first, and the time not
lengthened out.
"_Bishnoo Pooran_. If the husband die in war, only present uncleanness, or
till bathing, will be observed for him: if, therefore, the wife burn with
him only one night's uncleanness will be observed for her; but, if in a
separate fire, three days; and in that case the husband's _Pinda_ will be
at the end of three days.--If the husband and wife burn in one fire, they
will obtain separate offerings of the _Shraddha_.--If a woman die with
her husband voluntarily, the offerings to her, and all her obsequies will
be equal to his.--If they die within a _Tithee_, or lunar day, the
offerings will be made to both at the same time.--If the person be
_Potect_, or sinful; that is, has killed a _Brahmman_, or drinks
spirituous liquors, or has committed some sin in his former life, on
account of which he is afflicted with elephantiasis, consumption, leprosy,
&c. [81] all will be blotted out by his wife burning with him, after
proper atonement has been made. [82]--A woman with a young child, or
being pregnant, cannot burn with her husband.--If there be a proper person
to educate the infant, she may be permitted to burn.--If any woman ascend
the pile, and should afterward decline to burn, through love of life or
earthly things, she shall perform the penance _Prazapatya_, and will then
be free from sin.'" [83]
The following statement is taken from the more recent communication of
another of the Baptist missionaries to India:--
"Jan. 9, 1807. A person informing us that a woman was about to be burnt
with the corpse of her husband near our house, I, with several of our
brethren, hastened to the place; but, before we could arrive, the pile was
in flames. It was a horrible sight. The most shocking indifference and
levity appeared among those who were present: I never saw anything more
brutal than their behaviour. The dreadful scene had not the least
appearance of a religious ceremony, It resembled an abandoned rabble of
boys in England, collected for the purpose of worrying to death a cat or a
dog. A bamboo, perhaps twenty feet long, had been fastened at one end to a
stake driven in the ground, and held down over the fire by men at the
other. Such were the confusion, the levity, the bursts of brutal
laughter, while the poor woman was burning alive before their eyes, that
it seemed as if every spark of humanity was extinguished by this cruel
superstition. That which added to the cruelty was, the smallness of the
fire. It did not consist of so much wood as we consume in dressing a
dinner: no, not this fire that was to consume the living and the dead! I
saw the legs of the poor creature hanging out of the fire, while her body
was in flames. After a while they took a bamboo, ten or twelve feet long,
and stirred it, pushing and beating the half-consumed corpse, as you would
repair a fire of green wood, by throwing the unconsumed pieces into the
middle. Perceiving the legs hanging out, they beat them with the bamboo
for some time, in order to break the ligatures which fastened them at the
knees; (for they would not have come near to touch them for the world.) At
length, they succeeded in binding them upwards into the fire; the skin and
muscles giving way, and discovering the knee-sockets bare, with the balls
of the leg bones; a sight this, which, I need not say, made me thrill with
horror; especially when I recollected that this hopeless victim of
superstition was alive but a few minutes before. To have seen savage
wolves thus tearing a human body limb from limb, would have been shocking;
but to see relations and neighbours do this to one with whom they had
familiarly conversed not an hour before, and to do it with an air of
levity, was almost too much for me to bear! Turning to the Brahmman who
was the chief actor in this horrid tragedy, a young fellow of about
twenty-two, and one of the most hardened that ever I accosted, I told him
that the system which allowed of these cruelties, could no more proceed
from God than darkness from the sun; and warned him, that he must appear
at the judgment-seat of God, to answer for this murder. He, with a grin,
full of savage contempt, told me that 'he gloried in it, and felt the
highest pleasure in performing the deed.' I replied, 'that his pleasure
might be less than that of his Master; but seeing it was in vain to reason
with him, I turned to the people, and expostulated with them. One of them
answered, that 'the woman had burnt herself of her own free choice, and
that she went to the pile as a matter of pleasure.'--'Why, then, did you
confine her down with that large bamboo?'--'If we had not, she would have
run away'--'What, run away from pleasure!' I then addressed the poor lad,
who had been thus induced to set fire to his mother. He appeared about
nineteen. 'You have murdered your mother! your sin is great. The sin of
the Brahmman, who urged you to it, is greater; but yours is very
great.'--'What could I do? It is the custom.'--'True, but this custom is
not of God; but proceedeth from the devil, who wishes to destroy mankind.
How will you bear the reflection that you have murdered your only
surviving parent?' He seemed to feel what was said to him; but, just at
this instant, that hardened wretch, the Brahmman, rushed in, and drew him
away, while the tears were standing in his eyes. After reasoning with some
others, and telling them of the Saviour of the world, I returned home with
a mind full of horror and disgust.
"You expect, perhaps, to hear that this unhappy victim was the wife of
some Brahmman of high cast. She was the wife of a barber who dwelt at
Serampore, and had died that morning, leaving the son I have mentioned,
and a daughter about eleven years of age. Thus has this infernal
superstition aggravated the common miseries of life, and left these
children stripped of both their parents in one day! Nor is this an
uncommon case. It often happens to children far more helpless than these;
sometimes to children possessed of property, which is then left, as well
as themselves, to the mercy of those who have decoyed their mother to
their father's funeral pile." [84]
CEYLON. "Idolatrous procession. Each carriage has four wheels of solid
wood, and requires two hundred men to drag it. When they are dragged along
the streets, on occasions of great solemnity, women, in the phrensy of
false devotion, throw themselves down before the wheels, and are crushed
to death by their tremendous weight; the same superstitious madness
preventing the ignorant crowd from making any attempt to save them." [85]
SUMATRA. "The modes of marriage," says Mr. Marsden, "according to the
original institutions of these people, are by _jujur_, by _arnbel anak_,
or by _Semando_. The jujur is a certain sum of money, given by one man to
another, as a consideration for the person of his daughter, whose
situation, in this case, differs not much from that of a slave to the man
she marries, and to his family; his absolute property in her depends,
however, upon some nice circumstances. Besides the _botang jupu,_ (or main
sum,) there are certain appendages, or branches, one of which, the _tali
kulo_, or five dollars, is usually, from motives of delicacy or
friendship, left unpaid; and so long as that is the case, a relationship
is understood to subsist between the two families, and the parents of the
woman have a right to interfere on occasions of ill treatment; the husband
is also liable to be fined for wounding her: with other limitations of
absolute right. When that sum is finally paid, which seldom happens but in
cases of violent quarrel, the _tali kulo_, (tie of relationship,) is said
to be _putus_, (broken,) and the woman becomes to all intents the slave of
her lord. She has then no title to claim a divorce in any predicament; and
he may sell her, making only the first offer to her relations."
Speaking of another part of the _country_, (Batta,) he says, "the men are
allowed to marry as many wives as they please or can afford, and to have
half a dozen is not uncommon. The condition of the women appears to be no
other than that of slaves, the husbands having the power of selling their
wives and children." [86]
JAVA. At Bantam, and in other parts of the island, fathers betroth their
children at a very early age, lest they should be taken from them to
supply the harems of kings, or be sold for slaves on the death of the
fathers by the monarch, who is heir of all his subjects. [87]
Among all the nations of Southern Asia, and the East Indian and South Sea
Islands, the women are despised and oppressed; the wives and daughters of
every class are offered to strangers, and compelled to prostitute
themselves. They are moreover used with the utmost cruelty by their
husbands, and not permitted to eat, or even to sit down, in the presence
of the men; and yet, with marvellous inconsistency, many nations allow
themselves to be governed by women, who sometimes reign with despotic
authority.
NEW HOLLAND. "The aboriginal inhabitants of this distant region are,
indeed, beyond comparison, the most barbarous on the surface of the globe.
The residence of Europeans has been wholly ineffectual; the natives are
still in the same state as at our first settlement. Every day are men and
women to be seen in the streets of Sydney and Paramatta naked as in the
moment of their birth. In vain have the more humane of the officers of the
colony endeavoured to improve their condition: they still persist in the
enjoyment of their ease and liberty in their own way, and turn a deaf ear
to any advice upon this subject." [88]
"They observe no particular ceremony in their marriages, though their mode
of courtship is not without its singularity. When a young man sees a
female to his fancy, he informs her she must accompany him home; the lady
refuses; he not only enforces compliance with threats, but blows; thus the
gallant, according to the custom, never fails to gain the victory, and
bears off the willing, though struggling pugilist. The colonists, for some
time, entertained the idea that the women were compelled, and forced away
against their inclinations; but the young ladies informed them, that this
mode of gallantry was the custom, and perfectly to their taste." [89]
PERSIA. "Women are not allowed to join in the public prayers at the
mosques. They are directed to offer up their devotions at home, or if they
attend the place of public worship, it must be at a period when the male
sex are not there. This practice is founded upon the authority of the
traditionary sayings of the prophet, and is calculated to confirm that
inferiority and seclusion, to which the female sex are doomed by the laws
of Mahomed.
"In Persia, women are seldom publicly executed; nor can their crimes,
from their condition in society, be often of a nature to demand such
examples; but they are exposed to all the violence and injustice of
domestic tyranny; and innocent females are too often included in the
punishment of their husbands and fathers, particularly where those are of
high rank. Instances frequently occur where women are tortured, to make
them reveal the concealed wealth of which they are supposed to have a
knowledge; and when a nobleman or minister is put to death, it is not
unusual to give away his wives and daughters as slaves; and sometimes
(though rarely) they are bestowed on the lowest classes in the community.
There are instances of the wives of men of high rank being given to
mule-drivers." [90]
ARABIA. The ancient Arabs considered the birth of a daughter as a
misfortune, and they frequently buried daughters alive as soon as they
were born, lest they should be impoverished by having to provide for them,
or should suffer disgrace on their account. [91]
"The horrid practice of female infanticide has been an usage of many
nations. Among the ancient Arabs, as among the Rajpoots of the present
day, it proceeded as much from a jealous sense of honour, as the pressure
of want." [92]
Of eastern manners, in general, it has been remarked, that "excepting the
Chinese and Javanese, all the nations of the south of Asia, and all the
inhabitants of the East Indian and South Sea islands, offer the Europeans
their wives and daughters, or compel them to prostitute themselves to
strangers." [93]
"A man, in the East, dares not inquire concerning the health of the wife
or daughter of his most intimate friend, because this would instantly
excite suspicion of illicit views and connections; neither does etiquette
permit him to make mention himself of his own wife or daughter. They are
included among the domestic animals, or comprehended in the general
denomination of the house or the family. When, however, an Oriental is
obliged to mention his wife or his daughter, in conversation with a
physician, or any other person whom he wishes to treat with deference and
respect, he always introduces the subject with some such apology as we
make in Europe, when we are obliged to speak of things which are regarded
as disgusting or obscene. Conformably with this Asiatic prejudice,
Tamerlane was highly affronted with the vanquished Turkish emperor
Bajazet, for mentioning, in his presence, such impure creatures as women
are considered by the Orientals." [94]
AMERICA.
NORTHERN INDIANS.
Here all the gentle morals, such as play
Through life's more cultur'd walks, and charm the way;
These far dispers'd, on tim'rous pinions fly,
To sport and flutter in a kinder sky.
GOLDSMITH.
The women cook the victuals, but though of the highest rank, they are
never permitted to partake of it, till all the males, even the servants,
have eaten what they think proper; and in times of scarcity, it is
frequently their lot to be left without a single morsel; and should they
be detected in helping themselves during the business of cookery, they
would be subject to a severe beating; and be considered afterward, through
life, as having forfeited their character.
"The accounts we have had of the effects of the small pox on that nation
(the Maha Indians) are most distressing; it is not known in what way it was
first communicated to them, though probably by some war party. They had
been a military and powerful people; but when these warriors saw their
strength wasting before a malady which they could not resist, their
phrensy was extreme; they burnt their village, and many of them put to
death their _wives_ and _children_, to save them from so cruel an
affliction, and that all might go together to some better country." [95]
WEST INDIES. _Hayti_ (late St. Domingo.) Extract of a letter, dated Nov.
1810. "The Indigenes, or natives of Hayti, are extremely ignorant; but few
can read: their religion is Catholic; but neither it, or its priests, are
much respected. That they are in a most awful state of darkness, is but
too evident: mothers are actually panders to their own daughters, and reap
the fruit of their prostitution. The endearing name of father is scarcely
ever heard, as the children but rarely know to whom they are indebted for
existence." [96]
SOUTH AMERICA. In this region there are whole nations of cannibals, who
devour their captives. Sometimes they slay their own wives, and invite
their neighbours to the repast.
NEW ZEALAND. "Tippechu, the chieftain," says Mr. Savage, "has a
well-constructed dwelling on this island, and a large collection of
spears, war-mail, and other valuables. A short distance, from the
residence of the chief is an edifice, every way similar to a dove-cote,
standing upon a single post, and not larger than dove-cotes usually are.
In this, Tippechu confined one of his daughters several years; we
understood she had fallen in love with a person of inferior condition, and
that these means were adopted to prevent her from bringing disgrace upon
her family. The space alloted to the lady would neither allow of her
standing up, or stretching at her length; she had a trough, in which her
food was deposited as often as was thought necessary, during her
confinement; and I could not find that she was allowed any other
accommodation. These privations, and all converse being denied her, proves
that Tippechu was determined to exhibit a severe example to his subjects;
at least to such of the young ladies of this part of New Zealand, as might
be inclined to degrade themselves and their families by unsuitable
alliances. The long confinement with all its inconveniences, produced the
desired effect, in rendering the princess obedient to the wishes of her
royal parent. This barbarous case, which is ornamented with much grotesque
carving, still remains as a memento in _terrorem_ to all the young ladies
under Tippechu's government." [97]
AFRICA.
TUNIS. "The Tunisines have a curious custom of fattening up their young
ladies for marriage. A girl, after she is betrothed, is cooped up in a
small room; shackles of silver and gold are put upon her ancles and
wrists, as a piece of dress. If she is to be married to a man who has
discharged, despatched, or lost a former wife, the shackles which the
former wife wore, are put upon the new bride's limbs: and she is fed,
until they are filled up to the proper thickness. This is sometimes no
easy matter, particularly if the former wife was fat, and the present
should be of a slender form. The food used for this custom, worthy of
barbarians, is a seed called drough; which is of an extraordinary
fattening quality, and also famous for rendering the milk of nurses rich
and abundant. With this seed, and their national dish '_cuscusu_,' the
bride is literally crammed, and many actually die under the spoon." [98]
MOROCCO. "When an ill-disposed husband becomes jealous or discontented
with his wife, he has too many opportunities of treating her cruelly; he
may tyrannize over her without control; no one can go to her assistance,
for no one is authorized to enter his harem without permission. Jealousy
or hatred rises so high in the breast of a Moor, that death is often the
consequence to the wretched female, who has excited, perhaps innocently,
the anger of her husband. A father, however fond of his daughter, cannot
assist her even if informed of the ill treatment she suffers; the husband
alone is lord paramount; if, however, he should he convicted of murdering
his wife, he would suffer death; but this is difficult to ascertain, even
should she bear the marks of his cruelty or dastardly conduct, for who is
to detect it? Instances have been known, when the woman has been cruelly
beaten and put to death, and the parents have been informed of her decease
as if it had been occasioned by sickness, and she has been buried
accordingly; but this difficulty of bringing men to justice, holds only
among the powerful bashaws, and persons in the highest stations; and
these, to avoid a retaliation of similar practices on _their_ children,
sometimes prefer giving their daughters in marriage to men of an inferior
station in life, who are more amenable to justice." [99]
This writer informs us also, that "in Morocco, slaves are placed in the
public market-place, and there turned about and examined, in order to
ascertain their value." p. 249. "A young girl of Houssa, of exquisite
beauty, was once sold at Morocco, whilst I was there, for four hundred
ducats [of 3s. 8d. sterling,] whilst the average price of slaves is about
one hundred; so much depends on the fancy or the imagination of the
purchaser." p. 247.
DARFOR. "Slaves indeed, both male and female, rarely draw near their
master, if he be seated, except creeping on their knees. A man, who is
possessed of several women, rarely enters the apartments of any of them,
hut sends for one or more of them at a time to his own. Whether free or
slaves, they enter it on their knees, and with indications of timidity and
respect.... The slaves are rarely allowed to wear any covering on their
feet. Free women, on the contrary, are ordinarily distinguished by a kind
of sandal; which, however, is always taken off when they come into the
presence of, or have occasion to pass, a person of any consideration of
the other sex. It is not uncommon to see a man on a journey, mounted idly
on an ass; whilst his wife is pacing many a weary step on foot behind him;
and moreover, perhaps, carrying a supply of provisions or culinary
utensils. Yet it is not to be supposed, that the man is despotic in his
house; the voice of the female has its full weight." [100]
MANDINGOES. "About noon," says Mr. Park, "I arrived at Kolor, a
considerable town; near the entrance into which I observed, hanging upon a
tree, a sort of masquerade habit, made of the bark of trees; which, I was
told on inquiry, belonged to MUMBO JUMBO. This is a strange bugbear,
common to all the Mandingo towns, and much employed by the Pagan natives in
keeping their women in subjection; for as the Kafas are not restricted in
the number of their wives, every one marries as many as he can
conveniently maintain; and as it frequently happens that the ladies
disagree among themselves, family quarrels sometimes rise to such a
height, that the authority of the husband can no longer preserve peace in
his household. In such cases, the interposition of Mumbo Jumbo is called
in and is always decisive.
"This strange minister of justice (who is supposed to be either the
husband himself, or some person instructed by him,) disguised in the dress
that has been mentioned, and armed with the rod of public authority,
announces his coming (whenever his services are required) by loud and
dismal screams in the woods near the town. He begins the pantomime at the
approach of night; and, as soon as it is dark, he enters the town, and
proceeds to the Bentang, at which all the inhabitants immediately
assemble.
"It may easily be supposed, that this exhibition is not much relished by
the women; for as the person in disguise is entirely unknown to them,
every married female suspects that the visit may possibly be intended for
herself: but they dare not refuse to appear, when they are summoned; and
the ceremony commences with songs and dances, which continue till
midnight, about which time Mumbo fixes on the offender. This unfortunate
victim being thereupon immediately seized, is stripped naked, tied to a
post, and severely scourged with Mumbo's rod, amidst the shouts and
derision of the whole assembly; and it is remarkable, that the rest of the
women are the loudest in their exclamations on this occasion against their
unhappy sister. Daylight puts an end to this indecent and unmanly
revel." [101]
"In the Mandingo countries," says Durand, "there is a mosque in every
town, from the steeple of which the people are called to prayers, the same
as in Turkey. Polygamy is practised in these regions in its utmost
latitude. The women are frequently hostages for alliance and peace; and
the chiefs of two tribes, who have been at war, cement their treaties by
an exchange of their daughters: private individuals do the same; and this
circumstance may be the reason why the chiefs, in particular, have such a
great number of women. A girl is frequently betrothed to a man as soon as
she is born. On the day agreed on for the marriage, the bridegroom places
on the road which the bride has to pass, several of his people at
different distances, with brandy and other refreshments; for if these
articles be not furnished in abundance, the conductors of the bride will
not advance a step further, though they may have got three parts of the
way on their journey. On approaching the town, they stop, and are joined
by the friends of the bridegroom, who testify their joy by shouting,
drinking, and letting off their pieces." [102]
MOORS OF BENOROM, &c. "The education of the girls is neglected altogether:
mental accomplishments are but little attended to by the women; nor is the
want of them considered, by the men, as a defect in the female character.
They are regarded, I believe, as an inferior species of animals; and seem
to be brought up for no other purpose, than that of administering to the
sensual pleasures of their imperious masters. Voluptuousness is,
therefore, considered as their chief accomplishment, and slavish
submission as their indispensable duty." [103]
KAMALIA. "If a man takes a fancy to any one [of the young women,] it is
not considered as absolutely necessary, that he should make an overture to
the girl herself. The first object is to agree with the parents,
concerning the recompense to be given them for the loss of the company and
services of their daughter. The value of two slaves is a common price,
unless the girl is thought very handsome; in which case, the parents will
raise their demand very considerably. If the lover is rich enough and
willing to give the sum demanded, he then communicates his wishes to the
damsel; but her consent is, by no means, necessary to the match; for if
the parents agree to it, and eat a few kolla-nuts, which are presented by
the suiter as an earnest of the bargain, the young lady must either have
the man of their choice, or continue unmarried, for she cannot after be
given to another. If the parents should attempt it, the lover is then
authorized, by the laws of the country, to seize upon the girl as
his slave.
"The <DW64>s, whether Mahomedan or Pagan, allow a plurality of wives. The
Mahomedans alone are, by their religion, confined to four; and as the
husband commonly pays a great price for each, he requires from all of them
the utmost deference and submission, and beats them more like hired
servants than companions." [104]
BANISERILE. "One of our slatus was a native of this place, from which he
had been absent three years. This man invited me to go with him to his
house; at the gate of which his friends met him with many expressions of
joy, shaking hands with him, embracing him, and singing and dancing before
him. As soon as he had seated himself upon a mat, by the threshold of his
door, a young woman (his intended bride) brought a little water in a
calabash, and kneeling down before him, desired him to wash his hands;
when he had done this, the girl, with a tear of joy sparkling in her eyes,
drank the water; this being considered as the greatest proof she could
possibly give him of her fidelity and attachment." [105]
THE KAFFERS. The principal article of their trade with the Tambookie
nation, is the exchange of cattle for their young women. Almost every
chief has Tambookie wives, though they pay much dearer for them than for
those of their own people. Polygamy is allowed in its fullest extent, and
without any inconvenience resulting from the practice, as it is confined
nearly to the chiefs. The circumstances of the common people will rarely
allow them the indulgence of more than one wife, as women are not to be
obtained without purchase. The females being considered as the property of
their parents, are invariably disposed of by sale. The common price of a
wife is an ox, or a couple of cows. Love with them is a very confined
passion, taking but little hold on the mind. When an offer is made for the
purchase of a daughter, she feels little inclination to refuse; she
considers herself as an article in the market, and is neither surprised,
nor unhappy, nor interested, on being told that she is about to be
disposed of. There is no previous courtship, no exchange of fine
sentiments, no nice feelings, nor little kind attentions, which catch the
affections and attach the heart. [106]
THE PEOPLE OF SNEUWBERG, GRAAFF REGNET, "The only grievance of which I
ever heard them complain," says Mr. Barrow, "and which appears to be a
real inconvenience to all who inhabit the remote parts of the colony, is a
ridiculous and absurd law respecting marriage: and as it seems to have no
foundation in reason, and little in policy, except, indeed, like the
marriage-acts in other countries, it be intended as a check to population,
it ought to be repealed. By this law, the parties are both obliged to be
present at the Cape, in order to answer certain interrogatories, and pass
the forms of office there, the chief intention of which seems to be that
of preventing improper marriages from being contracted; as if the
commissaries appointed to this office, at the distance of five or six
hundred miles, should be better acquainted with the connexions and other
circumstances regarding the parties; than the landrost, the clergyman, and
the members of the council residing upon the spot. The expense of the
journey to the young couple is greater than they can frequently well
afford. For decency's sake they must set out in two wagons, though in the
course of a month's journey across a desert country, it is said they
generally make one serve the purpose; the consequence of which is, that
nine times out of ten the consummation of the marriage precedes the
ceremony. This naturally produces another bad effect. The poor girl, after
the familiarities of a long journey, lies entirely at the mercy of the
man, who, having satisfied his curiosity or his passion, sometimes deserts
her before their arrival at the altar; and it has sometimes happened, that
the lady has repented of her choice in the course of the journey, and
driven home again in her own wagon. Though, in our own country, a trip to
Scotland be sometimes taken, when obstacles at a nearer distance could not
safely be surmounted, yet it would be considered as a very ridiculous, as
well as vexatious law, that should oblige the parties intending to marry,
to proceed from the Laud's End to London to carry their purpose into
execution. The inhabitants of Graaff Regnet must travel twice that
distance, in order to be married." [107]
<DW64> NATIONS. "It is a practice equally, nay, perhaps still more common
among the <DW64>s than among the Americans, to offer their wives and
daughters to Europeans." [108] "Parents sell their daughters not only to
lovers, but to suiters of any kind, without doubting or even asking their
consent. The <DW64>s in general, receive for their daughters a few bottles
of brandy, and at the furthest, a few articles of wearing apparel; and
when these prices are paid, the fathers conduct their willing children to
the huts of the purchasers." [109] "A <DW64> may love his wife with all the
affection that is possible for a <DW64> to possess, but he never permits
her to eat with him, because he would imagine himself contaminated, or his
dignity lessened, by such a condescension; and at this degrading distance,
the very <DW64>-slaves in the West Indies keep their wives, though it
might be presumed that the hardships of their common lot would have tended
to unite them in the closest manner." [110] "The poorest and meanest
<DW64>, even though he be a slave, is generally waited upon by his wife as
by a subordinate being, on her knees. On their knees the <DW64> women are
obliged to present to their husbands tobacco and drink; on their knees
they salute them when they return from hunting, or any other expedition;
lastly, on their knees, they drive away the flies from their lords and
masters while they sleep." [111]
GAGERS. Various writers of credit and veracity report, that in the
southern portion of Africa, many princes and chieftains keep great numbers
of young girls, not merely to gratify their passions, but to satiate their
tigerlike appetite for human flesh. In order to convince ourselves, that
the fate of the black women of Africa is not less severe than the
condition of the brown females of the American continent, it is sufficient
to state, that among the <DW64>-women, to whom Cavazzi administered
baptism, some acknowledged with tears that they had killed five, others
seven, and others again ten children, with their own hands.
Notwithstanding the despotic authority of the legislatrix of the Gagers,
she was unable, even by the strictest prohibition, to restrain her
warriors from regaling themselves with the flesh of women. Rich and
powerful chieftains continued to keep whole flocks of young girls, as they
would of lambs, calves, or any other animals, and had some of them daily
slaughtered for the table; for the Gagers prefer human flesh to every
other species of animal food, and among the different classes of human
kind, they hold that of young females in particular estimation. [112]
III. PATRIARCHAL TIMES, AND THE PERIOD OF THE JEWISH THEOCRACY, require a
brief examination, as a necessary means of elucidating the
general subject.
Having already, in the preceding inquiries, ascended to an early date, and
traced the condition of women through a long series of historic record to
the present age, it may seem an imperfection in the plan to conduct the
reader back to a still more remote antiquity than has hitherto been
noticed; but this arrangement will be allowed, perhaps, to be founded in
propriety, upon observing that the design was first to exhibit a complete
series of illustrations, derived from a view of the circumstances of
mankind as _destitute of the light of revelation_, and then to compare the
condition of the female sex under the influence of a precursory and
imperfect system of the _true religion_, with their actual state, or with
the privileges secured to them by the nobler manifestations of
CHRISTIANITY. By this mode of conducting the argument we trace the great
epochs in the history of female melioration: the glory of woman appears at
first eclipsed, as behind a dark cloud, which the passions of a degenerate
race had interposed to hide and debase her: she then emerges, though
partially, to view, through the mists and obscurities of a temporary
dispensation, adapting itself to the circumstances of mankind as they then
existed, but unsuited to what they were destined to become--till at
length, "fair as the moon," ascending to the noon of her glory, and
tinging with the mildness of her beam every earthly object, woman attains
her undisputed eminence, and diffuses her benignant influence in society.
Were we to attach entire credit to the pleasing descriptions of the muses,
we must admit, that the earliest ages of the world deserved the epithet of
"golden" as exhibiting man devoid of those artificial wants which
refinement and luxury have superinduced, and divested of those violent
prejudices, that selfishness and that arrogance, which have filled the cup
of human wo to the brim: we should see him inhabiting a tent of the
simplest construction, furnishing himself with necessary subsistence with
his own hands, sharing with his companion the services of domestic life,
breathing the very soul of hospitality, and adorned with the most
attractive manners: we should even see princes and princesses devoting
themselves to what we are accustomed to denominate the menial offices both
of husbandry and house-keeping, but without any sense of degradation in
the one sex, or any tyrannical assumption in the other.
The authority of the sacred writings also upon this point is express and
decisive. The most distinguished of the human race were, in patriarchal
times, devoted to rural occupations and to plain habits; and it is not
easy, nor is it altogether desirable, to divest oneself of those feelings
of enchantment which the view of such scenes and manners naturally
inspires. Who can remain unaffected at the recital of the story of an
Abraham, running to the herd and fetching a young and tender calf to
refresh his angelic visiters; or at the various memorable instances of
simplicity that occur in the stories of Isaac, Jacob, and their
contemporaries?
But the question is, whether the actual condition of women did or did not
indicate the lordly views of their husbands, and a general state of
slavish subordination? What can be said to the practices of polygamy and
concubinage, which prevailed even in these golden times and in pious
families? Do they evince any proper estimate of the character of women? or
have they not an evident tendency to degrade them? Does not their very
institution assert the subserviency of the one sex to the will and
pleasure of the other? [113] The state of women may not only be inferred
under such circumstances, but is clearly seen. Wives possessed no other
advantages over concubines than the right of inheriting; and domestic
unions were formed without any reference to the nobler felicities of
social intercourse. Hence infertility not only excited dislike, but was
held to justify repudiation. In the earliest ages, marriage was not only
very unceremonious with regaird to the mode in which it was conducted, but
this important union was arranged without any previous agreement between
the parties, and wives were often purchased. Men had the right of
annulling all the oaths and engagements of their daughters and wives, if
they had, not been present when they were contracted. "We can discover,"
says Segur, "in these first ages, nothing worthy of the title of 'golden,'
which has been applied to them. Abraham and Isaac were continually afraid
of being assassinated for their wives; and the oath which they enacted
from their neighbours not to attempt their lives, savoured little of a
_golden_ age."
Under the Jewish theocracy the Levitical law appointed a variety of
regulations which evinced their imperfect emancipation from a state of
inferiority. They were in particular subjected to the trial of the waters
of jealousy, not only in cases of real departure from conjugal fidelity,
but when a suspicion existed in the mind of the husband, even though it
were without any foundation: and there were cases in which misconduct of a
similar natute exposed them to be stoned to death. The doctrine of vows
also, in the cases of daughters, wives, and widows, corroborates the
general argument, by evincing the marked subordination of the woman to
the man. "If a woman also vow a vow unto the Lord, and bind herself by a
bond, being in her father's house in her youth; and her father hear her
vow, and her bond wherewith she hath bound her soul, and her father shall
hold his peace at her: then all her vows shall stand, and every bond
wherewith she hath bound her soul shall stand. But if her father disallow
her in the day that he heareth; not any of her vows, or of her bonds,
wherewith she hath bound her soul, shall stand: and the Lord shall forgive
her, because her father disallowed her. And if she had at all an husband,
when she vowed, or uttered aught out of her lips, wherewith she bound her
soul; and her husband heard it, and held his peace at her in the day that
he heard it: then her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she bound
her soul shall stand. But if her husband disallowed her on the day that he
heard it; then he shall make her vow which she vowed, and that which she
uttered with her lips, wherewith she bound her soul, of none effect: and
the Lord shall forgive her. But every vow of a widow, and of her that is
divorced, wherewith they have bound their souls, shall stand against her.
And if she vowed in her husband's house, or bound her soul by a bond with
an oath; and her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and
disallowed her not: then all her vows shall stand, and every bond
wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. But if her husband hath utterly
made them void on the day he heard them; then whatsoever proceeded out of
her lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall
not stand: her husband hath made them void; and the Lord shall forgive
her. Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband
may establish it, or her husband may make it void. But if her husband
altogether hold his peace at her from day to day; then he establisheth
all her vows, or all her bonds, which are upon her: he confirmeth them,
because he held his peace at her in the day that he heard them. But if he
shall any ways make them void after that he hath heard them, then he shall
bear her iniquity."
* * * * *
From the dark and deeply shaded back-ground of the picture of female
degradation, formed by the facts which have now been adduced, and which
might easily be corroborated by an immense accumulation of evidence,
Christianity is brought forward with conspicuous prominence, and in all
her gracefulness. The contrast is at once striking and affecting: the
moral scene brightens upon the view as we contemplate this attractive
figure combining majesty and mildness--fascination in her smiles and
heaven in her eye.
The superiority which the religion of Jesus has secured to women above the
state of barbaric degradation, Mahometan slavery, and Jewish subjection,
proclaims the glory of that system, which has already meliorated society
to its minutest subdivisions, and will eventually transform the moral
desert of human being into a paradise of beauty and bliss. The argument,
however, will be seen with more distinctness, by the following
brief detail.
1. _The personal conduct of the divine Author of Christianity, tended to
elevate the female sex to a degree of consideration in society before
unknown._ During the life of our Lord, women were admitted to a holy
familiarity with him, attended his public labours, ministered to his
wants, and adhered to him with heroic zeal, when their attachment exposed
them to insult, danger and death.
Immediately after the marriage of Cana in Galilee, where he attended with
his mother, he accompanied her with his brethren and disciples to
Capernaum. That excellent spirit, for which he was remarkable from his
earliest years, continued to influence his mind in maturer life, and
taught him justly to appreciate and perfectly to exemplify the domestic
and social duties. He did not scruple to converse with a Samaritan woman,
who came to draw water at Jacob's well, though his disciples, in whose
minds Jewish prejudices continued to prevail, expressed their astonishment
at his condescension. Never was there so fine a specimen of patience,
gentleness, and humility, blended with true dignity, as upon that
remarkable occasion. He instructed her ignorance, endured her petulance,
corrected her mistakes, awakened her conscience, converted her heart, and
eventually honoured her as a messenger of mercy and salvation to her
Samaritan friends. At another time, when the disciples rebuked those who
brought their little children to him, that he might put his hands on them
and pray, he kindly interposed; and evincing the most sympathetic
tenderness towards the solicitudes which, on such an occasion, would
necessarily pervade the maternal bosom, he said, "Suffer little children,
and forbid them not to come unto me; for of such is the kingdom of
heaven: and he laid his hands on them." On various occasions, when he
performed some of his most illustrious miracles, females were personally
concerned, and shared his distinguished notice and condolence. Such
particularly was the case when he met the funeral procession at Nain: it
was that of a young man, represented in the simple and affecting language
of the evangelist, as "the only son of his mother, and she was a widow."
The meeting was apparently casual; but Jesus was instantly and deeply
impressed with the circumstances: he in particular felt compassion for the
weeping parent--addressed her in kind and gentle terms--remanded the
spirit from its eternal flight, to inhabit again for a season the body
from which it had so lately departed, and delivered the reanimated youth
to _his mother_. He blended his tears with those of Martha and Mary, at
the sepulchre of their brother; and after instructing them upon the
subject of the resurrection from the dead, restored him to their wishes
and affections." Women "ministered unto Jesus of their substance,"--"the
daughters of Jerusalem" bewailed him when he was led to crucifixion--and
the "women that followed him from Galilee were deeply interested
spectators of his sufferings, observed his sepulchre, and prepared spices
and ointments. It was Mary Magdalene who enjoyed the honour and happiness
of a first manifestation after Jesus was risen from the dead, and she was
commissioned to go and inform the rest of his sorrowing disciples. "The
frequent mention," says Doddridge "which is made in the evangelists of the
generous and courageous zeal of some _pious women_ in the service of
Christ, and especially of the faithful and resolute constancy with which
they attended him in those last scenes of his suffering, might very
possibly be intended to obviate that haughty and senseless contempt, which
the pride of men, often irritated by those vexations to which their own
irregular passions have exposed them, has in all ages affected to throw on
that sex, which probably, in the sight of God, constitute by far the
better half of mankind; and to whose care and tenderness the wisest and
best of men generally owe and ascribe much of the daily comfort and
enjoyment of their lives."
2. _As the conduct of Christ naturally induced his disciples to imitate
the example of their illustrious Master, the subsequent admission of women
to all the privileges of the Christian Church, tended exceedingly to
confirm their elevation, and evince their importance in society_. When the
primitive converts to the Christian faith wished publicly to avow their
dereliction of heathen idolatry, and their emancipation from the bondage
of Judaism, by being baptized in water, _both sexes_ were admitted without
distinction to this solemn rite. At a very early period of the primitive
church, when the city of Samaria received the word of God by the preaching
of Philip, which with its accompanying miracles, diffused an universal
joy, "they were baptized, both MEN and WOMEN;" and the apostle Paul, in
writing to the Galatians, expresses himself in this triumphant strain:
"For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many
of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is
neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither
MALE nor FEMALE, for ye are ALL ONE in Christ Jesus."
Sentiments like these, combined with the practice of an institution so
expressive and so remarkable, tended to circulate among the primitive
Christians those feelings of respect and affection for women, which, by
elevating them to their proper rank in society, must necessarily purify
the public morals, meliorate individual character, and ennoble the
intercourse of life. Admitted to an equal participation of the privileges
of God's house, where every minor distinction is annihilated by the
predominance of a diffusive charity, and feeling that their present joys
and future destinies were blended with those of the "holy brethren,
partakers of the heavenly calling;" the female part of the community rose
into importance as rational, but especially as immortal beings.
After the ascension of Christ, the historian of the Acts of the Apostles
informs us, that "the WOMEN, and Mary, the mother of Jesus," assembled
with the apostles to worship in the upper room at Jerusalem; being equally
interested in the great events which had recently occurred, and in the
devotional services in which they now engaged. Paul directs Timothy to
treat "the elder women as mothers, the younger as sisters, with all
purity." He also desires him to "honour widows that are widows indeed,"
and to afford them all proper relief by charitable contributions, a
practice for which the first Christians were highly distinguished. Women
are represented by an apostle himself as _fellow-labourers_ in the Gospel,
assisting them, not only by their example, to which he willingly pointed
the attention of the churches, but by their prayers, their visits of
mercy, and other similar methods of co-operatiug in the propagation of the
truth, and the promotion of individual happiness.
As the _immediate_ effects of original transgression upon the woman were
most obvious and most deplorable, and as her debasement from the eminence
assigned her by the Creator has been _completed_ by the misrule of
passion, and the gradual advancement of human degeneracy: so the _direct_
operation of Christianity is apparent, according to the degree of its
prevalence, in elevating her to a state which was known before only in the
garden of Eden--a state in which she again assumes a rank, which
regenerated man cheerfully concedes, wherein she regains the lost
paradise of love and tenderness; while the more _remote_ influence of this
system is discernible in the recognition of her rights, wherever its
benign dominion extends. Now she ascends to the glory of an intelligent
creature, gladdens by her presence the solitary hours of existence,
beguiles by her converse and sympathy the rough and tedious paths of life,
and not only acquires personal dignity and importance, but in some measure
new modifies, purifies, and exalts the character of man. If we cannot but
weep over the affecting representation of the departure of Adam and Eve
from the scene of innocence and of celestial manifestation, when
"The brandish'd sword of God before them blaz'd
Fierce as a comet: which with torrid heat
And vapours, as the Libyan air adust,
Begun to parch that temperate clime; whereat
In either hand the hast'ning angel caught
Our ling'ring parents, and to the eastern gate
Led them direct, and down the cliff as fast
To the subjected plain----"
and when, taking a hasty retrospect of their lost felicity, in consequence
of transgression, and cherishing gloomy forebodings of that melancholy
futurity, which seemed already to pour from its dark clouds the deluging
rain of grief and misery--
"Some natural tears they dropp'd, but wip'd them soon;
The world was all before them, where to choose
Their place of rest, and Providence their guide;
They, hand in hand, with wand'ring steps and slow
Through Eden took their solitary way;----"
--if we must mourn over so sad a scene, Christianity a wakens sympathies
of an opposite description, by exhibiting a goodly number of their
descendants as inhabitants of the CHRISTIAN CHURCH--the grand repository
of heavenly blessings, and the dwelling-place of peace--at whose holy
altar of truth souls are wedded, and at whose sacramental board they
celebrate an everlasting union. Nothing can present a scene more worthy
the attention of mankind, or more attractive to the eyes of witnessing
angels, than this association of persons in pious fellowship, without
distinction of birth or country, age or sex; participators in equal
proportions of the same happiness, children of one common parent, and
heirs of one rich inheritance!
3. _The, great principles asserted by the religion of Jesus, secure to
women, as an unquestionable right, that exaltation in society, which his
conduct, and that of his followers conferred_. These principles may he
traced in the New Testament, either as necessarily comprehending, by their
generality, a proper treatment of the female sex, or as developing
themselves in particular regulations and enactments.
Christianity breathes a spirit of the most diffusive charity and good
will: and wherever its "power" is felt, it moulds the character into the
image of benevolence. Love is the beauty and the strength of this
"spiritual building;" a love, at once comprehensive in its range, and
minute in its ramifications: adjusting the diversified claims of society
and religion with perfect exactness, and directing the exercise of all the
social affections. The fountain being purified, the streams become pure;
the heart, which is the centre mid spring of moral action, being renewed,
the conduct will be distinguished by a corresponding degree of virtue,
goodness, and sanctity. But as Christianity produces a general
transformation of character, by subduing the ferocious and brutal
propensities of man; clearing away the rank and noxious weeds that
overspread human nature, and sowing the seeds of moral excellence, the
effect must be discernible in the whole intercourse of life. Immorality
trembles, domestic tyranny retires abashed before the majesty of religion,
and peace pervades that dwelling where power was law, and woman a slave.
In fact, every precept of the Gospel that inculcates kindness, sympathy,
gentleness, meekness, courtesy, and all the other graces that bloom in the
garden of the Lord--indirectly, and by no unintelligible or forced
application, provides for the honour and glory of the female sex. If the
most effectual method of degrading woman be to barbarize man, the certain
means of dignifying _her_ is to christianize _him_.
It is to be noticed also, that there is no sex in conscience, and that for
the discharge of the duties of piety, each is equally capacitated, and
therefore equally responsible. If men were to give an account at the
tribunal of heaven, not only for their personal actions and principles,
but for those of women, to whom they are related by the ties of
consanguinity, or with whom they are connected by circumstances, there
would be some reason in assuming a jurisdiction over their faith, and
disputing their claims to rationality and to respectful treatment; but not
to insist upon the moral constitution of the female sex, and the whole
drift of divine revelation, the very terms of the initiatory ordinance of
the Christian church, to which they are equally entitled, illustrates and
secures their prerogatives--for it is "the answer of a good conscience
towards God." When men impose fetters upon other men, condemning,
imprisoning, fining, scourging, burning, and anathematizing them, merely
because they dare to think for themselves in matters which can only
concern God and their own souls, and will not have their faith decreed by
arbitrary power and exasperated ignorance, it need not excite surprise,
that they should assume the right of behaving to the weaker sex with all
the capriciousness of despotism; and no authority but that of Scripture,
which maintains the privileges of _all thinking beings_, can effectually
restrain the wickedness of man's UNMANLY usurpation.
The precepts of Christianity bespeak its characteristic regard to the
reciprocal duties and respective rank of the sexes, adjusting their claims
with a nicety that precludes disputation, and an authority that commands
assent. They are not arbitrary enactments; but being founded in the
highest reason, and connected with individual felicity, approve themselves
to every well-regulated mind. In our behaviour to others, we are not only
prohibited from indulging the vindictive and malignant passions, but
exhorted to do them good by the employment of our pecuniary resources,
social opportunities, and moral means, to advance both their temporal and
eternal interests. While these principles necessarily comprise the
discharge of all relative duties, these are besides specifically
enumerated and enforced. Husbands, in whose hands barbarism had placed a
tyrannic sceptre, are required by the religion of Jesus to renounce their
unjust domination, and to descend to the regulated and affectionate
intercourse of the domestic hearth. It is expressly enjoined upon them to
"love their wives," and not to be "bitter against them." "Let every one of
you in particular so love his wife even as himself: so ought men to love
their wives as their own bodies."--"Ye husbands, dwell with your wives
according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife as unto the weaker
vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life." "Let one of you
in particular so love his wife as himself, and the wife see that she
reverence her husband."
Christianity also expressly abolishes, at least by necessary implication,
polygamy and the power of divorce, as they existed among barbarous
nations, perpetuating the degradation of women, and spreading confusion in
society. "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication,
and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which
is put away, doth commit adultery." "Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak
to them that know the law.) how that the law hath dominion over a man as
long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law
to her husband so long as be liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is
loosed from the law of her husband." And, "Let every man have his own
wife, and let every woman have her own husband." Paley remarks, "The
manners of different countries have varied in nothing more than in their
domestic constitutions. Less polished and more luxurious nations have
either not perceived the bad effects of polygamy, or, if they did perceive
them, they who in such countries possessed the power of reforming the
laws, have been unwilling to resign their own gratifications. Polygamy is
retained at this day among the Turks, and throughout every part of Asia in
which Christianity is not professed. In Christian countries it is
universally prohibited. In Sweden it is punished with death. In England,
besides the nullity of the second marriage, it subjects the offender to
transportation, or imprisonment and branding, for the first offence, and
to capital punishment for the second. And whatever may be said in behalf
of polygamy when it is authorized by the law of the land, the marriage of
a second wife during the lifetime of the first, in countries where such a
second marriage is void, must be ranked with the most dangerous and cruel
of those frauds by which a woman is cheated out of her fortune, her
person, and her happiness.
"The ancient Medes compelled their citizens, in one canton, to take seven
wives; in another, each woman to receive five husbands; according as war
had made, in one quarter of their country, an extraordinary havoc among
the men, or the women had been carried away by an enemy from another. This
regulation, so far as it was adapted to the proportion which subsisted
between the number of males and females, was founded in the reason upon
which the most improved nations of Europe proceed at present.
"Caesar found among the inhabitants of this island a species of polygamy,
if it may be so called, which was perfectly singular. _Uxores_, says he,
_habent deni duodenique inter se communes; et maxime fratres cum
fratribus, parentesque cum liberis: sed si qui sint ex his nati, corum
habentur liberi, quo primum virgo quaque deducta est_."
The same perspicuous writer adds, upon the subject of divorce, "The
Scriptures seem to have drawn the obligation tighter than the law of
nature left it. 'Whosoever,' saith Christ, 'shall put away his wife,
except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth
adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away, doth commit adultery.'
The law of Moses, for reasons of local expediency, permitted the Jewish
husband to put away his wife; but whether for every cause, or for what
causes, appears to have been controverted amongst the interpreters of
those times. Christ, the precepts of whose religion were calculated for
more general use and observation, revokes this permission, (as given to
the Jews 'for the hardness of their hearts,') and promulges a law which
was thenceforward to confine divorces to the single cause of adultery in
the wife. And I see no sufficient reason to depart from the plain and
strict meaning of Christ's words. The rule was new. It both surprised and
offended his disciples, yet Christ added nothing to relax or explain it.
"Inferior causes may justify the separation of husband and wife, although
they will not authorize such a dissolution of the marriage contract as
would leave either party at liberty to marry again; for it is that
liberty, in which the danger and mischief of divorces principally consist.
If the care of children does not require that they should live together,
and it is become, in the serious judgment of both, necessary for their
mutual happiness that they should separate, let them separate by consent.
Nevertheless, this necessity can hardly exist, without guilt and
misconduct on one side or on both. Moreover, cruelty, ill usage, extreme
violence, or moroseness of temper, or other great and continual
provocations, make it lawful for the party aggrieved to withdraw from the
society of the offender, without his or her consent. The law which imposes
the marriage vow, whereby the parties promise to 'keep to each other,' or
in other words to live together, must be understood to impose it with a
silent reservation of these cases; because the same law has constituted a
judicial relief from the tyranny of her husband, by the divorce _a mensa
et toro_, and by the provision which it makes for the separate maintenance
of the injured wife. St. Paul, likewise, distinguishes between a wife
merely separating herself from the family of her husband, and her marrying
again: 'Let not the wife depart from her husband; but, and if she do
depart, let her remain unmarried.'" [114]
Notwithstanding the survey we have taken of the general degradation of the
female sex, where the benign influences of Christianity have been unfelt,
the argument may be confronted by a formidable array of plausible
objections. It may be said, that amidst the barbarity of the SCANDINAVIAN
NATIONS, they treated their women with extraordinary respect. The
Scythians exempted the daughter from the punishment in which the son was
obliged to partake with the father, and the German women even inherited
the throne. Some of the laws, among the Goths, respecting illicit
intercourse, were highly reasonable and just, and our remote ancestors may
be cited as examples of treating women with the utmost veneration. It may
seem indicative also of the prevalence of similar sentiments, that the
ancient mythologies abound in female divinities: the Phoenicians
worshipped the goddess _Astarte_, the Scythians, _Appia,_ the
Scandinavians, _Friggia_, the wife of Odin. It may be further urged, with
regard to the GREEKS and ROMANS, that though the melancholy picture we
have already drawn of their conduct be true, yet their history presents
some remarkable evidences of the elevated condition of their women, and
the honourable regard which they obtained. Among the former, indeed, few
instances can be adduced, in addition to that of Areta, the daughter of
Aristippus, who fixed upon her son the surname of [Greek: Metrodidaktos],
or _disciple of his mother_, in consequence of her having been his
instructer in the sciences and philosophy. The Romans, at some periods of
their history, paid extraordinary respect to their women; the institution
of the vestals is a memorial of the estimation in which female virtue was
held, and the emperor Heliogabalus was desirous that his wife should have
a voice in the senate. They allowed their women to celebrate an annual
feast, to commemorate the reconciliation between them and the Sabines, by
means of their wives; and they erected an equestrian statue to Cloelia,
and a temple to Fortune, in honour of the sex; because the mother and wife
of Coriolanus had caused that hero to retire weeping from his native
country, when he was irresistible by arms. [115] But the most plausible
objection to the general argument seems derivable from the history of
CHIVALRY, under whose influence it is alleged that women were not only not
degraded, but were actually advanced to the highest condition, and
possessed the most commanding influence. The knights, at their
installation, took solemn vows of self-devotement to the cause of female
honour; and ladies were constantly engaged as umpires at tournaments, took
off the armour of the conquerors, and irivested them with magnificent
robes. The middle ages witnessed the extraordinary sight of knight-errants
wandering over distant countries, with their sword and lance in hand, to
contest the point of the beauty and virtue of their ladies, with all who
ventured to intimate the slightest doubt or suspicion on the subject.
Their expeditions were usually made in consequence of some requisition on
the part of their mistresses, or to fulfil a vow voluntarily incurred in a
moment of intoxication and excitement.
The reply to these general objections has been in part anticipated.
Christianity assigns to women their proper place in society, neither
admitting of their being tyrannized over by despotic authority, nor
impiously honoured by a ridiculous adulation. They are to be viewed as
help meets, not, as slaves; to be respected and loved, but not deified.
While the religion of Jesus raises them to great consideration in the
scale of society, it imposes a salutary restraint upon human passions, and
checks every approach to the assumption of an unnatural superiority. It
bestows a rank which secures them from contempt or disregard, while it
equally prevents a senseless adoration: so that its principles disallow
the barbaric treatment of uncivilized nations and the follies of the
chivalrous ages.
In the different periods and places to which the objection refers, the
conduct of mankind was marked with inconsistency. Greece and Rome exhibit
ample specimens of this nature; and the time of chivalry afford
illustrations equally remarkable. The knights of the order were not
distinguished by fidelity to their wives, or by a concern for the
education of their daughters: their devotion to the female sex was, in
fact, without principle and without love; they fought, from vanity and
fashion, for persons whom they had basely dishonoured and secretly
despised; and while their flattery and folly were sufficiently
discreditable to their own understandings and hearts, they tended in a
deplorable degree to corrupt the principles of those whom they
professed to value.
It is further obvious, that in the very best periods of Greek and Roman
history there existed no security against a change in the treatment of
women, arising from the general recognition of any of those great
principles of moral conduct which constitute the basis of good government
and of well-regulated society. Passion predominated above reason, and
received its impulse solely from casual circumstances. It was, in fact,
accidental, whether it should operate amiably or malignantly; and the
felicity of one half of the human species depended upon the precarious and
ever vacillating humour of the other. Virtue was scarcely seen upon the
earth, except at occasional and often distant visitations, or as she shed
a fitful and flickering light into the retreats of systematic philosophy.
Woman was at the mercy of every wind--to-day honoured--to-morrow
despised--now a goddess--and anon a slave! Viewing heathen countries in
the most favourable aspect in which history presents them, and admitting
to the fullest extent the correctness of those details of virtue and
valour which she has transmitted to us, the conduct of the Celtic and
Scandinavian nations, and instances deduced from cultivated and classic
regions, or from modern times, can only be considered as _exceptions_
which do not impugn the general alignment, corroborated as it has been by
a historical and geographical delineation of society in every age of the
world, and every quarter of the globe.
Behold Christianity, then, walking forth in her purity and greatness to
bless the earth, diffusing her light in every direction, distributing her
charities on either hand, quenching the flames of lust and the fires of
ambition, silencing discord, spreading peace, and creating all things new!
Angels watch her progress, celebrate her influence, and anticipate her
final triumphs! The moral creation brightens beneath her smiles, and owns
her renovating power; at her approach man loses his fierceness and woman
her chains; each becomes blessed in the other, and God glorified in both!
Appendix.
(SEE p. 320.)
The concurrent evidence of a variety of passages of Scripture respecting
the existence of Satan, ind his interference in human concerns, have been
rejected with singular and pertinacious audacity, solely upon the ground
that the whole of these representations must be figurative, because they
are not consonant to _human reason_--which seems to be a very dignified
sort of personage, assuming to herself the right of calling revelation to
her bar, and disposing at pleasure of the doctrines of Heaven. As,
however, truth will always bear investigation, it may not be improper to
devote a few additional pages to this subject, with a view of satisfying;
the humble inquirer, that sound sense and divine testimony are really and
entirely coincident.
Whatever is revealed it becomes us to believe, and simply on this account,
that it _is revealed_; if the subject of the revelation be mysterious or
incomprehensible, this does not annul our obligation implicitly to believe
it, because sufficient reasons may exist in the Eternal Mind for the
concealment of its nature, or it may surpass the comprehension of our
limited capacities; but if it be naturally capable of investigation--if it
be not only a fact, but a fact in proof of which evidences may be adduced,
and explanations furnished, our minds cannot be better employed, than in
thus superinducing substantial evidence or vivid probability upon the
testimony of divine inspiration.
I. It is highly reasonable to suppose, that there are beings of a distinct
and superior order to ourselves in the universe. Nothing can be more
improbable than to imagine that this earth is the only inhabited region of
universal empire, the only peopled province in the creation of God;
especially when we observe that it forms but one, and that a small globe
of matter belonging to a system in which others, and some very superior
bodies, are found moving round the came centre, and legulated by similar
laws; and that this whole system itself is but one out of ten thousand
others that constitute the heavenly constellations, and "pave the shining
way to the divine abode."
The productions of Infinite Wisdom are wonderfully diversified. In the
present world we have an opportunity of observing them only in the
descending scale, from man, the summit of creation, down through all the
gradations of animal existence, to the scarcely discernible insects that
flit in the summer sunbeams, and to the minuter world of microscopic
discovery. But analogy would lead us to infer, that there may be beings in
the vast dominion of universal space as much superior to man as man
himself is superior to insects or animalculae. It is not probable that
creative power should cease to operate precisely at the point where human
existence commences; and especially as _mind_ admits of incalculable
diversity in the extent of its energies and capacities, and as it is found
in all cases to possess a power of improvement and expansion, it is
likely, under other circumstances and in other worlds, it may he
inconceivably superior to the highest elevation it his ever attained in
this lower region. Hence we infer the great probabilily of angelic
existence.
II. It is reasonable to suppose, that superior intelligences were
constituted free agents, and capable therefore of retaining or forfeiting
their primeval character and happiness, for this is the evident lay of the
rational creation, so far it comes within the limits of our observation.
If this be the case, some of these beings may probably have misused their
liberty, and become depraved and corrupt. It is essential to the notion of
free agency, to suppose this possible, and though from the infinite
benignity of the Divine Being, we should infer that he would _create_ them
holy and happy, we cannot conclude they must _necessarily_ be _preserved_
in such a state. There is nothing in the nature of the blessed God, as a
just and holy Being, to require this, no obligation to do so resulting
from the mere circumstance of their being thus created, and nothing, in a
perfect system of holy government, to demand it. Indeed, quite the
reverse, because it is natural to infer, that the subjects of divine
government, however elevated in character and condition, should be
responsible to their Ruler, and liberty of thought and action, the power
of choice, and refusal of obedience and disobedience, is essential to
responsibility. There may, therefore, probably exist unholy or evil
spirits, such as have not kept their first estate, and consequently
amenable to righteous laws, and proper objects of punishment.
III. As it is reasonable to suppose that the government of God may admit
of the existence of fallen and evil spirits, as well as those of a more
honourable class, it is equally so to conclude, that a similar or
analogous variety of talent, capacity, and guilt may obtain to that which
we observe in the constitution of other intelligent creatures both good
and evil, in this world. Wicked men are not satisfied to be sought by
criminals, they have no wish to be alone in sin but are uniformly anxious
to seduce others into the perpetration of those iniquities which they
themselves have dared to commit. The first action of Eve after her
transgression, was to hand the forbidden fruit to her husband, and
persuade him to eat, and it is the earliest wish of a rebellious heart to
involve others in the guilt and misery of their own deeds, partly for the
sake of concealing their enormity, by diverting the eye from observing the
awful proportions of then individual offences, and partly to acquire
encouragement and support in the commission of yet unpractised crimes.
Hence "_one_ sinner destroyeth much good." According to his capacity or
opportunity he becomes the centre of a large circle of impious
association, he sways inferior minds, and forms them into so many
satellites round his person, who individually acquire a lustre from his
pre-eminence, and feel the attraction of his base superiority. Hence the
world of wickedness is ruled by an incalculable number of petty princes,
who each assume independent empire, but all combine to carry on eternal
war against the order of providence, the good of society, and the glory
of God,
It is not absurd, then, to conclude, that a similar diversity prevails
amongst evil beings of a superior class, that some may be far more
atrocious in their characters than others, and more capacitated to do
extensive mischief. It is equally likely, that their influence over other
evil spirits may be proportioned to these circumstances, and that their
example or advice may excite to deeds of infernal daring. These
considerations would eventually conduct us to the probability of the
existence of one, pre-eminent above the rest in crime and in capacity, who
may influence the several chiefs of the infernal empire, as they exercise
a power over inferior demons; or that Satan, or the devil, is "the prince
of the power of the air."
IV. The _invisible_ nature of diabolical agency can be no sufficient
objection to its existence. Admitting that there are other proofs, this
circumstance could not diminish their force, much less destroy their
evidence. It must be granted, that without other proofs it would be a
radical objection, because in such a case the whole statement would he
gratuitous and conjectural. If it were allowable to suppose such an
agency, it might be equally so to refuse admitting it; every one may be
amused or not with a pure fiction, an imaginary creation. But do not
plead, that the invisibility of diabolical agency is any proof or any
presumption of its reality; but simply that it is no objection, that it
has no power to neutralize the evidence produced, and that unbelievers
have no authority, on this account, to treat the subject with that
profane and impertinent ridicule, which is a mere commonplace artifice to
evade unwelcome convictions.
God is invisible--but is this any argument against his being? The human
soul is invisible--is this a proof that it does not exist? The magnetic
influence cannot be seen--is this a reason that it does not operate? Are
the opinions or philosophers deduced from the analogies of nature, that
suns and stars and systems occupy the distant regions of space, which have
never yet been penetrated by the best constructed telescopes, rendered
improbable by the allegation, that no eye and no instrument can discern
them? The existence and operations of the devil are admitted to be
invisible to sense, and in many cases, perhaps, difficult of investigation
by reason--what then? Nothing.
V. The supposition that the operation of invisible spirits is secret and
imperceptible to ourselves, cannot be adduced as demonstrative against its
reality. What is more difficult to ascertain than the operation of our own
minds, and the motives by which we are impelled? Nor is it difficult only
to trace the process of reasoning that has led us to any particular
conclusion, and to recall the fleeting thoughts flinch have passed through
the mind in rapid succession, so as to tell how we came to be influenced
to a certain conclusion; but we often cannot discover what external
objects or what incidental circumstances, first directed us into the
inquiry, or led to the result.
Still more inconceivable is the manner in which spirit operates upon
spirit, where there is no external agency; and it is inconceivable,
because of our little experience on the subject, and because the usual
modes of impression are through the medium of sense. The ear, the eye, the
touch, convey impressions to the spirit; but when neither are sensibly
affected, we cannot trace the influence exercised upon us, although it is
highly irrational to deny its possibility. Besides, we know that "God, who
is a Spirit, operates upon our souls at times and under circumstances,
when we are unconscious of this influence; and, if we had no evidence from
Scripture, reason must admit that such an operation is not improbable."
The only objection which can arise here, is that of supposing the evil
spirit in any respects independent of God; a supposition, however, which
is not to be charged upon the advocates of diabolical agency. "It is
evident," says Dr. Leland, "to the common sense of mankind, that there is
a vast difference between the supposition of an almighty and independent
evil being, a supposition full of absurdity and horror; and that of an
inferior dependent being, who was made originally pure and upright, but
fell by his own voluntary defection into vice and wickedness; and who,
though permitted in many instances to do mischief, and to act according to
his evil inclinations, as wicked men are often permitted to do in this
present state, yet are still under the sovereign control of the most holy,
wise, and powerful Governor of the world. For, in this case, we may be
sure, from the divine wisdom, justice, and goodness, that God will, in the
fittest season, inflict a punishment upon that evil being and his
associates, proportionable to their crimes; and that in the mean time, he
setteth bounds to their malice and rage, and provideth sufficient
assistance for those whom they endeavour to seduce to evil, whereby they
may be enabled to repel their temptations, if it be not their own faults;
and that he will in his superior wisdom bring good out of their evil, and
overrule even their malice and wickedness, for promoting the great ends of
his government, This is the representation made to us of this matter in
the Holy Scripture, nor is there any thing in this that can be proved to
be contrary to sound reason. And we may justly conclude, that in the final
issue of things, the wisdom as well as righteousness of this part of the
divine administration will most illustriously appear."
END.
Footnotes
[1]: Compare Ps. cxxxii. 11. Isa. xi. 1. Jer. xxiii 5, and xxxiii. 15. Gen.
xii. 3, xxii. 18, xxvi. 4, and xxviii. 14.
[2]: Lowth's Isaiah, ch. xi. translation and notes, VOL. II.
[3]: DODDRIDGE.
[4]: There are, according to the Jews, four angels that surround the throne
of God--Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel. The latter they place,
conformably with his expression to Zacharias, [Hebrew], _before
him_, or _in his presence._
[5]: The Ethiopic version, instead of "in those days," renders the
expression in the thirty-ninth verse of 1st chap. of Luke, "in that day."
[6]: Selden. Uxor. Heb. lib. ii. cap. 1.
[7]: This remarkable time cannot be stated with any certainty. The earliest
antiquity determines nothing upon the subject. Towards the end of the
second, or beginning of the third century only, was this attempted; when
those who were most curious in their researches fixed it about the
twentieth of May. Clemens Alexandrinus thinks that it was the
twenty-eighth year after the battle of Actium; that is, the 41st year of
Augustus; but Joseph Scaliger places it in his forty-second year; and,
after a most laborious investigation, shows that Christ was born about the
autumnal equinox, the latter end of September, or beginning of October.
SCALIG. Animad. ad Chron. Euseb. p. 174, et seq.--It was not till the
fourth century that this great event was believed to have occurred on the
twenty-fifth of December. They have not failed to assign what they deemed
important reasons for this decision. As the sun, they say, is then
beginning to rise on our hemisphere, and again to approach our pole, it is
the proper period to which the rising of the Sun of Righteousness should
be referred. The Romans have another reason, deduced from the preceding.
At the return of the sun the feast of the Saturnalia was celebrated at
Rome. It was thought proper to substitute in the place of this feast,
which was distinguished by its profane rejoicings, that of our Saviour's
birth, for the purpose of inducing the people to separate joy from riot.
It is, however, the _event_, and not the _day_, we celebrate.
Comp. SAURIN, Discours Historiques, Critiques, &c. continuez par
Beausobre, tom. ix. p. 146-148, 8vo.
[8]: Compare Lev. xii. 2, 4, 6, 8. Numb. viii. 16, 17. xviii. 15, 16. Five
shekels amounted to about twelve shillings and sixpence of our money.
[9]: "This (_wise men_ from the East) is not only an indefinite, but
an improper version of the term. It is indefinite, because those called
[Greek: magoi] were a particular class, party, or profession among the Orientals,
as much as Stoics, Peripatetics, and Epicureans were among the Greeks.
They originated in Persia, but afterward spread into other countries,
particularly into Assyria and Arabia, bordering upon Judea on the East.
It is probable that the Magians here mentioned came from Arabia. Now to
employ a term for specifying one sect, which may with equal propriety be
applied to fifty, of totally different, or even contrary opinions, is
surely a vague way of translating. It is also, in the present
acceptation of the word, improper. Formerly the term _wise men_
denoted philosophers, or men of science and erudition: it is hardly ever
used so now, unless in burlesque. Some say _Magi_; but _Magians_
is better, as having more the form of an English word." CAMPBELL'S
Translation of the Four Gospels, vol. ii. _notes_.
[10]:
"Salvete, flores Martyrum,
Quos, lusis ipso in limine,
Christi insecutor sustulit,
Ceu turbo nascentes rosas.
Vos, prima Christi victima,
Grex immolatorum tener,
Aram ante ipsam, simplices,
Palma et coronis luditis."
[11]: Bishop Horne.
[12]: Josephus has given an affecting account of this awful death. Vide
Joseph. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 6. and Bell. Jud. lib. i. cap. 33.
[13]: So say the Jews, [Hebrew] _the passover of women is arbitrary_.
[14]: Misn. Sanhedrin c. v. sec. 4. ap. GILL in loc.
[15]: _At my Father's_ [Greek: en tois toupatros mou] Syriac [Hebrew], _in domo
patris mei_. The Armenian version renders the words in the same manner.
It has been justly observed that [Greek: ta tou deinoas] is a Greek idiom, not only
with classical writers, but with the sacred penmen, for denoting the house
of such a person.... Campbell.
[16]: Judg. xi. 12. 2 Sam. xvi. 10. I Kings xvii. 18. 2 Kings iii. 13. and
ix. 19. _Sept. translation_,
[17]: Blackwall observes, "'Tis the opinion of some learned men, that the
holy Jesus, the most tender and dutiful Son that ever was born, when he
called his mother plainly _woman_, declared against those idolatrous
honours which he foresaw would be paid her in latter ages, which is no
improbable guess. But in the more plain and unceremonious times it was a
title applied to ladies of the greatest quality and merit by people of the
greatest humanity and exactness of behaviour. So Cyrus the Great says to
the queen of the Armenians, [Greek: Alla su a gunai]: and servants addressed queens
and their mistresses in the same language." Blackwall's Sacred Classics, V.
ii. p. 206. _second edit_.
[18]: These water-pots contained two or three _baths_ apiece. A bath
was about seven gallons and a half.
[19]: Bishop Hall.
[20]: Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. vol. i. p. 432. ii. 56, 71.
[21]: Bossuet, Serm. pour la Fete de la Conception.
[22]: The bishop of Meux, who has been already quoted, does not fail to
suggest some delectable additions to her titles. He speaks in one of his
discourses of her "sacred body, the throne of chastity, the temple of
incarnate wisdom," &c. but the whole paragraph shall be introduced, though
perhaps it had better remain untranslated:--"Le corps sacre de Marie, le
trone de la chastite, le temple de la sagesse incarnee, l'organe du
Saint-Esprit, et le siege de la vertu du Tres-Haut, n'a pas du demeurer
dans le tombeau; et le triomphe de Marie seroit imperfait, s'il
s'accomplissoit sans sa sainte chair, qui a ete comme la source de sa
gloire. Venez done, Vierges de Jesus Christ, chastes epouses du Sauveur
des ames, venez admirer les beautes de cette chair virginale, et
contempler trois merveilles que la sainte virginite opere sur elle. La
sainte virginite la preserve de corruption; et ainsi elle lui conserve
l'etre: la sainte virginite lui attire une influence celeste, qui la fait
ressusciter avant le temps: ainsi elle lui rend la vie: la sainte
virginite repand sur elle de toutes parts une lumiere divine; et ainsi
elle lui donne la gloire. C'est ce qu'il nous faut expliquer par ordre;"
and he _does_ explain these _trois merveilles_ in a manner well
calculated to satisfy every <DW7>, and to sicken every Protestant. Vide
_Serm. pour l'Assumpt. de la Vierge_, P. 2.
[23]: Quoted by M. Pascal, in the ninth of his "Lettres Provinciales."
Consult also "the Life of Melancthon," by the author of this work, chap.
iii.
[24]: Picart, Ceremonies et Coutumes de tous les Peuples da Monde, tom. i.
[25]: Dr. Johnson
[26]: Dr. Johnson.
[27]: Gen. xxxiii. 18, 19, Josh. xxiv. 32. This place was the metropolis of
the tribe of Ephraim. It was destroyed by Abimelech, but rebuilt by
Jeroboam, who made it the seat of the kingdom of Israel. It was afterward
called _Neapolis_; and Vespasian or Domitian having established a
colony there, it received the Roman appellation of _Flavia Cesarea_.
Herod gave it the name of _Sebaste_.
[28]: It stood two hundred years. JOSEPH. Antiq. lib. xiii. cap. 18.
[29]: JUST. MART. Apol. II.
[30]: "_Living water, [Greek: udos chon]. It may surprise an English reader,
unacquainted with the Oriental idiom, that this woman, who appears
by the sequel to have totally misunderstood our Lord, did not ask what he
meant by _living water,_ but proceeded on the supposition that she
understood him perfectly; and only did not conceive how, without some
vessel for drawing and containing that water, he could provide her with it
to drink. The truth is, the expression is ambiguous. In the most familiar
acceptation, _living water_ meant no more than running water. In this
sense, the water of springs and rivers would be denominated _living_,
as that of cisterns and lakes would be called _dead_, because
motionless. Thus, Gen. xxvi. 19. we are told, that Isaac's servants digged
in the valley, and found there a well of springing water. It is _living
water,_ both in the Hebrew and the Greek, as marked on the margin of
our Bibles. Thus also Lev. xiv. 5. what is rendered _running water_
in the English Bible, is in both these languages _living water_. Nay,
this use was not unknown to the Latins, as may be proved from Virgil and
Ovid. In this passage, however, our Lord uses the expression in the more
sublime sense of divine teaching, but was mistaken by the woman as using
it in the popular acceptation." CAMPBELL'S Trans. of the Four Gospels,
vol. ii. p. 518, _notes_.
[31]: "It is no unusual practice with the Jews; we often have heard of it.
R. Jonathan and R. Jannai were sitting together; there came a certain man,
[Hebrew], and _kissed the feet_ of R. Jonathan." Again, "R. Meir stood
up, and Bar Chama, [Hebrew], _kissed his knees_, or _feet_. This
custom was also used by the Greeks and Romans, among their civilities and
in their salutations." GILL in loc. Consult also HARMER'S Observations,
vol. ii. chap. 6.
[32]: ROBINSON.
[33]: "There is in these denominations no inconsistency. By birth she was
of _Syrophenicia_, so the country about Tyre and Sidon was
denominated, by descent of _Canaan_, as most of the Tyrians and
Sidonians originally were; and by religion a _Greek_, according to
the Jewish manner of distinguishing between themselves and idolaters. Ever
since the Macedonian conquests, Greek became a common name for idolater,
or at least one uncircumcised, and was held equivalent to Gentile. Of this
we have many examples in Paul's epistles, and in the Acts. _Jews and
Greeks_, [Greek: Ellenes], are the same with _Jews and Gentiles_" CAMPBELL'S
Transl. of the Gospels in loc. _notes_.
[34]: The question has been often agitated, whether the possessions of the
New Testament are to be ascribed to demoniacal influence, or whether they
are so represented in conformity to the popular prejudices of the age,
being in reality nothing more than diseases. Surely a distinct existence
must be attributed to these, as evil spirits, when we consider their
number, the actions particularly ascribed to them, the conversation which
they held respecting themselves, the Son of God, and their own destiny,
the desires and passions they are represented as manifesting, and various
other circumstances of their history. Is it credible, that a mere
_disease_ should be said to have addressed Christ in such language as
the following: "What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art
thou come hither to torment us before the time?" Comp. Matt. viii. 29, and
the succeeding verses.
[35]: Bishop Hall.
[36]: Bishop Hall
[37]: Doddridge on the Care of the Soul.
[38]: The whole narrative is contained in the eleventh chapter of John, and
this reference in the fifth verse.
[39]: Three hundred Roman pence, or denarii, amount to about _nine pounds
seven shillings and sixpence_ sterling.
[40]: Bishop Hall.
[41]: The farthing was a _quadrant_, or fourth part of a Roman _assis_, a
coin of similar value with the [Greek: tetartchmorion] of the Greeks, or the fourth
part of an obolus (the least Athenian coin,) that is, two brass pieces.
These were the same with the _prutas_ of the Jews, two of which make a
_quardrant_.
[42]: Barrow's Works, vol. i. p. 457, fol.
[43]: Paley's Moral Philosophy, vol. i. p. 254--257.
[44]: Sermon on the Duty and Reward of Bounty to the Poor.
[45]: Acts xvi. "Philippi was a city of Macedonia near the confines of
Thrace. It lies near the sea, as it were at the head of the Archipelago.
It was so named from Philip, king' of Macedon, who repaired and enlarged
it; but its more ancient name was Dathos. It was also called Crenides from
its numerous springs, whence flowed the river mentioned Acts xvi. 13;
[Greek: krene], _kreenee_, in Greek meaning a spring. Julius Caesar is said to have
planted there a Roman colony; and the neighbourhood of Philippi was the
scene of conflict between him and Pompey, and afterward between his
assassinators, Brutus and Cassius, and his partizans, Antony and
Octavius. It is said still to retain some monuments of its former
splendour, although it is much depopulated and sunk to decay." Bevan's
Life of the Apostle Paul, p. 367.
[46]: For information on the subject of proselytes, consult Dr. Gill's
"Dissertation concerning the Baptism of Jewish Proselytes," chap. i. in
vol. iii, of his Body of Divinity.
[47]: GREGORY'S Evidences, Doctrines, and Duties of the Christian Religion,
vol. ii. pp. 127, 128.
[48]: Bp. Taylor's Holy Living, Chap. i. sect. 3.
[49]: The purple die is called in I Maccab. iv. 23, _purple of the sea,_
or _sea purple_; it being the blood or juice of a turbinated shell-fish,
which the Jews call [Hebrew] _Chalson_; this they speak of as a
shell-fish. Hence those words 'Go and learn of the _Chalson_, for all the
while it grows, its shell grows with it:' and that purple was died with
the blood of it, appears from the following instances: _The best fruits in
the land_, Gen. xliii. 11, are interpreted, the things that are the most
famous in the world, as the Chalson, _&c,_ with whose blood, as the gloss
on the passage says, they die purple: and the purple died with this was
very valuable, and fetched a good price. The tribe of _Zebulon_ is
represented as complaining to God, that he had given to their brethren
fields and vineyards, to them mountains and hills; to their brethren
lands, to them seas and rivers: to which it is replied, All will stand in
need of thee because of Chalson; as it is said, Deut. xxxiii. 19 _They
shall suck of the abundance of the seas_; the gloss upon it, interpreting
the word _Chalson_ is, it comes out of the sea to the mountains, and with
its blood they die purple, which is sold at a very dear price.... It may
be further observed, that the fringes which the Jews wore upon their
garments, had on them a riband of blue or purple. Numb. xv. 38, for the
word there used is by the Septuagint rendered _the purple_, in Numb. iv.
7, and sometimes _hyacinth_; and the whole fringe was by the Jews called
[Hebrew], _purple_. Hence it is said, 'Does not every one that puts on
the purple (i.e. the fringes on his garments) in Jerusalem make men to
wonder? and a little after, the former saints or religious men, when they
had wove in it (the garment) three parts, they put on it [Hebrew],
_the purple_. And there were persons who traded in these things, and were
called, [Hebrew], _sellers of purple_, as here; that is, for the
_tzitzith_, or fringes for the borders of the garments, on which the
riband of blue or purple was put, as the gloss explains it. The Jews were
very curious about the colour and the dying of it, that it should be a
colour that would hold and not change, and that the riband be died on
purpose for that use. Maimonides gives rules for the dying of it, and they
were no less careful of whom they bought it; for they say that _the
purple_ was not to be bought, but of an approved person, or one that was
authorized for that purpose; and a scruple is raised by one, whether he
had done right or no in buying it of the family of a doctor deceased. Now,
since Lydia might be a Jewess, or, at least, as appears by what follows,
was a proselytess of the Jewish religion, this might he her business, to
sell the purple for their fringes, and, it may be, the fringes
themselves. GILL in loc.
[50]: Eighth Report of the British and Foreign Bible Society.
[51]: Herod. Euterpe.
[52]: Tacit. de Moribus Germanoram, chap, xviii. xix.
[53]: Tacit. Hist.
[54]: Xenophon.
[55]: Plut. in Solone.
[56]: DIONYSUS HALICARN. ii. c. 25.
[57]: Cranz's Greenland.
[58]: Georgi's Description of the Russian Nations. Weber's Russia.
[59]: Consult Steller.
[60]: Weber and Georgi.
[61]: Clarke's Travels, part i. p. 35, 4to.
[62]: Thornton's Present State of Turkey, (1807) 4to. p. 376.
[63]: Collin's Voyages, 1807, p. 152.
[64]: Peyssonel II. p. 246.
[65]: Quart. Rev. May, 1811, p. 330.
[66]: Inquiry into the Origin of Ranks.
[67]: Voyage en Chine de l'Ambassade Hollandaise, vol. ii. p. 116, _et
seq_.
[68]: Barrow's China, p. 141, 541.
[69]: P. Du Halde, vol. i. 278.
[70]: P, Du Halde, vol. in. p. 211.
[71]: Barrow's China, p. 145.
[72]: Ibid. p. 518.
[73]: Edinburgh Rev. July, 1809, p. 428, 429.
[74]: It may be proper to observe, that the Hindoos never bury their dead;
but if they can afford it, always burn them. If they be too poor, or the
person be rendered unclean by some incurable disease, they are either
thrown into a river or left on the ground to be devoured.
[75]: A kind of celestial beings, which are fabled by the Hindoos.
[76]: it is not generally known, that women, in certain cases, burn
themselves with any part of their husbands' effects, as a substitute for
him; but on inquiry of my Pundit, whether this be now practised, he
assured me it was, and that he had himself seen many instances of it.
[77]: _Shraddha_, or _Pinda_, is an offering made to the manes of
any deceased person, on an appointed day after his or her death. It
consists of rice, and other article, often made into cakes, and is
continued annually for seven generations by all his or her descendants,
called _Sapinda_, and in some cases to fourteen generations by all
the descendants, who, when beyond the seventh generation, are called
_Sakoolya_.
[78]: The following law, from the same book, will show how uncleanness for
death or birth must be observed in the different casts: viz. If a person
die, or if a child be born, the _Sapinda_ shall be unclean ten days
for a _Brahmman_, twelve for a _Kshetra_, fifteen for a _Bysha_,
and one month for a _Soodra_: during which time they can make no
offering to their ancestors or the gods.
[79]: _Dospinda_ an inferior offering made to the manes.
[80]: This may happen if her own son be an infant, or very far off, or if
she have no son.
[81]: The Hindoos believe the metemphsychosis, and say that certain
diseases, as mahabhead, consumptions, and some others; also dreadful
accidents, such as being killed by a _Brahmman_; and great sin, such
as killing a Brahmman, are the fruit of sins committed in a former life.
[82]: A person with such diseases, accidents, or sins cannot have the rite
of burning his body performed till an offering of atonement has been made,
which qualifies him for having his obsequies performed; viz. _Dahon_
or burning (in which case the wife may die with him,) and the
_Shraddha_, or _Pinda_. This, however, does not gain such on one
admission into bliss, which is only done by the _Sahemaron_, or the
wife's dying with him.
[83]: Bap. Period. Accounts, vol. i. No. 6, p. 473-476.
[84]: Bapt. Period. Accounts, No. xvii. p. 324.
[85]: Cordiner's Description of Ceylon, vol. ii. p. 16.
[86]: History of Sumatra, 4to. 1811, p. 257, 381, 382.
[87]: Vogel, p. 649. Voyages des Hollandois, i. 349.
[88]: Turnbull's Voyage round the World, p. 6.
[89]: Turnbull, p. 11.
[90]: Malcolm's History of Persia, vol. ii. p. 333, 434, 455, 4to. 1815.
[91]: Sale's Koran, vol. ii. p. 79, _n_. and 472, _n_.
[92]: Malcolm's History of Persia, vol. i. p. 173, _n_.
[93]: Dampier, ii. p. 6. 86. Forster's Voyage, i. p. 212. ii. p. 71.
Meiners, vol. i. p. 80.
[94]: Arvieux, i. p. 229, 230. Meiners, vol. i. p. 96.
[95]: Lewis and Clark's Travels up the Missouri, p. 33, 34. 4to. 1814.
[96]: Seventh Report of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1811, p. 59.
[97]: Some Account of New Zealand, 1807, p. 13.
[98]: Maggil's Account of Tunis, p. 92.
[99]: Jackson's Account of the Empire of Morocco, 4to, 1809, p. 152.
[100]: Brown's Travels in Africa, &c. 2d ed. 4to. 1806, p. 335, 339.
[101]: Park's Travels in the Interior Districts of Africa, Sic. 4to. 1799,
p. 39.
[102]: Durand's Voyage to Senegal, p. 104, 105.
[103]: Park's Travels, p. 157.
[104]: Park's Travels, p. 226, 267.
[105]: Park's Travels p. 347.
[106]: Barrow's Travels in Southern Africa, second edit. 1806, vol. i. p.
159.
[107]: Barrow's Travels, vol. i. p. 206.
[108]: Dampier, ii. p. 86.
[109]: Des Marchais, ii. p. 178.
[110]: Labat, ii. p. 299. Adanson, p. 32. Oldendorp, i. p. 376.
[111]: Meiners, i. p. 52--54.
[112]: Cavazzi, ii. p. 123. Meiners, i. p. 59, 69. See also Rees's
Cyclopaedie, and Encyclop. Brit, under the word's _Ansiko,
Anthropophagi, Batta_. Marsden's Hist, of Sumatra, 3d ed. 4to. 1811, p.
390-395, & 463.
[113]: This subject has been already more than once remarked upon this
work. See vol. i. p. 21 and 255.
[114]: Paley's Mor. Philos. vol. i. p. 3. ch. vi. & vii.
[115]: Plutarch in Rom. I. p. 123. Livy II. p. 13, 40.
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Female Scripture Biographies, Vol. II, by
Francis Augustus Cox
*** | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 8,224 |
Q: What is the President�s Information Technology Advisory Committee?
A: The technical advances that led to today�s information technology tools, such as electronic computers and the Internet, began with Federal government support of research in partnership with industry and universities during the Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations. These modest investments have yielded massive economic benefits to the Nation: businesses that produce computers, semiconductors, software and communications equipment have accounted for one-third of the total growth in U.S. production since 1992, creating millions of high paying new jobs.
A: The Committee notes that Federal research investment in information technology has not kept pace with IT�s growing economic, strategic, and societal importance to the Nation. Non-inflationary growth in information technology and information-intensive industries is a key driver of the economy. Advances in information technology are stimulating development of whole new industries, creating high-paying jobs, and enhancing our global competitiveness. Beyond the economy, IT has proven fundamental to solving many problems of national importance. Yet, the amount of Federal R&D investment has been, at best, steady, and compromised by imbalances between basic and applied research.
A: The Committee is recommending that Federal IT investments be increased by $1 billion over the next five years � roughly a doubling of today�s investment. They indicate that the FY2000 budget should reflect IT�s importance to the economy. The Committee expects to assist the President�s Assistant for Science and Technology, Dr. Neal Lane, and the CIC R&D agencies in developing an FY2000 budget proposal consistent with these recommendations.
Continued research for high-end computing to sustain America�s lead in advanced supercomputing. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 5,081 |
Justia › US Law › Case Law › Federal Courts › Courts of Appeals › Seventh Circuit › 1966 › Hewitt-robins, Inc., Plaintiff-appellant, v. Link-belt Company, Defendant-appellee
Receive free daily summaries of new opinions from the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Hewitt-robins, Inc., Plaintiff-appellant, v. Link-belt Company, Defendant-appellee, 371 F.2d 225 (7th Cir. 1966)
US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit - 371 F.2d 225 (7th Cir. 1966) November 30, 1966
W. Houston Kenyon, Jr., New York City, William E. Anderson, Chicago, Ill., Richard K. Parsell, William F. Noval, Kenyon & Kenyon, New York City, Anderson, Luedeka, Fitch, Even & Tabin, Chicago, Ill., for appellant.
Kenneth J. Burns, Jr., Chicago, Ill., John R. Swindler, Harold J. Birch, Washington, D. C., Raymond, Mayer, Jenner & Block, Chicago, Ill., Irons, Birch, Swindler & McKie, Washington, D. C., of counsel, for appellee.
Before SCHNACKENBERG, CASTLE and CUMMINGS, Circuit Judges.
CASTLE, Circuit Judge.
Hewitt-Robbins, Inc., the plaintiff-appellant, brought this suit in the District Court as the assignee of Dischinger U.S. Patent No. 3,069,027, issued December 18, 1962, for "Reclaiming Method and Apparatus". Plaintiff charged Link-Belt Company, the defendant-appellee, with infringement, and sought both injunctive relief and damages. The defendant denied validity and infringement and interposed two counterclaims: (1) for declaratory judgment that the patent is invalid and not infringed; and (2) for declaratory judgment of noninfringement by the reclaiming apparatus which defendant contracted to supply to Koppers Company, Inc., of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for erection in Eregli, Turkey, on the grounds that the "parts * * * supplied by defendant have never been assembled or combined into a reclaiming apparatus within the United States."
Defendant moved on affidavits for a summary judgment in its favor under the second counterclaim, and after depositions were taken and filed the District Court filed a memorandum opinion and entered an order granting defendant's motion for partial summary judgment and declaring that the defendant did not infringe the patent with respect to the ore bedding and reclaiming facilities erected in Eregli, Turkey. The court further determined, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 U.S.C.A.), that there was no just reason for delay and directed entry of final judgment upon the issue adjudicated. The defendant appealed.
The undisputed material facts can be summarized as follows:
The patent in suit relates to an apparatus for "reclaiming" bulk particulate material (such as coal, ore, etc.) from outdoor storage piles thereof in which a bridge, spanning the pile and adapted to be self-propelled along parallel rails on either side thereof, has a carriage capable of traversing the bridge back and forth across the face of the pile. Supported by the carriage is a wheel having buckets around its perimeter, this wheel being arranged to revolve in a vertical plane at right angles to the face of the pile. As the bucket wheel rotates, and as the carriage moves it from side to side across the foot of the pile, its lowermost buckets sweep the ground surface under the bridge and scoop piled material towards the foot of the sloping pile. Material scooped up by the buckets is carried up to a point near the top of the wheel's circle of rotation where it is discharged by gravity and falls upon a transverse conveyor belt located on the bridge. This transverse conveyor transports the material to one end of the bridge where it falls upon a permanently mounted ground conveyor, and is carried by the latter to the desired point, such as a blast furnace.
The asserted claims of the patent are combination claims, each of which recites in common the combination of at least three elements as the claimed reclaimer invention, viz., an "elongated frame", or bridge, a "carriage movably supported on the frame", and a "bucket wheel rotatably mounted on the movable carriage" or digging means. Claim 16, to which plaintiff makes specific reference, requires a fourth element, a "harrow" or rake, also mounted on the carriage. The purpose of the harrow is to prevent the buckets from undercutting the sloping face of the pile, which would cause undesirable avalanching of the material. The harrow is mounted so as to move back and forth across the sloping face of the pile, is adjusted to approximately the angle of repose of the material in the slope, and operates simultaneously and cooperatively with the bucket wheel to create a steady downward trickle of material to the lowermost buckets.
Prior to issuance of the patent, defendant entered into a contract with Koppers to supply a reclaimer for erection in Eregli, Turkey. Performance of the apparatus was guaranteed. Defendant agreed to provide in Turkey both an erection superintendent to direct the assembly and installation of the reclaimer and a field representative to supervise initial operations and assure meeting the performance guarantee. Following issuance of the patent, the reclaimer parts embraced in the contract specifications, were manufactured by defendant or its designees in the United States. No complete combination of any claim of the patent ever was assembled in the United States.
Defendant made a few sub-assemblies to check clearances and took some measurements, as between bolt holes, to insure fit when the apparatus was assembled in Turkey. No operational tests of even a single element of the patented combination ever were made. The sub-assembly and fit-up made at defendant's plant embraced only the following:
(a) The bucket wheel and its buckets were fitted together while the wheel (without its axle, bearings or drive sprocket) lay flat on its side on the floor of defendant's Colmar, Pa., plant.
(b) The bucket wheel without its buckets or drive sprocket was fitted into the carriage frame. The transfer belt conveyor, without the belt, and the rotary transfer table were assembled in place. Only the rotary transfer table was powered. This sub-assembly rested upon steel saw-horses preventing movement in any direction. The buckets could not be assembled on the wheel because there wasn't room.
(c) The wheeled trucks or hangers which are a necessary part of the carriage and allow it to be suspended from and move across the bridge were not assembled to the carriage frame or with the bridge. Only the spacing of the holes for the mounting bolts on the wheeled trucks was checked with a fibre board template.
(d) The main horizontal span of the bridge was not assembled. Distances between bolt holes in the two bridge end support legs and bridge supporting wheel beams were checked with a tape.
(e) The rake was not assembled, or was it connected to the carriage.
The reclaimer parts were shipped in numerous separate shipments, forwarded at different times, spread over a three-month period, to the port of exportation and thence transported to Turkey. Many parts were outside the United States and on the high seas or actually in Turkey before other parts were even manufactured. The reclaimer was first completely assembled in Turkey. It was assembled under the direction of an erection superintendent supplied by the defendant but paid for by Koppers. Following the erection of the reclaimer in Turkey, he supervised the initial operation of the apparatus at defendant's expense and made the tests, adjustments, and modifications of the apparatus necessary to produce the guaranteed performance.
Affidavits filed with defendant's motion set forth as reasons why all the parts were at no time completely assembled together, tested or placed in operable relationship within the United States that the apparatus was too large to set up as a whole in defendant's shop, that some parts were shipped before others were fabricated, and that shipment required numerous separate packages or pieces.
The District Court found it apparent that the parts supplied by defendant were at no time assembled together, testea or placed in operable relationship within the United States. The court concluded that the defendant's activities in the manufacture, sale and shipment disclosed by the record did not constitute an infringement by the defendant of the plaintiff's patent. The court reasoned that such manufacture and sale in this country of parts for an apparatus to be assembled outside the territorial limits of the United States does not fall within the purview of 35 U.S.C.A. § 271, which provides in pertinent part:
"* * * whoever without authority makes, uses or sells any patented invention, within the United States during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent."
The main contested issue presented by plaintiff's appeal is whether in a sale for export the presence of the assembled elements of the patented combination within the United States is a prerequisite to the existence of infringement.
Plaintiff contends that inasmuch as under the terms of the contract here involved and the application of relevant provisions of Pennsylvania law the sale of the accused structure for erection in Turkey1 constituted a sale of a single commercial unit (12A Pa.Stat.Ann. § 2105 (1959)), as disinguished from a sale of the individual separate parts, and that title passed to the purchaser (Koppers) when delivery of the components was completed f. o. b. the carrier at the plant of manufacture (12A Pa.Stat.Ann. § 2401; Harvey Probber, Inc. v. Kauffman, 181 Pa.Super. 281, 124 A.2d 699; Dentzel v. Island Park Ass'n, 229 Pa. 403, 78 A. 935, 33 L.R.A.,N.S., 54) makes it immaterial that the sale was not preceded by either complete assembly or actual use of the patented combination in the United States. And, in this connection, the plaintiff points out that prior to delivery the defendant made such factory fit-ups and tests of subassemblies as it considered necessary to assure that the mechanism when erected in Turkey would be complete and operative, supplied the purchaser (Koppers) with erection drawings and complete instructions for assembly, furnished the services of an employee to superintend the assembly and erection, and after erection of the apparatus in Turkey tested, adjusted, and modified it to meet performance specifications and defendant's guarantee.
Plaintiff urges that the use of the disjunctive in defining the grant of a patent (35 U.S.C.A. § 154) and its infringement (35 U.S.C.A. § 271, "makes, uses or sells") evidences that "selling" without either "making" or "using" may constitute infringement, and that considerations relevant to the construction of the pertinent venue provision (28 U.S.C.A. § 1400) and the trend of authorities applying the "choice of law" principles in multi-state tort conflict of laws situations indicate that "sells" as used in § 271 should be construed by recourse to the law of the jurisdiction (Pennsylvania) having the most significant relationship with the occurrence and with the parties.
But whatever impact the law of Pennsylvania has upon the contractual relationship between the defendant and the purchaser (Koppers), and whatever considerations may properly have relevance in either a determination of venue under § 1400 or a choice of law in the resolution of a conflict of laws question, we are of the opinion that the considerations the plaintiff here advances are not determinative of whether in the context of § 271 a sale of the "patented invention" took place "within the United States". It is settled that the law of Pennsylvania may not be permitted to encroach upon the Federal patent law directly or indirectly to "give protection of a kind that clashes with the objectives" of such Federal law. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co., 376 U.S. 225, 231, 84 S. Ct. 784, 788, 11 L. Ed. 2d 661. Thus, State standards prescribed to measure the "unit" which is the subject of a contract of sale, or to fix the time when title shall be deemed to have passed, cannot be determinative of what constitutes a patented invention or whether the "invention" has been sold within the United States. And, plaintiff's reliance upon Union Asbestos & Rubber Company v. Evans Products Company, 7 Cir., 328 F.2d 949, is misplaced. In that case demonstrations of the accused device within the district of suit, together with other activities within the district, were relied upon as "proof of `sale'" within the district for venue purposes. Not only was the device assembled in completely operable form and its operation demonstrated, but this Court took occasion to expressly recognize (328 F.2d 949, 952) that:
"The test [for an act of infringement] is less strict when venue is challenged, for otherwise a disposition of the venue question would also be one on the merits wherever venue was sustained."
We are here dealing with a question of substantive law, and one which can admit of no conflict of laws problem. Sears, Roebuck & Co., supra. Consequently, we find wholly unpersuasive the plaintiff's attempted analogy to problems governed by choice of law principles.
If anything is settled in the patent law, it is that a combination patent covers only the totality of the elements in the claim and that no element, separately viewed, is within the grant. Aro Mfg. Co. Inc. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co., 365 U.S. 336, 81 S. Ct. 599, 5 L. Ed. 2d 592. We deem it equally clear that unassembled elements of a combination patent do not constitute the "patented invention."
In granting summary judgment on defendant's second counterclaim the District Court relied upon Cold Metal Process Company v. United Engineering & Foundry Co., 3 Cir., 235 F.2d 224, and Radio Corporation of America v. Andrea, 2 Cir., 79 F.2d 626, as affording clear precedents that the manufacture and sale in this country of parts of an apparatus to be assembled outside the territorial limits of the United States does not infringe a combination patent limited to the embodiment of those parts as elements in combination. We agree.
In Andrea it was held that sales of unassembled elements of a patented combination for foreign export and assembly do not constitute infringement. The Court in reversing the District Court's award of a preliminary injunction stated:
"No wrong is done the patentee until the combination is formed. His monopoly does not cover the manufacture or sale of separate elements capable of being, but never actually, associated to form the invention. Only when such association is made is there a direct infringement of his monopoly, and not even then if it is done outside the territory for which the monopoly was granted."
We read Andrea as standing for the proposition that a combination claim of a United States patent is not infringed absent presence of the combination in assembled form within the United States. The Court found no infringement even though the radios in question were furnished with two elements of the three-element patented combination assembled in final configuration in a radio set leaving only the simple insertion of the third element, the vacuum tubes (separately packaged but contained in the same carton with the radio), to be carried out abroad. The case proceeded to trial on the substantive issue of infringement and again came before the Circuit Court of appeals (90 F.2d 612). Evidence adduced at the trial established that before leaving the United States each of the radios in question had actually been fully assembled and subjected to operational tests by the defendant. It was then disassembled, by removal and separate packaging of the tubes, for shipment in the single carton. The Court held that the assembling and testing constituted an infringing use of the patented invention; and that there was infringement by the sales — which entailed the complete assembly of the combination of the invention within the United States prior to disassembly for export.
In Cold Metal, the defendant was the licensee of the plaintiff. Controversy arose with respect to royalties due on defendant's production and sale of steel rolling mills. A portion of the production and sales involved concerned mills, all parts of which were manufactured in the United States, but with respect to which the combination recited by the patent claims was never completely assembled within the United States. Assembly occurred outside of the United States, after export. The critical facts were identical to those presented in the instant appeal. The defendant, United Engineering, had manufactured most of the parts but had obtained some from another manufacturer. The contracts for the mills were executed in the United States, payment was received in the United States, and the contracts provided for delivery to the purchaser or its representative f.a.s. at a designated port in the United States. As to these mills, initially completely assembled and erected outside the United States, the Court said:
"This brings us to the consideration of the second group of mills, all the parts of which were manufactured in the United States, but which were shipped unassembled to foreign countries and there assembled and used. The master held that these mills were not within the license because, if there had been no license, United would not have been either a direct or a contributory infringer with respect to them. He based his conclusion upon the rule laid down by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Radio Corporation of America v. Andrea, 1935, 79 F.2d 626, a case involving the sale for export of unassembled radio sets involving a patented combination when assembled."
and after quoting extensively from the Andrea case, continued:
"We are in full accord with the rule thus laid down in the Andrea case and we think that the master and the district court were right in applying it here. Its force, in our view, is not impaired by the later opinion of the court after final hearing in the same case, 2 Cir., 1937, 90 F.2d 612, which held that the defendant had infringed the combination patent there sued on in view of evidence that the radio sets in question had been completely assembled in this country and tests of operation made after which they were disassembled and shipped to purchasers abroad. We do not quarrel with the conclusion of the court that such assembling and testing constituted a making and use of the patented combination in this country. In the present case, however, no such assembling or testing in this country took place. Accordingly the rule laid down in the first Andrea opinion applies here rather than that stated in the second."
The dictum in Ric-Wil Co. v. E. B. Kaiser Co., 7 Cir., 187 F.2d 1, 3, to which plaintiff directs attention, that:
"* * * while ordinarily it is true that mere place of assembly is immaterial, and one cannot avoid infringement by merely disassembling — or rather, waiting to assemble the elements of a combination patent, * *"
is of no aid to it here. The statement was not made in the context of an initial and only presence of the invention in complete assembly outside the United States.
Kreplik v. Couch Patents Co., 1 Cir., 190 F. 565; Electric Pipe Line, Inc. v. Fluid Systems, Incorporated, 2 Cir., 231 F.2d 370; and Ellett v. Klein, (D.C. E.D. Pa.) 22 F.2d 807, also cited by the plaintiff, but where complete assembly of the combination of the invention occurred, and was intended to occur, within the United States are likewise inapposite.
We are of the opinion that the District Court's conclusion, upon which its award of summary judgment is predicated, represents the application of correct legal criteria.
The judgment order of the District Court appealed from is therefore affirmed.
For the purposes of its motion for summary judgment, solely, the defendant concedes that erection of the structure in the United States would constitute infringement
of Seventh Circuit opinions. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 518 |
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The impact and importance of embedded (aka IoT or ``smart'') devices is hard to overestimate.
They are increasingly popular and becoming pervasive in many settings: from
homes and offices to public spaces and industrial facilities. Not surprisingly, they also represent increasingly
attractive attack targets for exploits and malware. In particular, low-end (cheap, small, and simple) micro-controller units
(MCUs) are designed with strict cost, size, and energy limitations. Thus, it is hard to offer
any concrete guarantees for tasks performed by these MCUs, due to their lack of sophisticated
security and privacy features, compared to higher-end computing devices, such as smartphones or
general-purpose IoT controllers, e.g., Amazon Echo or Google Nest. As MCUs increasingly permeate private spaces,
exploits that abuse their sensing capabilities to obtain sensitive data represent a significant privacy threat.
Over the past decade, the IoT privacy issues have been recognized and explored by the research
community~\cite{priv_iot0,priv_iot1,priv_iot2,priv_iot3,priv_iot4}. Many techniques (e.g.,
\cite{neto2016aot,kumar2019jedi}) were developed to secure sensor data from active attacks
that impersonate users, IoT back-ends, or servers. Another research direction focused on
protecting private data from passive in-network observers that intercept traffic
\cite{trimananda2020packet,apthorpe2018keeping,apthorpe2017closing,apthorpe2017smart} or
perform traffic analysis based on unprotected packet headers and other
metadata, e.g., sizes, timings, and frequencies. However, security of sensor data {\bf on the device}
which originates that data has not been investigated. We consider this to be a crucial issue,
since all software on the device can be compromised
and leak (exfiltrate) sensed data.
Whereas, aforementioned techniques assume that sensing device runs the expected {\bf benign} software.
We claim that in order to solve this problem, privacy of sensed data must be ensured ``from birth''.
This corresponds to two requirements: (1) access to sensing interfaces must be strictly controlled,
such that only authorized code is allowed to read data, (2) sensed data must be protected
as soon as it is converted to digital form. Even the simplest devices (e.g., motion sensors,
thermostats, and smart plugs) should be protected since prior
work~\cite{cheng2017homespy,narain2016inferring,sukor2019hybrid,jin2017virtual} amply
demonstrates that private
-- and even safety-critical -- information can be inferred from sensed data. It is also well-known
that even simple low-end IoT devices are subject to malware attacks. This prompts a natural question:
\emph{Can privacy of sensed data be guaranteed if the device software is compromised?}
We refer to this guarantee as {\small {\texttt{Privacy-from-Birth}}\xspace} ({\texttt{PfB}}\xspace).
Some previous results considered potential software compromise in low-end devices and proposed methods
to enable security services, such as remote verification of device software state (remote attestation)
\cite{smart,sancus,vrasedp,simple,tytan,trustlite}, proofs of remote software execution~\cite{apex},
control- \& data-flow attestation~\cite{litehax,cflat,lofat,atrium,oat,tinycfa,dialed}, as well as
proofs of remote software updates, memory erasure, and system reset~\cite{pure,verify_and_revive,asokan2018assured}.
Regardless of their specifics, such techniques only \underline{detect} of violations or compromises {\bf after the fact}.
In the context of {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace, that is too late since leakage of private sensed data likely already occurred.
Notably, SANCUS~\cite{sancus} specifically discusses the problem of access control to sensor
peripherals (e.g., GPIO) and proposes attestation of software accessing (or controlling access to) these peripherals.
However, this only allows detection of compromised peripheral-accessing software and does not
prevent illegal peripheral access.
To bridge this gap and obtain {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace, we construct the {\underline{Ve}rified \underline{R}emote \underline{S}ensing \underline{A}uthorization}\xspace ({\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace) architecture. It provably
prevents leakage of private sensor data even when the underlying device is software-compromised.
At a high level, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace combines three key features: (1) \emph{Mandatory Sensing Operation Authorization},
(2) \emph{Atomic Sensing Operation Execution}, and (3) \emph{Data Erasure on Boot} (see Section~\ref{sec:overview}).
To attain these features, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace implements a minimal and formally verified hardware monitor that runs independently from
(and in parallel with) the main CPU, without modifying the CPU core. We show that {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace is an efficient and
inexpensive means of guaranteeing {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
This work makes the following contributions:
\begin{compactitem}
\item Formulates {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace with a high-level specification of requirements, followed by a
game-based formal definition of the {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace goal.
%
\item Constructs {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace, an architecture that guarantees {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
%
\item Implements and deploys {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace on a commodity low-end MCU, which demonstrates its cost-effectiveness and practicality.
%
\item Formally verifies {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace implementation and proves security of the overall construction, hence
obtaining provable security at both architectural and implementation levels. {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace implementation
and its computer proofs are publicly available in \cite{pfb-repo}.
\end{compactitem}
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:BG}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{images/mcu.png}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\caption{\footnotesize System Architecture of an MCU-based IoT Device}
\vspace{-1em}
\label{fig:mcu_arch}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scope \& MCU-based devices}\label{subsec:scope}
This work focuses on low-end CPS/IoT/smart devices with low computing power and meager resources.
These are some of the smallest and weakest devices based on low-power single-core MCUs with only a few kilobytes
(KB) of program and data memory. Two prominent examples
are Atmel AVR ATmega and TI MSP430: $8$- and $16$-bit CPUs, respectively, typically running at $1$-$16$MHz clock frequencies,
with $\approx$ 64KB of addressable memory.
Figure \ref{fig:mcu_arch} illustrates a generic architecture representing such MCUs. The CPU core and the Direct-Memory Access
(DMA) controller access memory through a bus.\footnote{DMA is a hardware controller that can read/write to memory in parallel with the CPU.}
Memory can be divided into 5 logical regions: (1) Read-only memory (ROM), if present, stores critical software such as a bootloader,
burnt into the device at manufacture time and not modifiable thereafter; (2) program memory (PMEM), usually realized as flash, is
non-volatile and stores program instructions; (3) interrupt vector table (also in flash and often considered as part of PMEM),
stores interrupt configurations; (4) data memory (DMEM), usually implemented with DRAM, is volatile and used to store program
execution state, i.e., its stack and heap; and, (5) peripheral memory region (also in DRAM and often considered as a part of
DMEM), contains memory-mapped I/O interfaces, i.e., addresses in the memory layout that are mapped to hardware components,
e.g., timers, UART, and GPIO. In particular, GPIO are peripheral memory addresses hardwired to physical ports that
interface with external circuits, e.g., analog sensors/circuits.
We note that small MCUs usually come in one of two memory architectures: Harvard and von Neumann.
The former isolates PMEM and DMEM by maintaining two different buses and address spaces, while the latter keeps
both PMEM and DMEM in the same address space and accessible via a single bus.
Low-end MCUs execute instructions in place, i.e., directly from flash memory. They have neither memory management units
(MMUs) to support virtualization/isolation, nor memory protection units (MPUs). Therefore, privilege levels and isolation used
in higher-end devices and generic enclaved execution systems
(e.g., Intel SGX~\cite{sgx} or MIT SANCTUM~\cite{sanctum}) are not applicable.
We believe that a {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-agile architecture that is sufficiently inexpensive and efficient for such low-end devices
can be later adapted to more powerful devices. Whereas, going in the opposite direction is more challenging.
Furthermore, simpler devices are easier to model and reason about formally. Thus, we believe that they represent a
natural starting point for the design and verification of a {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-agile architecture.
To this end, our prototype implementation of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace is integrated with MSP430, due in part to public availability
of an open-source MSP430 hardware design from OpenCores \cite{openmsp430}.\footnote{Nevertheless,
the generic machine model and methodology of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace are applicable to other low-end MCUs of the same class,
e.g., Atmel AVR ATmega.}
\subsection{\texttt{GPIO}\xspace \& MCU Sensing}\label{sec:gpio_bg}
A GPIO port is a set of GPIO pins arranged and controlled together, as a group. The MCU-addressable
memory for a GPIO port is physically mapped (hard-wired) to physical ports that can be connected to a variety of
external circuits, such as analog sensors and actuators, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:mcu_arch}.
Each GPIO pin can be set to function as either an input or output, hence called "general purpose".
Input signals produced by external circuits can be obtained by the MCU software by reading from GPIO-mapped memory.
Similarly, egress electric signals (high or low voltage) can be generated by the MCU software by writing (logical $1$ or $0$)
to GPIO-mapped memory.
\textit{\textbf{Remark:}} ``GPIO-mapped memory'' includes the set of all software-readable memory regions connected to
external sensors. In some cases, this set may even include multiple physical memory regions for a single physical pin.
For instance, if a given GPIO pin is also equipped with an Analog-to-Digital Converter (ADC), a GPIO input could be
reflected on different memory regions depending on whether the ADC is active or inactive. All such regions are considered
``GPIO-mapped memory'' and we refer to it simply as \texttt{GPIO}\xspace.
Using this definition, in order to access sensor data, software running on the MCU must read from \texttt{GPIO}\xspace.
We also note that various applications require different sensor regimes~\cite{WSNbook2010}: event-driven,
periodic, and on-demand. Event-driven sensors report sensed data when a trigger event occurs, while
periodic sensors report sensor data at fixed time intervals. On-demand (or query-driven) sensors report sensor
data whenever requested by an external entity. Although we initially consider on-demand sensing, as discussed
in Section~\ref{sec:overview}, the proposed design is applicable to other regimes.
\subsection{\new{Remote Attestation \& {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace}} \label{subsec:BG-vrased}
Remote Attestation ({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace) allows a trusted entity (verifier = \verifier) to remotely measure current memory contents (e.g., software binaries)
of an untrusted embedded device (prover = \prover). {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace is usually realized as a challenge-response protocol:
\begin{compactenum}
\item \verifier sends an attestation request containing a challenge ({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace) to \prover.
\item \prover receives the request and computes an authenticated integrity check
over its memory and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace. The memory region can be either pre-defined or explicitly specified in the attestation request.
\item \prover returns the result to \verifier.
\item \verifier verifies the result and decides if it corresponds to a valid \prover state.
\end{compactenum}
\new{
{{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace~\cite{vrasedp} is a verified hybrid (hardware/software) {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace architecture for for low-end MCUs.
It comprises a set of (individually) verified hardware and software sub-modules; their composition
provably satisfies formal definitions of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace soundness and security.
{{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace software component implements the authenticated integrity function computed over a given
``Attested Region'' (AR) of \prover's memory.
{{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace hardware component assures that its software counterpart executes securely and that no
function of the secret key is ever leaked.
In short, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace soundness states that the integrity measurement must accurately reflect a snapshot of \prover's memory in AR,
disallowing any modifications to AR during the actual measurement. {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace security defines that the measurement must be
unforgeable, implying protection of secret key \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace used for the measurement.
}
In order to prevent DoS attacks on \prover, the RA protocol may involve authentication of the attestation request, before
\prover performs attestation. If this feature is used, an authentication token must accompany every attestation
request.\footnote{By saying ``this feature is used'', we mean that its usage (or lack thereof) is fixed at the granularity
of a \verifier-\prover setting, and not per single {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace instance.}
For example, in {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace, \verifier computes this token as an HMAC over {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace, using \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace. Since \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace is only known
to \prover and \verifier, this token is unforgeable. To prevent replays, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace is a monotonically increasing counter, and
the latest {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace used to successfully authenticate \verifier is stored by \prover in persistent and protected memory.
In each attestation request, incoming {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace must be greater that the stored value.
Once an attestation request is successfully authenticated, the stored value is updated accordingly.
\new{
{{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace software component is stored in ROM and realized with a formally verified HMAC implementation
from the HACL* cryptographic library \cite{hacl}, which is used to compute:
$
H=HMAC(KDF(\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace), AR),
$
where $KDF(\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace)$ is a one-time key derived from the received {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace using a key derivation function.
}
As discussed later in Section~\ref{sec:design}, in {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace, {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace is used as a means of authorizing a binary to access \texttt{GPIO}\xspace.
\subsection{LTL, Model Checking, \& Verification}
Our verification and proof methodologies are in-line with prior work on the design and verification of
security architectures proving code integrity and execution properties for the same class of MCUs~\cite{vrasedp, apex, rata, tarot}.
However, to the best of our knowledge, no prior work tackled formal models and
definitions, or designed services, for guaranteed sensed data privacy.
This section overviews our verification and proof methodologies that allow us to later show that
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace achieves required {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace properties and end-goals.
Computer-aided formal verification typically involves three steps. First, the system of interest (e.g., hardware,
software, or communication protocol) is described using a formal model, e.g., a Finite State Machine (FSM).
Second, properties that the model should satisfy are formally specified. Third, the system model is checked against
formally specified properties to guarantee that the system retains them. This can be done via Theorem
Proving~\cite{loveland2016automated} or Model Checking~\cite{clarke2018model}.
We use the latter to verify the implementation of system sub-modules, and the former to
prove new properties derived from the combination (conjunction) of machine model axioms and
sub-properties that were proved for the implementation of individual sub-modules.
In one instantiation of model checking, properties are specified as \textit{formulae} using Linear Temporal Logic (LTL)
and system models are represented as FSMs. Hence, a system is represented by a triple: $(\sigma, \sigma_0, T)$,
where $\sigma$ is the finite set of states, $\sigma_0 \subseteq \sigma$ is the set of possible initial states, and
$T \subseteq \sigma \times \sigma$ is the transition relation set, which describes the set of states that can be reached
in a single step from each state. Such usage of LTL allows representing a system behavior over time.
Our verification strategy benefits from the popular model checker NuSMV~\cite{nusmv}, which can
verify generic hardware or software models. For digital hardware described at Register Transfer Level (RTL) -- which is the
case in this work -- conversion from Hardware Description Language (HDL) to NuSMV models is simple. Furthermore,
it can be automated~\cite{irfan2016verilog2smv} as the standard RTL design already relies on describing
hardware as FSMs. LTL specifications are particularly useful for verifying sequential systems. In addition to propositional
connectives, such as conjunction ($\land$), disjunction ($\lor$), negation ($\neg$), and implication ($\rightarrow$),
LTL extends propositional logic with {\bf temporal quantifiers}, thus enabling sequential reasoning. In this paper,
we are interested in the following LTL quantifiers:
\vspace*{0.2cm}
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\linewidth} \footnotesize
\noindent$\bullet$ \textbf{X}$\phi$ -- ne\underline{X}t $\phi$: holds if $\phi$ is true at the next system state.\\
$\bullet$ \textbf{G}$\phi$ -- \underline{G}lobally $\phi$: holds if for all future states $\phi$ is true.\\
$\bullet$ $\phi$ \textbf{U} $\psi$ -- $\phi$ \underline{U}ntil $\psi$: holds if there is a future state
where $\psi$ holds and $\phi$ holds for all states prior to that.\\
$\bullet$ $\phi$ \textbf{W} $\psi$ -- $\phi$ \underline{W}eak until $\psi$: holds if, assuming a future state where $\psi$
holds, $\phi$ holds for all states prior to that. If $\psi$ never becomes true, $\phi$ must hold forever.
Or, more formally: $\phi$ \textbf{W} $\psi \equiv (\phi$ \textbf{U} $\psi) \lor$ \textbf{G}$(\phi)$.\\
$\bullet$ $\phi$ \textbf{B} $\psi$ -- $\phi$ \underline{B}efore $\psi$: holds if the existence of state where $\psi$
holds implies the existence of at least one earlier state where $\phi$ holds. Equivalently:
$\phi$ \textbf{B} $\psi \equiv \neg(\neg\phi$ \textbf{U} $\psi)$.
\end{minipage}}
\vspace*{0.2cm}
NuSMV works by exhaustively enumerating all possible states of a given system FSM and by checking each state
against LTL specifications. If any desired specification is found not to hold for specific states
(or transitions between states), the model checker provides a trace that leads to the erroneous state,
which helps correct the implementation accordingly. As a consequence of exhaustive enumeration, proofs for complex
systems that involve complex properties often do not scale due to the so-called ``state explosion'' problem.
To cope with it, our verification approach is to specify smaller LTL sub-properties separately and verify each
respective hardware sub-module for compliance. In this process, our verification pipeline automatically
converts digital hardware, described at RTL using Verilog, to Symbolic Model Verifier
(SMV)~\cite{smv} FSMs using Verilog2SMV~\cite{irfan2016verilog2smv}. The SMV representation is then fed to
NuSMV for verification. Then, the composition of LTL sub-properties (verified in the model-checking
phase) is proven to achieve a desired end-to-end implementation goal, also specified in LTL. This step uses an
LTL theorem prover~\cite{spot}.
In our case, we show that the end-to-end goal of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace, in composition with {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace,
is sufficient to achieve {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace via cryptographic reduction from the formal security definition of {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace.
These steps are discussed in detail in Section~\ref{sec:security_impl}.
\section{{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace Overview}\label{sec:overview}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace involves two entities: a trusted remote controller (\ctrl) and a device ({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace).
We expect \ctrl to be a relatively powerful computing entity, e.g., a home gateway, a backend server or even a smartphone.
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace protects sensed data on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace by keeping it (and any function thereof) confidential. This implies: (1) controlling
GPIO access by blocking attempted reads by unauthorized software, and (2) keeping execution traces
(i.e., data allocated by \texttt{GPIO}\xspace-authorized software) confidential.
Therefore, access to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace is barred by default. \texttt{GPIO}\xspace is unlocked only for benign binaries that are pre-authorized by \ctrl.
Whenever a binary is deemed to be authorized on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace creates for it an ephemeral isolated execution
environment and permits its one-time execution.
This isolated environment lasts until execution ends, which corresponds to reaching the legal exit point of the
authorized binary. Therefore, by including a clean-up routine immediately before the legal exit, we can assure that
all execution traces, including all sensitive information, are erased. Any attempt to interrupt, or tamper with,
isolated execution causes an immediate system-wide reset, which erases all data traces.
\new{
We use the term ``Sensing Operation'', denoted by {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, to refer to a self-contained and logically independent binary
(e.g., a function) that is responsible for processing data obtained through one or more reads from \texttt{GPIO}\xspace.
}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace achieves {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace via three key features:
\noindent\emph{{\bf [A]} Mandatory Sensing Operation Authorization} requires explicit authorization issued by \ctrl before any
{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace software reads from \texttt{GPIO}\xspace. Recall that access to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace is blocked by default.
\new{
Each authorization token ({\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace) coming from \ctrl allows one execution of a specific sensing operation {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace,
although a single execution of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace can implement several \texttt{GPIO}\xspace reads.
}
{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace has the following properties:
\begin{compactenum}
\item It can be authenticated by {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace as having been issued by \ctrl; this includes freshness;
\item It grants privileges {\bf only to a specific} {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace to access \texttt{GPIO}\xspace during its execution; and
\item It can only be used once.
\end{compactenum}
%
\new{
\ctrl can authorize multiple executions of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace by issuing a batch of tokens, i.e., ${\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_1,...,{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_n$, for up to
$n$ executions of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace.} Although supporting multiple tokens is unnecessary for on-demand sensing, it might be
useful for periodic or event-driven sensing regimes discussed in Section~\ref{sec:gpio_bg}.
\noindent\emph{{\bf [B]} Atomic Sensing Operation Execution} ensures that, once authorized by \ctrl, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is executed
with the following requirements:
\begin{compactenum}
\item {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace execution starts from its legal entry point (first instruction) and runs until its legal exit point (last instruction).
This assumes a single pair of entry-exit points;
\item {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace execution can not be interrupted and its intermediate results cannot be accessed by
external means, e.g., via DMA controllers; and
\item An immediate MCU reset is triggered if either (1) or (2) above is violated.
\end{compactenum}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{images/workflow3.png}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\caption{\footnotesize \new{MCU execution workflow with {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace.}}
\label{fig:workflow}
\end{figure}
\noindent\new{\emph{{\bf [C]} Data Erasure on Reset/Boot} works with \emph{\bf [B]} to
guarantee that, sensed data (or any function thereof) obtained during {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace execution is not leaked due to errors or
violations of security properties, which cause MCU reset per item (3) above. This feature must guarantee that
all values that remain in RAM after a hard reset and the subsequent boot process, are erased before any
unprivileged software can run. While some architectures already provide memory erasure on boot, for those MCUs that
do not do so, it can be obtained by calling a secure RAM erasure function at boot time, e.g., as a part of a ROM-resident
bootloader code. Appendix~\ref{apdx:erasure} discusses this further.
}
At a high level, correct implementation of aforementioned three features suffices to obtain {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace, because:
\begin{compactitem}
\item Any compromised/modified binary can not access \texttt{GPIO}\xspace since it has no authorization from \ctrl.
\item Any authorized binary {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace must be invoked properly and run atomically, from its first, and until its last, instruction.
\item Since {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is invoked properly, intended behavior of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is preserved. Code reuse attacks are not possible, unless they
occure as a result of bugs in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace implementation itself. \ctrl can always check for such bugs in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace prior to authorization;
see Section~\ref{sec:adv_model}.
\item {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace runs uninterrupted, meaning that it can erase all traces of its own execution from the stack
before passing control to unprivileged applications. This guarantees that no sensor data remains in
memory when {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace terminates.
\item {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace assures that any violation of aforementioned requirements causes an MCU reset, triggering erasure of
all data memory. Therefore, malware that attempts to interrupt {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace before completion, or tamper with
{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace execution integrity, will cause all data used by {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace to be erased.
\end{compactitem}
\vspace{0.5mm}
\noindent{\bf Support for Output Encryption:}
{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace might process and use sensor data locally as part of its own execution, or generate some output that needs to be returned to
\ctrl. In the latter case, encryption of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace output is necessary. For this reason, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace supports the generation of a fresh
key derived from {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace (thus implicitly shared between \ctrl and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace). This key is only accessible to {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace during authorized execution.
Hence, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace can encrypt any data to be exported with this key and ensure that encrypted results can only be decrypted by \ctrl.
Since we assume that the encryption function is part of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, it cannot be interrupted (or tampered with) by any unprivileged
software or external means. Importantly, the encryption key is only accessible to {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace (similar to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace) and shielded from
all other software. Furthermore, the choice of the encryption algorithm is left up to the specific {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace implementation.
Figure ~\ref{fig:workflow} illustrates MCU execution workflow discussed in this section.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{mdframed}
\begin{definition}[{\small MCU Execution Model}]\label{def:model}~\\
\footnotesize
\vspace*{-0.6em}
\textbf{1 -- Execution} is modeled as a sequence of MCU states $\texttt{S}:=\{{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_0, ...,{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m\}$ and a sequence of instructions
$\texttt{I}:=\{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_0,...,{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_n\}$. Since the \underline{next} MCU state and the \underline{next} instruction to be executed are
determined by the \underline{current} MCU state and the \underline{current} instruction being executed,
these discrete transitions are denoted as shown in the following example:
\vspace*{-0.2em}
\begin{equation*}
\boldsymbol{({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_{1}, {\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{j}) \leftarrow \textbf{{\textit{EXEC}}\xspace}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_0,{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_0)};\quad
\boldsymbol{({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_{2}, {\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{k}) \leftarrow \textbf{{\textit{EXEC}}\xspace}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_1,{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_j)};\quad
\textbf{~...}\quad
\boldsymbol{({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_{m}, \perp) \leftarrow \textbf{{\textit{EXEC}}\xspace}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_{m-1},{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_l)}
\end{equation*}
The sequence $\texttt{I}$ represents the physical order of instructions in memory, which is
not necessarily the order of their execution.
The next instruction and state are also affected by current external inputs, current data-memory values,
and current hardware events, e.g., interrupts or resets, which are modeled as properties of each execution
state in $\texttt{S}$. The MCU always starts execution (at boot or after a reset) from state ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_0$
and initial instruction $i_0$. {\textit{EXEC}}\xspace produces $\perp$ as the next instruction if there is no instructions left to execute.
\vspace{2mm}
\textbf{2 -- State Properties as Sets:} sets are used to model relevant execution properties and characterize
effects/actions occurring within a given state ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_t$. We are particularly interested in the behaviors
corresponding to the following sets:
\begin{compactenum}
\item \textbf{{\textit{READ}}\xspace: } all states produced by the execution of an instruction ${\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace$
that reads the value from memory to a register.
\item \textbf{{\textit{WRITE}}\xspace: }all states produced by the execution of an instruction ${\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace$
that writes the value from a register to memory.
\item \textbf{${\textit{DMA}}\xspace^R$: } all states produced as a result of DMA reading from memory.
\item \textbf{${\textit{DMA}}\xspace^W$: } all states ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_t$ produced as a result of DMA writing to memory.
\item \textbf{{\textit{IRQ}}\xspace: } all states ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_t$ where an interrupt is triggered.
\item \textbf{{\textit{RESET}}\xspace: } all states ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_t$ wherein an MCU reset is triggered.
\end{compactenum}
\vspace{0.3mm}
Note that these sets are not disjoint, i.e., ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_t$ can belong to multiple sets.
Also, the aforementioned sets do not aim to model
all possible MCU behaviors, but only the ones relevant to {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
Finally, we further subdivide sets that model memory access into subsets relating to memory regions of interest.
For example, considering a contiguous memory region ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace = [{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{min},{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{max}] $, ${\textit{READ}}\xspace_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$
is a subset of {\textit{READ}}\xspace containing only the states produced through {\textit{EXEC}}\xspace of instructions that read from
the memory region ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$. We use the same notation to refer to other subsets, e.g., ${\textit{WRITE}}\xspace_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$,
${\textit{DMA}}\xspace^R_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$, and ${\textit{DMA}}\xspace^W_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$.
\end{definition}
\end{mdframed}
%
\vspace*{-0.5em}
%
\begin{mdframed}
\linespread{0.4}
\begin{definition}[{\small Hardware Model}]\label{def:hw_model}~\\
\footnotesize
{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace denotes a contiguous memory region within addresses ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{min}$ and ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{max}$
in physical memory of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace, i.e., ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace := [{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{min}, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{max}]$.
{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace represents the system execution state at a given CPU cycle.\\ \\
{\bf Program counter \& instruction execution:}
%
\vspace*{-0.8em}
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{ltl:cpu_pc}
{\bf G:}\{[{\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace) \leftarrow {\textit{EXEC}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace,{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_k) \land {\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_k \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)] \rightarrow (PC \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
{\bf Memory Reads/Writes:}
%
\vspace*{-0.8em}
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{ltl:cpu_mem_read}
{\bf G:}\{{\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace) \in {\textit{READ}}\xspace_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace \rightarrow (R_{en} \land D_{addr} \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
%
\vspace*{-1.2em}
%
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{ltl:cpu_mem_write}
{\bf G:}\{{\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace) \in {\textit{WRITE}}\xspace_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace \rightarrow (W_{en} \land D_{addr} \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
%
\vspace*{-1.2em}
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{ltl:DMA_mem_read_write}
{\bf G:}\{({\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace) \in {\textit{DMA}}\xspace^R_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace \lor {\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace) \in {\textit{DMA}}\xspace^W_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)\rightarrow (DMA_{en} \land DMA_{addr} \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
%
\iffalse
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{ltl:read_memory}
{\bf G:}\{ Read\_Mem({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace) \rightarrow [({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in READ_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace) \lor ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in DMA^R_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)]\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
%
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{ltl:write_memory}
{\bf G:}\{ Write\_Mem({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace) \rightarrow [({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in WRITE_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace) \lor ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in DMA^W_{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace)]\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
\fi
{\bf Interrupts (\ensuremath{irq}\xspace) and Resets:}
\vspace*{-0.8em}
\begin{align}\label{ltl:trigger_interrupt}
\begin{split}
{\bf G:}\{{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in {\textit{IRQ}}\xspace \leftrightarrow irq\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
%
\vspace*{-1.2em}
%
\begin{align}\label{ltl:trigger_reset}
\begin{split}
{\bf G:}\{{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in {\textit{RESET}}\xspace \leftrightarrow reset\}
\end{split}
\end{align}
\end{definition}
\end{mdframed}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure*}
\section{MCU Machine Model} \label{sec:machine_model}
\subsection{Execution Model}\label{sec:exec_model}
To enable formal specification of {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace guarantees, we formulate the MCU execution model in Definition~\ref{def:model}.
It represents MCU operation as a discrete sequence of MCU states, each corresponding to one clock cycle -- the
smallest unit of time in the system. We say that the subsequent MCU state is defined based on the current MCU state
(which includes current values in memory/registers, as well as any hardware signals and effects, such as
external inputs, actions by DMA controller(s), and interrupts) and
the current instruction being executed by the CPU core. Similarly, the instruction to be executed
in the next state is determined by the current state and the current instruction being executed.
For example, an arithmetic instruction (e.g., \texttt{add} or \texttt{mult}) causes the program counter (\ensuremath{PC}\xspace) to point to
the subsequent address in physical memory. However, an interrupt (which is a consequence of the current MCU state)
may occur and deviate the normal execution flow. Alternatively, a branching instruction may be executed and
cause \ensuremath{PC}\xspace to jump to some arbitrary instruction that is not necessarily located at the subsequent position
in the MCU flash memory.
In order to reason about events during the MCU operation, we say that each MCU state can belong to one or
more sets. Belonging to a given set implies that the state has a given property of interest. Definition~\ref{def:model}
introduces six sets of interest, representing states in which memory is read/written by
CPU or DMA, as well as states in which an interrupt or reset occurs.
\subsection{Hardware Signals}\label{sec:hw_model}
We now formalize the effects of execution, modeled in Definition~\ref{def:model},
to the values of concrete hardware signals that can be monitored by {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace hardware
in order to attain {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace guarantees. Informally, we model the following simple axioms:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\textbf{[A1] PC:}] contains the memory address containing
the instruction being executed at a given cycle.
\item[\textbf{[A2] CPU Memory Access:}] Whenever memory is read or written, a data-address
signal (\ensuremath{D_{addr}}\xspace) contains the address of the corresponding memory location. A data read-enable bit (\ensuremath{R_{en}}\xspace)
must be set for a read access and a data write-enable bit (\ensuremath{W_{en}}\xspace) must be set for a write access.
\item[\textbf{[A3] DMA:}] Whenever a DMA controller attempts to access
the main memory, a DMA-address signal (\ensuremath{DMA_{addr}}\xspace) contains the address of the accessed memory
location and a DMA-enable bit (\ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace) must be set.
\item[\textbf{[A4] Interrupts:}] When hardware interrupts or software interrupts happen, the \ensuremath{irq}\xspace~signal is set.
\item[\textbf{[A5] MCU reset:}] At the end of a successful reset routine, all registers (including \ensuremath{PC}\xspace) are
set to zero before restarting software execution. The reset handling routine cannot be modified,
as resets are handled by MCU in hardware. When a reset happens, the corresponding \ensuremath{reset}\xspace signal is set.
The same signal is also set when the MCU initializes for the first time.
\end{compactitem}
\noindent This model strictly adheres to MCU specifications, assumed to be correctly implemented
by the underlying MCU core.
Definition~\ref{def:hw_model} presents formal specifications for aforementioned axioms in LTL. Instead of
explicitly quantifying time, LTL embeds time within the logic by using temporal quantifiers (see
Section~\ref{sec:BG}).
Hence, rather than referring to execution states
using temporal variables (i.e., state $t$, state $t+1$, state $t+2$),
a single variable ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace)
and LTL quantifiers suffice to specify, e.g., ``current'', ``next'', ``future'' system states ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace).
For this part of the model, we are mostly interested in: (1) describing MCU state at the next CPU cycle
(${\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace)$) as a function of the MCU state at the current CPU cycle ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace), and (2) describing which particular MCU signals must be triggered in order for ${\bf X}({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace)$ to be in each of the sets defined in Definition~\ref{def:model}.
\new{
LTL statements in Definition~\ref{def:hw_model} formally model axioms {\bf [A1]-[A5]}, i.e.,
the subset of MCU behavior that is relevant to, and sufficient for formally verifying, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace.
LTL (\ref{ltl:cpu_pc}) models {\bf [A1]}, (\ref{ltl:cpu_mem_read}) and (\ref{ltl:cpu_mem_write}) model {\bf [A2]},
and each (\ref{ltl:DMA_mem_read_write}), (\ref{ltl:trigger_interrupt}), and (\ref{ltl:trigger_reset}) models {\bf [A3]},
{\bf [A4]}, and {\bf [A5]}, respectively.
}
\section{{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace Definitions}\label{sec:definitions}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{mdframed}
\begin{definition}[Syntax: {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace scheme]\label{def:pfb}~\\
\footnotesize
A {\texttt{Privacy-from-Birth}}\xspace ({\texttt{PfB}}\xspace) scheme is a tuple of algorithms $[\ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace, \verify, \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace]$:
%
\begin{compactenum}
%
\item{$\ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace^{\ctrl}({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, \cdots)$:} an algorithm executed by \ctrl taking as \underline{input} at least one
executable ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace$ and \underline{producing}
at least one authorization token {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace which can be sent to {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace to authorize one execution of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace with
access to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace.\\ \vspace*{-0.7em}
%
\item{$\verify^{{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace}({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace, \cdots)$:} an algorithm (with possible hardware-support), executed by {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace,
that takes as \underline{input} {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace and {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace. It uses {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace to
check whether {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is pre-authorized by \ctrl and outputs $\top$ if verification succeeds, and $\perp$ otherwise.\\ \vspace*{-0.7em}
%
\item{$\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace^{{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace}({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, \cdots)$:} an algorithm (with possible hardware-support)
that executes {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace, producing a sequence of states $E:=\{{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_0,..., {\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m\}$. It returns
$\top$, if sensing successfully occurs during {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace execution, i.e., $\exists
{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in E$ such that $({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in {\textit{READ}}\xspace_{\texttt{GPIO}\xspace}) \land ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \notin {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)$); it returns $\perp$, otherwise.\\ \vspace*{-0.7em}
\item[\textbf{Remark:}] In the parameter list, ($\cdots$) means that additional/optional parameters might be
included depending on the specific {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace construction.
%
\end{compactenum}
\end{definition}
\end{mdframed}
%
%
\vspace*{-0.5em}
\begin{mdframed}
\vspace*{-0.5em}
\begin{definition}[{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace Game-based Definition]\label{def:pfb_sec_def}~\\
\footnotesize
\vspace*{-0.5em}
\textbf{\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}.1 Auxiliary Notation \& Predicate(s):}
\begin{compactitem}
\item Let \texttt{\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace} be a secret string of bit-size $|\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace|$; and $\lambda$ be the security
parameter, determined by $|\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace|$, i.e., $\lambda = \Theta(|\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace|)$;
\item Let \ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace be a predicate evaluated on some sequence of states $\texttt{S}$ and some
software -- i.e., some sequence of instructions $\texttt{I}$.
\begin{compactitem}
\item $\ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace(\texttt{S}:=\{{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_1, ..., {\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m\},\texttt{I}:=\{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_0, ..., {\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_n\}) \equiv \top$ if and only if the
following hold; otherwise, $\ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace(\texttt{S},\texttt{I}) \equiv \perp$.
\begin{compactenum}
\item \textbf{Legal Entry Instruction:} The first execution state ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_1$ in $\texttt{S}$ is produced by the execution of the first instruction ${\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_0$ in $\texttt{I}$. \\i.e., $({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_1 \leftarrow {\textit{EXEC}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{0},{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace{*})) ~\lor~ ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_1 \in {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)$, where ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace{*}$ is any state prior to ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_1$.
\item \textbf{Legal Exit Instruction:} The last execution state ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m$ in $\texttt{S}$ is produced by the execution of the last instruction ${\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_n$ in $\texttt{I}$. \\i.e., $({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m \leftarrow {\textit{EXEC}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{n},{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_{m-1})) ~\lor~ ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m \in {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)$.
\item \textbf{Self-Contained Execution:} For all ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j$ in $\texttt{S}$, ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j$ is produced by the execution of an instruction ${\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_k$ in $\texttt{I}$, for some $k$. \\i.e., $({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j \leftarrow {\textit{EXEC}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_k,{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_{j-1})) ~\lor~ ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j \in {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)$, for some ${\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_k \in \texttt{I}$.
\item \textbf{No Interrupts, No DMA:} For all ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j$ in $\texttt{S}$, ${\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j$ is neither in the ${\textit{IRQ}}\xspace$ or ${\textit{DMA}}\xspace$. i.e., $[({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j \notin {\textit{IRQ}}\xspace) \land ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j \notin {\textit{DMA}}\xspace)] ~\lor~ ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_j \in {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)$.
\end{compactenum}
\end{compactitem}
\end{compactitem}
%
\vspace*{0.4em}
\textbf{\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}.2 {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-Game:}
The challenger plays the following game with \adv:
\begin{compactenum}
\item \adv is given full control over {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace software state, implying \adv can execute any (polynomially sized) sequence of arbitrary instructions $\{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace^{\adv}_0, ..., {\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace^{\adv}_n\}$, inducing the associated changes in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace's sequence of execution states;
\item \adv has oracle access to polynomially many calls to \verify. \adv also has access to the set of software executables, $\mathsf{SW} := \{S_1, ..., S_l\}$, and the set of all corresponding authorization ``tokens'', $\mathsf{T}:= \{{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_{1},...,{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_{l}\}$, ever produced by any prior \ctrl calls to \ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace up until time $t$. i.e., ${\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_j \leftarrow \ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_j, ...)$, for all $j$.
\item Let $\mathsf{U} \subset \mathsf{T}$ be the set of all ``used'' authorization tokens up until time $t$, i.e., ${\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_j \in \mathsf{U}$, if a call to $\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_j, ...)$ returned $\top$ up until time $t$; Let $\mathsf{P}$ be the set of ``pending'' (issued but not used) authorization tokens, i.e., $\mathsf{P} := \mathsf{T} \setminus \mathsf{U}$.
\item At any arbitrary time $t$, \adv wins if it can perform an \textbf{unauthorized or tampered sensing execution}, i.e.:
\begin{compactitem}[--]
\item \adv triggers an $\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_{\adv},...)$ operation that returns $\top$, for $\forall {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_{\adv} \notin \mathsf{SW}$, or
\item \adv triggers $(\texttt{S}, \top) \leftarrow \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_j,...)$ such that $\ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace(\texttt{S}, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_j) \equiv \perp$, for some ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace_j \in \mathsf{SW}$ and ${\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace_j \in \mathsf{U}$ .
\end{compactitem}
\end{compactenum}
\vspace*{0.4em}
\textbf{\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}.3 {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-Security:}
A scheme is considered {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-Secure iff, for all PPT adversaries \adv, there exists a negligible function $\negl[]$ such that: \vspace*{-0.5em}
\begin{center}
$Pr[\adv, \text{{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-Game}] \leq \negl[l]$
\end{center}
\end{definition}
\end{mdframed}
\vspace*{-1em}
\end{figure*}
Based on the specified machine model, we now proceed with the formal definition of {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
\subsection{{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace Syntax}\label{subsec:syntax}
A {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace scheme involves two parties: \ctrl and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace. \ctrl authorizes {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace to execute some software {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace which accesses \texttt{GPIO}\xspace.
It should be impossible for any software different from {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace to access \texttt{GPIO}\xspace data, or any function thereof (see
Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}). \ctrl is trusted to only authorize functionally correct code. The goal of a {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace scheme is to
facilitate sensing-dependent execution while keeping all sensed data private from all other software.
Definition~\ref{def:pfb} specifies a syntax for {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace scheme composed of three functionalities: \ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace, \verify,
and \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace. \ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace is invoked by \ctrl to produce an authorization token, {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace, to be sent to {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace,
enabling {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace to access \texttt{GPIO}\xspace. \verify is executed at {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace with {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace as input, and
it checks whether {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace is a valid authorization for the software on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace. If and only if this check succeeds,
\verify returns $\top$. Otherwise, it returns $\perp$. The verification success indicates one execution of
{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace granted on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace via \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace. \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace is considered successful
(returns $\top$), if there is at least one MCU state produced by \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace where a \texttt{GPIO}\xspace read
occurs \underline{without} causing an MCU $reset$, i.e.,
$({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in {\textit{READ}}\xspace_{GPIO}) \land \neg({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)$.
Otherwise, \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace returns $\perp$. That is, \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace models execution of any software in the MCU and its
return symbol indicates whether a \texttt{GPIO}\xspace read occurred during its execution. Therefore, invocation of \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace
on any input software that does not read from \texttt{GPIO}\xspace returns $\perp$.
Figure~\ref{fig:pfb_interaction} illustrates a benign {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace interaction between \ctrl and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{0.6}[0.5]{
\fbox{
\input{images/timeline-1col.tex}
}
}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\caption{\footnotesize {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace interaction between \ctrl and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace}\label{fig:pfb_interaction}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\end{figure}
\subsection{\new{Assumptions \& Adversarial Model}}\label{sec:adv_model}
We consider an adversary, \adv, that controls the entire software state of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace, including PMEM (flash) and DMEM (DRAM).
It can attempt to modify any writable memory (including PMEM)
or read any memory, including peripheral regions, such as \texttt{GPIO}\xspace, unless explicitly protected by verified hardware.
It can launch code injection attacks to execute arbitrary instructions from PMEM or even DMEM (if the MCU architecture supports execution from DMEM).
It also has full control over any DMA controllers on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace that can directly read/write to any part of the memory independently of the CPU.
It can induce interrupts to pause any software execution and leak information from its stack, or change its control-flow.
We consider Denial-of-Service (DoS) attacks, whereby \adv abuses {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace functionality in order to render {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace unavailable, to be out-of-scope.
These are attacks on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace availability and not on sensed data privacy.
\new{
\textbf{Executable Correctness:} we stress that {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace aims to guarantee that {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, as specified by
\ctrl, is the only software that can access and process \texttt{GPIO}\xspace data. Similar to other trusted hardware architectures,
{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace does not check for lack of implementation bugs within {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace; thus it is not concerned with run-time (e.g., control-flow and data-only)
attacks. As a relatively powerful and trusted entity \ctrl can
use various well-known vulnerability detection methods, e.g., fuzzing~\cite{fuzzer},
static analysis~\cite{costin2014large}, and even formal verification, to scrutinize {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace before authorizing it.
}
\new{
\textbf{Physical Attacks:} physical and hardware-focused attacks are considered out of scope. We assume
that \adv cannot modify code in ROM, induce hardware faults, or retrieve {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace's secrets via side-channels that require
\adv's physical presence. Protection against such attacks can be obtained via standard
physical security techniques~\cite{ravi2004tamper}. This assumption is in line with related work on
trusted hardware architectures for embedded systems~\cite{smart,vrasedp,trustlite,tytan}.
}
\subsection{{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace Game-based Definition}\label{subsec:game_def}
Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def} starts by introducing an auxiliary predicate \ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace.
It defines whether a particular sequence of execution states (produced by the execution of some software {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace)
adheres to all necessary execution properties for \emph{Atomic Sensing Operation Execution} discussed in Section~\ref{sec:overview}.
\iffalse
\ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace yields $\top$ only if:
\noindent {\bf (1)} execution starts from the first instruction of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace; \\
\noindent {\bf (2)} execution ends at the last instruction of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace; \\
\noindent {\bf (3)} each executed instruction is within the region delimited by the first and the last instructions; and \\
\noindent {\bf (4)} no interrupts and no DMA activity occur during execution.
\fi
In \ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace (in Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}.1), conditions 1-3 guarantee that a given {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is executed as a whole and no external instruction is executed between its first and last instructions. Condition 4 assures that DMA is inactive during execution, hence protecting intermediate variables in DMEM against DMA tampering. Additionally, malicious interrupts could be leveraged to illegally change the control-flow of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace during its execution. Therefore, condition 4 stipulates that both cases cause \ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace to return $\perp$.
{\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-Game in Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}.2 models \adv's capabilities by allowing it to execute
any sequence of (polynomially many) instructions. This models \adv's full control over software executed on the MCU, as well
as its ability to use software to modify memory at will. It can also call \verify any
(polynomial) number of times in an attempt to gain an advantage (e.g., learn something) from \verify executions.
To win the game,
\adv must succeed in executing some software that does not cause an MCU reset, and either: (1) is unauthorized,
yet reads from \texttt{GPIO}\xspace, or (2) is authorized, yet violates \ensuremath{\mathsf{atomicExec}}\xspace predicate conditions during its execution.
\section{{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace: Realizing {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace} \label{sec:design}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio=true, height=2.0in,width=0.9\columnwidth]{images/archpps.png}
\vspace*{-0.7em}
\caption{\footnotesize {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace Architecture} \label{fig:archpps}
\vspace*{-1.7em}
\end{figure}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace runs in parallel with the MCU core and monitors a set of MCU signals: $PC$, $D_{addr}$, $R_{en}$, $W_{en}$, $DMA_{en}$,
$DMA_{addr}$, and $irq$. It also monitors $ER_{min}$ and $ER_{max}$, the boundary memory addresses of $ER$ where
{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is stored; these are collectively referred to as ``\textit{METADATA}\xspace''. {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace hardware module detects privacy violations in real-time, based on
aforementioned signals and \textit{METADATA}\xspace values, causing an immediate MCU reset.
Figure~\ref{fig:archpps} shows the {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace architecture. For quick reference,
MCU signals and memory regions relevant to {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace are summarized in Table~\ref{tabl:notations}.
To facilitate specification of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace properties, we introduce the following two macros:
\vspace{0.3em}
\noindent{\centering\footnotesize
$Read\_Mem(i) \equiv (\ensuremath{R_{en}}\xspace \land \ensuremath{D_{addr}}\xspace = i) \lor (\ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace \land \ensuremath{DMA_{addr}}\xspace = i)$\\
$Write\_Mem(i) \equiv (\ensuremath{W_{en}}\xspace \land \ensuremath{D_{addr}}\xspace = i) \lor (\ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace \land \ensuremath{DMA_{addr}}\xspace = i)$\\
}
\vspace{0.3em}
\noindent representing read/write from/to a particular memory address $i$ by either CPU or DMA. For reads/writes from/to
some continuous memory region (composed of multiple addresses) ${\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace = [{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{min},{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{max}]$,
we instead say $D_{addr} \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$ to denote that $D_{addr} = i ~\land (i \geq {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{min})
\land (i \leq {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace_{max})$. The same holds for notation $DMA_{addr} \in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal M}}}\xspace$.
\begin{table}
\caption{\footnotesize Notation Summary} \label{tabl:notations}
\vspace{-1em}
\footnotesize
\linespread{0.8}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{tabularx}{\columnwidth}{lX}
\toprule
Notation & Description \\
\midrule
\ensuremath{PC}\xspace & Current program counter value \\
\ensuremath{R_{en}}\xspace & 1-bit signal that indicates if MCU is reading from memory \\
\ensuremath{W_{en}}\xspace & 1-bit signal that indicates if MCU is writing to memory \\
\ensuremath{D_{addr}}\xspace & Memory address of an MCU memory access \\
\ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace & 1-bit signal that indicates if DMA is active \\
\ensuremath{DMA_{addr}}\xspace & Memory address being accessed by DMA, when active \\
\ensuremath{irq}\xspace & 1-bit signal that indicates if an interrupt is happening \\
\ensuremath{reset}\xspace & Signal that reboots the MCU when set to logic `1'\\
\ensuremath{ER}\xspace & A configurable memory region where the sensing operation {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is stored, $\ensuremath{ER}\xspace = [\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace, \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace]$\\
\textit{METADATA}\xspace & Metadata memory region; contains \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace\\
{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace & Fixed memory region from which \verify reads the authorization token when called \\
\texttt{GPIO}\xspace & Memory region that is mapped to GPIO port \\
\ensuremath{VR}\xspace & Memory region storing \verify code which instantiates {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace software and its hardware protection\\
\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace & A fixed address in \ensuremath{ROM}\xspace, only be reachable (i.e., $PC=\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$) by a successful \verify call (i.e., \verify
returns $\top$)\\
\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace & (Optional) memory region for the encryption key \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace necessary to encrypt the {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace output (relevant to sensed data) \\
\bottomrule
\vspace*{-3em}
\end{tabularx}
\end{table}
\subsection{{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace: Construction} \label{subsec:construction}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{mdframed}
\label{def:versa}
\begin{construction}\label{cons:pps}
\footnotesize
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace instantiates a {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace = $[\ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace, \verify, \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace]$ scheme as follows:
~\\~
-- \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace is a symmetric key pre-shared between \ctrl and {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace secure architecture in {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace;
\begin{compactenum}
~
\item{$\ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace^{\ctrl}({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace)$:} \ctrl produces an authorization message $\texttt{M}:=({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace, {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace)$,
where {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is a software, i.e., a sequence of instructions $\{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_1, ..., {\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_n\}$, that \ctrl wants to execute
on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace; {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace is a monotonically increasing challenge; and ${\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace$ is an authentication token computed as below.
\ctrl sends \texttt{M} to {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace. Upon receiving \texttt{M}, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace is expected to parse \texttt{M},
find the memory region for {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, and execute \verify (see below).
\begin{equation}
{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace := HMAC(KDF({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace, \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace), {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace)
\end{equation}
\item{$\verify^{{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace}(ER, {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace)$:} calls {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace functionality~\cite{vrasedp} on memory
region $ER:= [\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace,\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace]$ to securely compute:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:verify_sigma}
\sigma := HMAC(KDF({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace, \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace), ER)
\end{equation}
\vspace*{-0.2em}
If $\sigma = {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace$, output $\top$;
Otherwise, output $\perp$. \\
\item{$\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace^{{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace}(ER)$:}
starts execution of software in $ER$ by jumping to $ER_{min}$ (i.e., setting \ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace).
A benign call to \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace with input \ensuremath{ER}\xspace is expected to occur after one successful computation
of \verify for the same $ER$ region and contents therein. Otherwise, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace hardware support (see below)
will cause the MCU to reset when \texttt{GPIO}\xspace is read.
\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace produces $\texttt{E}:=\{{\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_0, ..., {\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace_m\}$, the set of states produced by executing $ER$, and outputs $\top$ or $\perp$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace(ER) =
\begin{cases}
(\texttt{E}, \top),& \text{ if } \exists {\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in \texttt{E} \text{ such that } ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \in {\textit{READ}}\xspace_{\texttt{GPIO}\xspace}) \land ({\ensuremath{\sf{s}}}\xspace \notin {\textit{RESET}}\xspace)\\
(\texttt{E}, \perp),& \text{ otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\item \ensuremath{\mathsf{Hardware Monitor}}\xspace:
\underline{At all times}, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace verified hardware enforces all following LTL properties :\\ \\
\linespread{0.5}
\footnotesize
{\bf A -- Read-Access Control to} \texttt{GPIO}\xspace{\bf:}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:read_gpio1}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{
(Read\_Mem(\texttt{GPIO}\xspace) \land \neg(PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace)) \rightarrow \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:read_gpio2}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{
[(PC = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace] \rightarrow (\neg Read\_Mem(\texttt{GPIO}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace) ~\textbf{W}~ (PC = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace) \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
{\bf B -- Ephemeral Immutability of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace and \textit{METADATA}\xspace }
\begin{equation}\label{eq:auth_noWrite1}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace=\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace) \land (Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \lor Write\_Mem(\textit{METADATA}\xspace)) \rightarrow \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:auth_noWrite2}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \{ ((Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \lor Write\_Mem(\textit{METADATA}\xspace) \rightarrow (\neg Read\_Mem(\texttt{GPIO}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace)
~\textbf{W}~ (PC = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace))
\}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:auth_noWrite3}
\begin{split}
\textnormal{[Optional] } \text{\bf G}: \{ ((Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \lor Write\_Mem(\textit{METADATA}\xspace) \rightarrow
(\neg Read\_Mem(\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace) ~\textbf{W}~ (PC = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace))
\}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
{\bf C -- Atomicity and Controlled Invocation of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace:}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ephe_continv1}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{\neg \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \land (PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \land \neg \text{\bf X}(PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \rightarrow (PC = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace) \lor \text{\bf X}(\ensuremath{reset}\xspace) \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ephe_continv2}
\begin{split}
& \text{\bf G}: \ \{\neg \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \land \neg (PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \land \text{\bf X}(PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \rightarrow \text{\bf X}(PC = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace)
\lor \text{\bf X}(\ensuremath{reset}\xspace) \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ephe_atom}
\begin{split}
& \text{\bf G}: \ \{(PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \land (\ensuremath{irq}\xspace \lor \ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace) \rightarrow \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
{\bf [Optional] Read/Write-Access Control to Encryption Key (\ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace) in \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace:}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:read_enckey1}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{
(Read\_Mem(\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) \land \neg(PC \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace)) \rightarrow \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:read_enckey2}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{
[(PC = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace]
\rightarrow (\neg Read\_Mem(\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace) ~\textbf{W}~ (PC=\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace) \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:write_enckey}
\begin{split}
\text{\bf G}: \ \{
[Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) \land \neg(PC \in \ensuremath{VR}\xspace)] \rightarrow \ensuremath{reset}\xspace \}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{compactenum}
\textbf{\textit{Remark:}} [Optional] properties are needed only if support for encryption of outputs is desired.
\end{construction}
\end{mdframed}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\caption{\footnotesize {Verified Remote Sensing Authorization}\xspace ({\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace) Scheme}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\normalsize
\end{figure*}
Recall the key features of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace from Section \ref{sec:overview}. To guarantee \emph{Mandatory Sensing Operation Authorization}
and \emph{Atomic Sensing Operation Execution}, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace constructs {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace = $(\ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace, \verify, \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace)$ algorithms as in
Construction~\ref{cons:pps}. We describe each algorithm below.
\begin{center}
\textbf{\ensuremath{\mathsf{Authorize}}\xspace:}
\end{center}
\vspace{-.5em}
To authorize {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, \ctrl picks a monotonically
increasing {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace and generates ${\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace$ := $HMAC(KDF({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace,\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace),{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace)$
(this follows {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace authentication algorithm -- see {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace~\verify specification below). {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace is computed
over {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace with a one-time key derived from \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace, where \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace is the master secret key shared between \ctrl and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace.
\begin{center}
\textbf{\verify:}
\end{center}
\vspace{-.5em}
To securely verify that an executable {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace', installed in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace, matches authorized {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace invokes {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace\footnote{{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace and \ctrl act as \prover and \verifier in {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace respectively.}
to compute
$\sigma $ := $HMAC(KDF({\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace,\ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace),{\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace')$.
\verify outputs $\top$, iff $\sigma={\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace$.
In this case, \ensuremath{PC}\xspace reaches a fixed address, called \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace. Otherwise, \verify outputs $\perp$.
In the rest of this section, we use ``authorized software" to refer to software located in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace, for which
$\verify(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace, {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace)$ outputs $\top$. Whereas, ``unauthorized software"
refers to any software for which $\verify(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace, {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace)$ outputs $\perp$
\begin{center}
\textbf{\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace:}
\end{center}
\vspace{-.5em}
When \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace) is invoked, \ensuremath{PC}\xspace jumps to \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace, and starts executing the code in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace.
It produces a set $\textit{\texttt{E}}$ of states by executing \ensuremath{ER}\xspace, and outputs $\top$, if there is at least one state that
reads \texttt{GPIO}\xspace without triggering an MCU reset. Otherwise, it outputs $\perp$.
\begin{center}
\textbf{\ensuremath{\mathsf{Hardware Monitor}}\xspace:}
\end{center}
\vspace{-.5em}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace \ensuremath{\mathsf{Hardware Monitor}}\xspace is verified to enforce LTL specifications (\ref{eq:read_gpio1})--(\ref{eq:write_enckey}) in Construction~\ref{cons:pps}.
{\bf A -- Read-Access Control to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace} is jointly specified by LTLs (\ref{eq:read_gpio1}) and (\ref{eq:read_gpio2}). LTL (\ref{eq:read_gpio1})
states that \texttt{GPIO}\xspace can only be read during execution of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace ($\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace$), requiring an MCU reset otherwise. LTL (\ref{eq:read_gpio2})
forbids all \texttt{GPIO}\xspace reads (even those within $ER$ execution) before successful computation of \verify on $ER$ binary using a valid
{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace. Successful \verify computation is captured by condition $PC=\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$. A new successful computation of $\verify(ER,{\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace)$
is necessary whenever $ER$ execution completes ($PC=ER_{max}$) or after reset/boot. Hence, each legitimate {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace
can be used to authorize $ER$ execution once.
{\bf B -- Ephemeral Immutability of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace and \textit{METADATA}\xspace} is specified by LTLs (\ref{eq:auth_noWrite1})-(\ref{eq:auth_noWrite3}).
From the time when $ER$ binary is authorized until it starts executing,
no modifications to \ensuremath{ER}\xspace or \textit{METADATA}\xspace are allowed.
LTL (\ref{eq:auth_noWrite1}) specifies that no such modification is allowed at the moment when verification succeeds ($\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$);
LTL (\ref{eq:auth_noWrite2}) requires $ER$ to be re-authorized from scratch if $ER$ or \textit{METADATA}\xspace are ever modified. Whenever these modifications are detected $(Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \lor Write\_Mem(\textit{METADATA}\xspace)$) further reads to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace are immediately blocked ($\neg Read\_Mem(\texttt{GPIO}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace$) until subsequent re-authorization of $ER$ is completed ($ ... ~\textbf{W}~ (PC = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace)$).
LTL (\ref{eq:auth_noWrite3}) specifies the same requirement in order to read {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace-provided encryption key (\ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace) which is stored in memory region \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace. This property is only required when support for encryption of outputs is desired.
{\bf C -- Atomicity \& Controlled Invocation of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace} are enforced by LTLs (\ref{eq:ephe_continv1}), (\ref{eq:ephe_continv2}), and~(\ref{eq:ephe_atom}). They specify that \ensuremath{ER}\xspace execution must start at
\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace and end at \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace. Specifically, they use the relation between \emph{current} and \emph{next} \ensuremath{PC}\xspace values.
The only legal \ensuremath{PC}\xspace transition from currently outside of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace to next inside \ensuremath{ER}\xspace is via $PC=\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace$. Similarly, the only legal \ensuremath{PC}\xspace transition from currently inside \ensuremath{ER}\xspace to next outside \ensuremath{ER}\xspace
is via $PC=\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace$. All other cases trigger an MCU reset. In addition, LTL (\ref{eq:ephe_atom}) requires an MCU reset whenever interrupts or
DMA activity is detected during \ensuremath{ER}\xspace execution. This is done by simply checking \ensuremath{irq}\xspace and \ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace signals.
\new{
We note that \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace relies on the \ensuremath{\mathsf{Hardware Monitor}}\xspace to reset the MCU when violations to \ensuremath{ER}\xspace atomic execution are detected. Upon reset all data is erased from memory.
However, when execution of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace completes successfully {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace does not trigger resets. In this case, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is responsible for erasing its own stack before completion (reaching of $ER$ its last instruction).
We discuss how this self-clean-up routine can be implemented as a part of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace behavior in Appendix \ref{apdx:clean_up}.
}
\subsection{Encryption \& Integrity of \ensuremath{ER}\xspace Output} \label{subsec:enc_key}
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:overview}, after reading and processing \texttt{GPIO}\xspace inputs, {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace might need to encrypt and send the result to \ctrl. {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace supports encryption of this output, regardless of the underlying encryption scheme. For that purpose,
\verify implementation derives a fresh one-time encryption key (\ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace) from \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\xspace and {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Chal}}}\xspace.
To assure confidentiality of \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace, the following properties are required for the memory region (\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) reserved to store \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace:
\begin{compactenum}
\item \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace is writable only by \verify (i.e., $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{VR}\xspace$); and
\item \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace is readable only by \ensuremath{ER}\xspace after authorization.
\end{compactenum}
LTLs (\ref{eq:read_enckey1})-(\ref{eq:write_enckey}) and (\ref{eq:auth_noWrite3}) specify the confidentiality requirements of \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace.
In sum, these properties establish the same read access-control policy for \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace and \texttt{GPIO}\xspace regions.
Therefore, only authorized {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace is able to retrieve \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace.
\section{Verified Implementation \& Security Analysis} \label{sec:security_impl}
\subsection{Sub-module Implementation \& Verification} \label{subsec:submodule_imp_vrf}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace sub-modules are represented as FSMs and individually verified to hold for LTL properties from
Construction~\ref{cons:pps}. They are implemented in Verilog HDL as Mealy machines, i.e.,
their output is determined by both their current state and current inputs.
Each FSM has a single output: a local \ensuremath{reset}\xspace. {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace global output \ensuremath{reset}\xspace is given by the disjunction (logic $OR$)
of all local \ensuremath{reset}\xspace-s. For simplicity, instead of explicitly representing the output \ensuremath{reset}\xspace value for each state, we use
the following convention:
\begin{compactenum}
\item \ensuremath{reset}\xspace is $1$ whenever an FSM transitions to $RESET$ state;
\item \ensuremath{reset}\xspace remains $1$ while on $RESET$ state;
\item \ensuremath{reset}\xspace is $0$ otherwise.
\end{compactenum}
Note that all FSMs remain in $RESET$ state until $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = 0$ which indicates that
the MCU reset routine finished.
Fig.~\ref{fig:readprotection_gpio} illustrates the {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace sub-module that implements read-access control to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace and \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace (when applicable). It guarantees that such reads are only possible when they emanate from execution of authorized software {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace contained in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace. It also assures that no modifications to \ensuremath{ER}\xspace or \textit{METADATA}\xspace occur between authorization of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace and its subsequent execution. The Verilog implementation of this FSM is formally verified to adhere to LTLs (\ref{eq:read_gpio1})-(\ref{eq:auth_noWrite3}) and (\ref{eq:read_enckey1})-(\ref{eq:read_enckey2}). It has 3 states:
(1) $rLOCK$, when reads to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace (and possibly \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) are disallowed;
(2) $rUNLOCK$, when such reads are allowed to \ensuremath{ER}\xspace; and (3) $RESET$.
The initial state (after reset or boot) is $RESET$, and it switches to $rLOCK$ state when $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = 0$.
It switches to $rUNLOCK$ when $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace=\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$ (with no reads to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace and \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace), indicating that
\verify was successful. Note that $rUNLOCK$ transitions to $RESET$ when reads are attempted from outside
\ensuremath{ER}\xspace, thus preventing reads by any unauthorized software. Once \ensuremath{PC}\xspace reaches \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace, indicating that \ensuremath{ER}\xspace execution has finished, the FSM transitions back to $rLOCK$.
Also, any attempted modifications to \textit{METADATA}\xspace or \ensuremath{ER}\xspace in $rUNLOCK$ state bring the FSM back to $rLOCK$.
Note that $rUNLOCK$ is only reachable after authorization of $ER$, i.e., $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace=\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{images/read-protection-gpio-fsm.png}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\caption{\footnotesize Verified FSM for \texttt{GPIO}\xspace and \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace Read-Access Control (LTL (\ref{eq:read_gpio1})-(\ref{eq:auth_noWrite3})
\& LTL (\ref{eq:read_enckey1})-(\ref{eq:read_enckey2}))}
\label{fig:readprotection_gpio}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{images/write-protection-key-fsm.png}
\vspace{-0.7em}
\caption{\footnotesize Verified FSM for \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace Write-Access Control (LTL (\ref{eq:write_enckey}))}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\label{fig:writeprotection_ekr}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{images/atomic-ex-er-fsm.png}
\vspace{-1em}
\caption{\footnotesize \ensuremath{ER}\xspace Atomicity and Controlled Invocation FSM (LTL (\ref{eq:ephe_continv1})-(\ref{eq:ephe_atom}))}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\label{fig:atomicex_er}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{mdframed}
\footnotesize
\begin{definition} \label{def:e2e_1_atom} \underline{Atomic Sensing Operation Execution:} \scriptsize
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
&\quad \textbf{G} \{
~
(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \rightarrow [(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \land \neg \ensuremath{irq}\xspace \land \neg \ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace] ~\textbf{W}~ [(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace) \lor \ensuremath{reset}\xspace]
~ \} \\
&\land \quad
\textbf{G} \{
~
\neg\ensuremath{reset}\xspace \land \neg(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \land \textbf{X}(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \rightarrow \textbf{X}(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace) \lor \textbf{X}(\ensuremath{reset}\xspace)
~
\}
\end{split}
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def:e2e_2_sensing} \underline{Mandatory Sensing Operation Authorization:}
\scriptsize
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
& \textbf{G} \{~(Read\_Mem(\texttt{GPIO}\xspace) \land \neg \ensuremath{reset}\xspace) \rightarrow (\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace)~\} ~\land \\
&
\Big\{
(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace) \land
\big\{(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace) \rightarrow [\neg Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{ER}\xspace) \land \neg Write\_Mem(\textit{METADATA}\xspace) \land (Write\_Mem(\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace) \rightarrow (\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{VR}\xspace))]~\textbf{U}~(\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace) \big\} \\
& \Big\}
~\textbf{B}~ \big\{Read\_Mem(\texttt{GPIO}\xspace) \land \neg \ensuremath{reset}\xspace\big\}
\end{split}
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\end{mdframed}
\vspace{-2em}
\end{figure*}
The FSM in Figure~\ref{fig:writeprotection_ekr} enforces LTL (\ref{eq:write_enckey}) to protect \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace from
external writes. It has two states:
(1) $wUNLOCK$, when writes to \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace are allowed; and (2) $RESET$.
At boot/after reset ($PC=0$), this FSM transitions from $RESET$ to $wUNLOCK$. It transitions back to
$RESET$ state whenever writes to \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace are attempted, unless these writes come from \verify execution ($\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{VR}\xspace$).
Figure~\ref{fig:atomicex_er} shows the FSM verified to enforce \ensuremath{ER}\xspace atomicity and controlled invocation: LTLs (\ref{eq:ephe_continv1})-(\ref{eq:ephe_atom}). It has five states; $notER$ and $midER$ correspond to
\ensuremath{PC}\xspace being outside and within \ensuremath{ER}\xspace (not including \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace), respectively.
$firstER$ and $lastER$ are states in which \ensuremath{PC}\xspace points to \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace, respectively.
The only path from $notER$ to $midER$ is via $firstER$. Likewise, the only path from $midER$ to $notER$ is via
$lastER$. The FSM transitions to $RESET$ whenever \ensuremath{PC}\xspace transitions do not follow
aforementioned paths. It also transitions to $RESET$ (from any state other than $notER$) if $\ensuremath{irq}\xspace$ or $\ensuremath{DMA_{en}}\xspace$ signals are set.
\subsection{Sub-module Composition and {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace End-To-End Security}\label{subsec:composition_e2e}
To demonstrate security of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace according to Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}, our strategy is two-pronged:
\begin{compactenum}
\item[\bf A)] We show that LTL properties from Construction~\ref{cons:pps} are sufficient to imply that \texttt{GPIO}\xspace (and \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace)
is only readable by {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal S}}}\xspace and
any \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace operation that returns $\top$ (i.e., performs sensing) is executed atomically.
The former is formally specified in Definition~\ref{def:e2e_2_sensing}, and the latter in Definition~\ref{def:e2e_1_atom}. For this part, we write an LTL computer
proof using SPOT LTL proof assistant~\cite{spot}.
\item[\bf B)] We use a cryptographic reduction to show that, as long as item \textbf{A} holds, {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace security
can be reduced to {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace security according to Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}.
\end{compactenum}
The intuition for this strategy is that, to win {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-game in Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}, \adv must either break the atomicity of
\ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace (which is in direct conflict with Definition~\ref{def:e2e_1_atom}) or execute \ensuremath{\mathsf{ExecSensing}}\xspace with unauthorized
software and read \texttt{GPIO}\xspace without causing an MCU \ensuremath{reset}\xspace. Definition~\ref{def:e2e_2_sensing} guarantees that the
latter is not possible without a prior successful call to \verify. On the other hand, \verify is implemented using {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace
verified architecture, which guarantees the unforgeability of {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace. Hence, breaking {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace requires either violating
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace verified guarantees or breaking {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace verified guarantees, which should be infeasible to any PPT \adv.
Appendix~\ref{apdx:proofs} includes proofs for Theorems~\ref{thm:atom_ER},~\ref{thm:readGPIO}, and~\ref{thm:reduction},
in accordance to this proof strategy. The rest of this section focuses on {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace end-to-end implementation goals captured by
LTLs in Definitions~\ref{def:e2e_1_atom} and~\ref{def:e2e_2_sensing} as well as their relation to {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace
high-level features discussed in Section~\ref{sec:overview}.
\begin{mdframed}
\footnotesize
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:atom_ER}
Definition \ref{def:hw_model} $\land$ LTL \ref{eq:ephe_continv1}, \ref{eq:ephe_continv2}, \ref{eq:ephe_atom} $\rightarrow$ Definition \ref{def:e2e_1_atom}
\end{theorem}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:readGPIO}
Definition \ref{def:hw_model} $\land$ LTL \ref{eq:read_gpio1}, \ref{eq:read_gpio2}, \ref{eq:auth_noWrite1}, \ref{eq:auth_noWrite2}, \ref{eq:ephe_continv2}, \ref{eq:write_enckey} $\rightarrow$ Definition \ref{def:e2e_2_sensing}
\end{theorem}
\vspace{-1em}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:reduction}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace is secure according to the {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace-game in Definition~\ref{def:pfb_sec_def}, as long as {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace is a secure {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace architecture according to {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace security game from \cite{vrasedp}
\end{theorem}
\end{mdframed}
\vspace{1mm} \noindent\emph{\textbf{[Definition~\ref{def:e2e_1_atom}]}} states that it {\bf globally} (always) holds
that \ensuremath{ER}\xspace is atomically executed with controlled invocation.
That is, whenever an instruction in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace executes ($\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace$), it keeps executing instructions within \ensuremath{ER}\xspace ($\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace$),
with no interrupts and no DMA enabled, {\bf until} \ensuremath{PC}\xspace reaches the last instruction in \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{max}}\xspace or an MCU reset occurs. Also, if an instruction in \ensuremath{ER}\xspace starts to execute, it always begins with the first instruction in $\ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace$.
This formally specifies the \textit{Atomic Sensing Operation Execution} feature discussed in Section~\ref{sec:overview}.
\vspace{1mm} \noindent\emph{\textbf{[Definition~\ref{def:e2e_2_sensing}]}} {\bf globally} requires that whenever \texttt{GPIO}\xspace is successfully read
(i.e., without a \ensuremath{reset}\xspace), this read must come from the CPU while $ER$ is being executed.
In addition, {\bf before} this read operation, the
following must have happened at least once:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[(1)] \verify succeeded (i.e., $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$);
\item[(2)] From the time when $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$ {\bf until} \ensuremath{ER}\xspace starts executing (i.e., $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace$), no modification to
\ensuremath{ER}\xspace and \textit{METADATA}\xspace occurred; and
\item[(3)] If there was any write to \ensuremath{eKR}\xspace from the time when $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\sf{i}}}\xspace_{Auth}}\xspace$, {\bf until} $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace = \ensuremath{\ensuremath{ER}\xspace_{min}}\xspace$, it
must have been from \verify, i.e., while $\ensuremath{PC}\xspace \in \ensuremath{VR}\xspace$.
\end{compactitem}
This formally specifies the intended behavior of the \emph{Mandatory Sensing Operation Authorization} feature,
discussed in Section~\ref{sec:overview}.
\section{Evaluation \& Discussion} \label{sec:evaluation}
In this section, we discuss {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace implementation details and evaluation. {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace source code and verification/proofs are publicly available at \cite{pfb-repo}.
Evaluation of verification costs and discussion of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace limitations are deferred to Appendix \ref{apdx:eval}.
\subsection{Toolchain \& Prototype Details}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace is built atop OpenMSP430 \cite{openmsp430}: an open source implementation of TI-MSP430 \cite{TI-MSP430}.
We use Xilinx Vivado to synthesize an
RTL description of \ensuremath{\mathsf{Hardware Monitor}}\xspace and deploy it on Diligent Basys3 prototyping board for Artix7 FPGA. For the software part
(mostly to implement \verify), {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace extends {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace software (which computes $HMAC$ over {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace memory) to include
a comparison with the received {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace (See Section~\ref{subsec:runtime_overhead} for extension details).
We use the
NuSMV model checker to formally verify that \ensuremath{\mathsf{Hardware Monitor}}\xspace implementation adheres to LTL specifications (\ref{eq:read_gpio1})-(\ref{eq:write_enckey}). See Appendix~\ref{apdx:eval} for details on the verification setup and costs.
\subsection{Hardware Overhead}
Table~\ref{tab:overhead_results} reports on {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace hardware overhead, as compared to unmodified OpenMSP430 and {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace.
Similar to other schemes~\cite{vrasedp,apex,sancus,smart}, we consider hardware overhead in terms of additional
Look-Up Tables (LUTs) and registers. Extra hardware in terms of LUTs gives an estimate of additional chip cost and size
required for combinatorial logic, while extra hardware in terms of registers gives an estimate of memory overhead required by
sequential logic in {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace FSMs. Compared to {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace requires 10\% additional LUTs and 2\% additional registers.
In actual numbers, it adds 255 LUTs and 50 registers to the underlying MCU as shown in Table~\ref{tab:overhead_results}.
\begin{table}[!htp]
\footnotesize
\centering
\vspace{-1em}
\caption{\footnotesize \small Hardware Overhead and Verification cost}
\vspace{-0.8em}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|cc|c|cccc|} \hline\cline{1-8}
\multirow{2}{*}{Architecture} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Hardware} & Reserved &\multicolumn{4}{c|}{Verification} \\
& LUTs & Regs & RAM~(bytes) & LoC & \#(LTLs) &Time~(s) & RAM~(MB) \\ \hline
OpenMSP430 & 1854 & 692 & 0 & - & - & - & - \\
{{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace & 1891 & 724 & 2332 & 481 & 10 & 0.4 & 13.6 \\
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace + {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace & 2109 & 742 & 2336 & 1118 & 21 & 13956.4 & 1059.1 \\
\hline\cline{1-8}
\end{tabular}%
}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\label{tab:overhead_results}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[Additional HW overhead (\%) in Number of Look-Up Tables]
{\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{images/graphics_python/lut_comparison.pdf}}
\subfigure[Additional HW overhead (\%) in Number of Registers]
{\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{images/graphics_python/reg_comparison.pdf}}
\vspace{-1.4em}
\caption{\footnotesize Hardware overhead comparisons with other low-end security architectures.}
\label{fig:comparison}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Runtime Overhead} \label{subsec:runtime_overhead}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\columnwidth]{images/graphics_python/runtime_overhead.pdf}
\vspace{-1.4em}
\caption{\footnotesize Runtime overhead of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace due to \verify} \label{fig:runtime_overhead}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace requires any software piece seeking to access \texttt{GPIO}\xspace (and \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace) to be verified. Consequently, runtime overhead is due to \verify computation which instantiates {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace. This runtime includes: {(\bf1)} time to compute
$\sigma$ from equation \ref{eq:verify_sigma}; {(\bf2)} time to check if $\sigma = {\small \texttt{ATok}}\xspace$; and {(\bf3)} time to write \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace to
\ensuremath{eKR}\xspace, when applicable. Naturally the runtime overhead is dominated by the computation in {\bf (1)} which is proportional to the size of $ER$.
We measure \verify cost on three sample applications: (1) Simple Application, which reads 32-bytes of
\texttt{GPIO}\xspace input and encrypts it using One-Time-Pad (OTP) with \ensuremath{\mathcal K_{enc}}\xspace; (2) Motion Sensor -- available at~\cite{code1} --
which continuously reads \texttt{GPIO}\xspace input to detect movements and actuates a light source when movement is detected; and
(3) Temperature Sensor -- adapted code from~\cite{code2} to support encryption of its outputs --
which reads ambient temperature via \texttt{GPIO}\xspace and encrypts this reading using OTP.
We prototype using OTP for encryption for the sake of simplicity noting that {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace does not mandate a particular encryption scheme.
All of these sample applications also include a self-clean-up code executed immediately before reaching their exit point to erase their stack traces once their execution is over.
Figure \ref{fig:runtime_overhead} shows \verify runtimes on these applications. Assuming a clock frequency of 10MHz (a common frequency for low-end MCUs), \verify runtime ranges from $100-200$ milliseconds for these applications. The overhead is linear on the binary size.
\subsection{Comparison with Other Low-End Architectures:}
To the best of our knowledge, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace is the first architecture related to {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
However, to provide a point of reference in terms of performance and overhead, we compare {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace with other low-end
trusted hardware architectures, such as SMART~\cite{smart}, VRASED~\cite{vrasedp}, APEX~\cite{apex}, and
SANCUS~\cite{sancus}. All these architectures provide {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace-related services to attest integrity of software
on {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace either statically or at runtime. Since {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace also checks software integrity before granting access to \texttt{GPIO}\xspace, we consider these architectures to be related to {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace.
Figure \ref{fig:comparison} compares {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace hardware overhead with the aforementioned architectures in terms of additional LUTs and registers. Percentages are relative to the plain MSP430 core total cost.
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace builds on top of {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace. As such, it is naturally more expensive than hybrid {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace architectures such as SMART and {{\sf\it VRASED}}\xspace.
Similar to {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace, APEX also monitors execution properties and also builds on top of {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace (in APEX case, with the goal of producing proofs of remote software execution). Therefore, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace and APEX exhibit similar overheads. SANCUS presents a higher cost because it implements {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace and isolation features in hardware.
\section{Related Work} \label{sec:rw}
There is a considerable body of work (overviewed in Section~\ref{sec:intro}) on IoT/CPS privacy. However,
to the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first effort specifically targeting {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace, i.e., sensor data privacy on potentially compromised MCUs.
Nonetheless, prior work has proposed trusted hardware/software
co-designs -- such as {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace~-- offering other security services. We overview them in this section.
Trusted components, commonly referred to as Roots of Trust (RoTs), are categorized as software-based,
hardware-based, or hybrid (i.e., based on hardware/software co-designs).
Their usual purpose is to verify software integrity on a given device.
Software-based RoTs~\cite{KeJa03,seshadri2004swatt,SLS+05,SLP08,GGR09,LMP11,gligor} usually do not rely on any hardware modifications.
However, they are insecure against compromises to the entire software state of a device (e.g., in cases where \adv can physically re-program {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace).
In addition, their inability to securely store cryptographic secrets imposes reliance on strong assumptions about precise timing and
constant communication delays to enable device authentication. These assumptions can be unrealistic in the IoT ecosystem.
Nonetheless, software-based RoTs are the only viable choice for legacy devices that have no security-relevant hardware support.
Hardware-based methods~\cite{PFM+04,TPM,KKWHAB2012,SCHELLEKENS200813,flicker,MQY10,sancus} rely on security
provided by dedicated hardware components (e.g., TPM~\cite{TPM} or ARM TrustZone~\cite{trustzone}). However,
the cost of such hardware is normally prohibitive for low-end MCUs. Hybrid RoTs~\cite{smart,apex,vrasedp,tytan,trustlite}
aim to achieve security equivalent to hardware-based mechanisms, yet with lower hardware costs.
They leverage minimal hardware support while relying on software to reduce additional hardware complexity.
\new{Other architectures, such as SANCTUM \cite{sanctum} and Notary \cite{notary}, provide strong
memory isolation and peripheral isolation guarantees, respectively.
These guarantees are achieved via hardware support or external hardware agents.
They are also hybrid architectures where trusted hardware works in tandem with trusted software.
However, we note that such schemes are designed for application computers that support MMUs and are therefore unsuitable for simple MCUs.}
In terms of functionality, such embedded RoTs focus on integrity. Upon receiving a request from an external trusted {\it Verifier},
they can generate unforgeable proofs for the state of the MCU or that certain actions were performed by the MCU.
Security services implemented by them include: (1) memory integrity verification, i.e., remote attestation
~\cite{smart,sancus,vrasedp,simple,tytan,trustlite};
(2) verification of runtime properties, including control-flow and data-flow attestation
~\cite{apex,litehax,cflat,lofat,atrium,oat,tinycfa,dialed,geden2019hardware};
and (3) proofs of remote software updates, memory erasure, and system-wide resets~\cite{pure,verify_and_revive,asokan2018assured}.
As briefly mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:intro},
due to their reactive nature,
they can be used to \emph{detect} whether {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal Dev}}}\xspace has been compromised \emph{after the fact},
but \emph{cannot prevent} the compromised entity from exfiltrating private sensor data. {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace, on the other hand,
enforces mandatory authorization before any sensor data access and thus prevents leakage even when a compromise has already happened.
Formalization and formal verification of RoTs for MCUs have gained attention due
to the benefits discussed in Sections~\ref{sec:intro} and~\ref{sec:BG}. VRASED~\cite{vrasedp}
implemented a verified hybrid {\ensuremath{\sf{\mathcal RA}}}\xspace scheme. APEX~\cite{apex} built atop
VRASED to implement and formally verify an architecture for proofs of remote execution of
attested software. PURE~\cite{pure} implemented provably secure services for software update, memory erasure, and system-wide reset. Another recent result~\cite{busi2020provably}
formalized and proved the security of a hardware-assisted mechanism to prevent leakage of secrets through timing side-channels due to MCU interrupts. Inline with
the aforementioned work, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace also formalizes its assumptions along with its goals and implements the
first formally verified design assuring {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
\vspace*{-0.2em}
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
We formulated the notion of {\texttt{Privacy-from-Birth}}\xspace ({\texttt{PfB}}\xspace) and proposed {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace: a formally verified architecture realizing {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace.
{\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace ensures that only duly authorized software can access sensed data even if the entire software state of the sensor
is compromised. To attain this, {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace enhances the underlying MCU with a small hardware monitor, which is shown sufficient
to achieve {\texttt{PfB}}\xspace. The experimental evaluation of {\texttt{VERSA}}\xspace publicly available prototype~\cite{pfb-repo} demonstrates
its affordability on a typical low-end IoT MCU: TI MSP430.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors sincerely thank S\&P'22 reviewers. This work was supported by funding
from NSF Awards SATC-1956393 and CICI-1840197, as well as a subcontract from Peraton Labs.
Part of this work was conducted while the first author was at the University of California, Irvine.
\bibliographystyle{./IEEEtran}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 5,140 |
{"url":"http:\/\/tex.stackexchange.com\/questions\/157113\/savebox-in-page-header-with-redefinable-commands","text":"# \\savebox in page header with redefinable commands\n\nI'm making a document class with some redefinable commands for page headers. However, I'm running into the following issue:\n\n\\documentclass{article}\n\\usepackage{fancyhdr}\n\n% In custom document class\n\n\\fancypagestyle{mystyle}{\n\\fancyhf{}\n\\newsavebox\\mybox\n\\sbox\\mybox{\\foo}\n}\n\\pagestyle{mystyle}\n\n% In user tex file\n\n\\begin{document}\nPage 1\n\\newpage\nPage 2\n\\end{document}\n\n\nThis produces\n\nHow can I allow the user to redefine these commands, but still use \\sbox so I can use \\wd inside the page header for positioning purposes?\n\n-\nBe careful that fancyhdr wants the header height to be the same across the document; if it finds \\headheight is not sufficient to contain the header, it changes it from the next page, which could lead to various problems. \u2013\u00a0egreg Feb 2 '14 at 12:01\n@egreg Thanks for the tip. Where is this documented? What should one do if differently-sized headers are desirable? \u2013\u00a0jtbandes Feb 2 '14 at 18:36\nYou should fix a head height that suffices for the tallest header. \u2013\u00a0egreg Feb 2 '14 at 18:51\n\nYou can proceed in this way.\n\n\u2022 First of all, declare the new box outside the command \\fancypagestyle\n\u2022 When you want to change the header, issue both the commands\n\n\\renewcommand{\\foo}{new header}\n\\pagestyle{mystyle}\n\n\nMWE:\n\n\\documentclass{article}\n\\usepackage{fancyhdr}\n\n% In custom document class\n\n\\newsavebox\\mybox % declare it outside\n\n\\fancypagestyle{mystyle}{\n\\fancyhf{}\n\\sbox\\mybox{\\foo}\n}\n\\pagestyle{mystyle}\n\n\\begin{document}\nPage 1\n\\newpage\n\\pagestyle{mystyle}\nPage 2\n\\end{document}\n\n\nOutput:\n\nSince it is supposed to go in a document class, I suggest you to define a new command \\newheader and use it in this way:\n\n\\documentclass{article}\n\\usepackage{fancyhdr}\n\n% In custom document class\n\\newcommand{\\foo}{}\n\\renewcommand{\\foo}{#1}%\n\\pagestyle{mystyle}%\n}\n\n\\newsavebox\\mybox % declare it outside\n\n\\fancypagestyle{mystyle}{\n\\fancyhf{}\n\\sbox\\mybox{\\foo}","date":"2016-02-10 03:17:04","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.887747585773468, \"perplexity\": 3829.7291868951334}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2016-07\/segments\/1454701158601.61\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20160205193918-00097-ip-10-236-182-209.ec2.internal.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/internal/reference/integer_ops/logistic.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/c/builtin_op_data.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/c/common.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/internal/common.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/internal/quantization_util.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/internal/reference/logistic.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/internal/tensor_ctypes.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/kernel_util.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/kernels/op_macros.h"
#include "tensorflow/lite/micro/kernels/xtensa_hifi/xtensa_tf_micro_common.h"
namespace tflite {
namespace ops {
namespace micro {
namespace activations {
namespace {
constexpr int kInputTensor = 0;
constexpr int kOutputTensor = 0;
struct OpData {
int32_t input_zero_point;
int32_t input_range_radius;
int32_t input_multiplier;
int input_left_shift;
};
TfLiteStatus CalculateArithmeticOpData(TfLiteContext* context, TfLiteNode* node,
OpData* data) {
const TfLiteTensor* input = GetInput(context, node, kInputTensor);
TfLiteTensor* output = GetOutput(context, node, kOutputTensor);
TF_LITE_ENSURE_EQ(context, input->type, output->type);
if (input->type == kTfLiteInt8) {
TF_LITE_ENSURE_EQ(context, output->params.zero_point,
std::numeric_limits<int8_t>::min());
static constexpr int kInputIntegerBits = 4;
const double input_real_multiplier =
static_cast<double>(input->params.scale) *
static_cast<double>(1 << (31 - kInputIntegerBits));
const double q = std::frexp(input_real_multiplier, &data->input_left_shift);
data->input_multiplier = static_cast<int32_t>(TfLiteRound(q * (1ll << 31)));
data->input_range_radius =
CalculateInputRadius(kInputIntegerBits, data->input_left_shift, 31);
}
return kTfLiteOk;
}
} // namespace
TfLiteStatus LogisticEval(TfLiteContext* context, TfLiteNode* node) {
const TfLiteTensor* input = GetInput(context, node, kInputTensor);
TfLiteTensor* output = GetOutput(context, node, kOutputTensor);
OpData data;
CalculateArithmeticOpData(context, node, &data);
if (input->type == kTfLiteFloat32) {
switch (output->type) {
case kTfLiteFloat32: {
#if HIFI_VFPU
int err;
const float* inp_data_ptr;
float* out_data_ptr;
const RuntimeShape& input_shape = GetTensorShape(input);
const RuntimeShape& output_shape = GetTensorShape(output);
const int flat_size = MatchingFlatSize(input_shape, output_shape);
inp_data_ptr = GetTensorData<float>(input);
out_data_ptr = GetTensorData<float>(output);
err = xa_nn_vec_sigmoid_f32_f32(out_data_ptr, inp_data_ptr, flat_size);
CHECK_ERR_HIFI_NNLIB_KER(err, "xa_nn_vec_sigmoid_f32_f32 failed");
#else
reference_ops::Logistic(
GetTensorShape(input), GetTensorData<float>(input),
GetTensorShape(output), GetTensorData<float>(output));
#endif /* HIFI_VFPU */
return kTfLiteOk;
}
default:
TF_LITE_KERNEL_LOG(context, "Input %s, output %s not supported.",
TfLiteTypeGetName(input->type),
TfLiteTypeGetName(output->type));
return kTfLiteError;
}
} else if (input->type == kTfLiteInt8) {
switch (output->type) {
case kTfLiteInt8: {
reference_integer_ops::Logistic(
input->params.zero_point, data.input_range_radius,
data.input_multiplier, data.input_left_shift,
NumElements(input->dims), GetTensorData<int8_t>(input),
GetTensorData<int8_t>(output));
return kTfLiteOk;
}
default:
TF_LITE_KERNEL_LOG(context, "Input %s, output %s not supported.",
TfLiteTypeGetName(input->type),
TfLiteTypeGetName(output->type));
return kTfLiteError;
}
} else {
// TODO(b/141211002): Also support other data types once we have supported
// temporary tensors in TFLM.
TF_LITE_KERNEL_LOG(context, "Input %s, output %s not supported.",
TfLiteTypeGetName(input->type),
TfLiteTypeGetName(output->type));
return kTfLiteError;
}
return kTfLiteOk;
}
} // namespace activations
TfLiteRegistration Register_LOGISTIC() {
return {/*init=*/nullptr,
/*free=*/nullptr,
/*prepare=*/nullptr,
/*invoke=*/activations::LogisticEval,
/*profiling_string=*/nullptr,
/*builtin_code=*/0,
/*custom_name=*/nullptr,
/*version=*/0};
}
} // namespace micro
} // namespace ops
} // namespace tflite
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 7,978 |
Home Afghanistan The Syrian War: America's "War on Terror" Exposed/By Tony Cartalucci/Global Research, December...
Foreign Minister Walid Muallem
War on Syria
The Syrian War: America's "War on Terror" Exposed/By Tony Cartalucci/Global Research, December 31, 2019
Syria's Foreign Minister Walid Muallem recently described the US as using the so-called "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" (ISIS) as "a scarecrow" the US uses to menace targeted nations all while secretly encouraging, protecting, and helping them "move from one area to another."
Maullum's comments perfectly encapsulate the twenty-plus year so-called "War on Terror" the US has used to expand itself across the globe militarily and to serve as a stand-in for legitimate economic and political development both within the United States and between the United States and the international community.
Maullum's comments come at a time when – despite Washington's collapsing machinations in Syria – the US is still working to undermine, divide, and destroy the Syrian nation by aiding its enemies while using all political, economic, and military options available to pressure Syria itself.
Muallem was also quoted as saying:
All nations that were victimized by this system need to join forces and resist those sanctions.
In many ways, this is already happening. Russia's intervention in Syria from 2015 onward is part of growing international momentum working against US special interests, their collective hegemony, and the toxic impact it has had not only on international relations and development, but also on the US itself.
From Convincing Pretext to Obvious State-Sponsored Terrorism
Following the events of September 11, 2001 the United States embarked on a multi-decade "War on Terror." Its invasion of Afghanistan was seen and supported by many nations and their respective populations as a necessary and justified means of combating the scourge that allegedly carried out the deadly attacks on 9/11.
By 2003 – after a time of reflection and in the face of an America eager to spread its "War on Terror" across the globe – it became clear that this "War on Terror" was merely a stand-in to continue America's hegemonic designs pursued during the now concluded Cold War. This included a pretext for NATO's continued existence and the alliance's use by Washington as a means of exerting control over Europe as well as using Europe, its people, and resources to exert influence and control across Africa and Eurasia.
READ MORE: Conflict in Syria Far From Resolved. US Bombings Targeting Raqqa Residential Areas. 78 Civilians Killed in Last 24 Hours.
By 2011 and the US interventions in Libya and Syria – it was abundantly clear that not only was the "War on Terror" a false pretext, but it was one artificially created and deliberately perpetuated by Washington itself.
This included revelations that the US had been arming and directing the very Al Qaeda terror network and its affiliates allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks – using them as a virtual mercenary force to target nations the US sought regime change within.
The so-called "rebels" in Libya were little more than Al Qaeda affiliates – poorly dressed as freedom fighters seeking "democracy." These same literal terrorists the US armed and aided in overthrowing the Libyan government in 2011 would be shipped to Syria where the US sought to replicate its "success" in Libya against Damascus.
The war in Syria however failed to produce Washington's desired results – and as the conflict dragged on – through the growth and influence of alternative media – the true nature of America's "War on Terror" emerged.
It is now common knowledge that the United States and its Saudi, Turkish, and Qatari allies deliberately armed Al Qaeda militants and their affiliates in a bid to destabilize and overthrow the Syrian government. It is now also common knowledge that when this bid failed – the US and its allies created ISIS to serve as both an additional pressure point against Damascus as well as a pretext for direct US military intervention.
Today, the US "War on Terror" exists as a mostly empty narrative long-since exposed. Washington's continued efforts against Syria have resulted in even its own allies during the early stages of the war abandoning them – including Turkey – a key NATO member – which now is working closer with Russia and increasingly pursuing a foreign policy independently of Washington.
What Lies in the Future
For Washington – a lack of of a better alternative and its insistence on doubling down on a now exposed and impotent narrative reveals to the world a circle of special interests that are desperately and dangerously spiraling out of control.
Nations eager to do business with the United States as a nation are increasingly frustrated by the handful of special interests occupying Wall Street and Washington – preferring to create an alternative global order that either excludes the US or at the very least – leaves it behind as the rest of the world moves on without it.
For nations like Syria – their decision to stand by their allies – including Russia and Iran – has paid off. And because it has – other nations facing similar threats from Washington's belligerent foreign policy are faced with the easy choice of likewise building ties with reemerging powers like Russia or rising powers like China rather than continuing to capitulate to US pressure.
Growing global momentum means that not only will current US foreign policy continue to fail to produce positive results for the interests directing it – it will fail at an increasingly expotential rate.
For nations like Russia and China who serve as alternative focal points of global power – their success owed to a different forumla of creating and brokering a global balance of power should serve as encouragement to continue in a multipolar direction rather than cave in to the temptation of seizing a hegemonic position as the US did both after the conclusion of World War 2 and again at the end of the Cold War.
The world finds itself at yet another critical juncture where the very face of global relations and international order stand to be redefined. This time it is not Washington who gets to decide – but rather those who have long suffered under US hegemony.
Only time will tell if this alternative global order will learn from America's mistakes – or merely repeat them.
The collapse of America's "War on Terror" is a microcosm within the greater collapse of American global hegemony in general. It is a collapse that will cost the US as a nation dearly. It should serve as a stark warning and example driving emerging global powers to learn from America's mistakes rather than repeat them.
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Tony Cartalucci is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine"New Eastern Outlook" where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from NEO
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Tony Cartalucci, Global Research, 2019
Previous articleColonial Media al Qaeda supporters versus Eva Bartlett and the evidence-based Truth
Next articleMichele Greenstein and the West's willful, on-going support for ISIS, al Qaeda, and ALL of the terrorists in Syria
After Kazakhstan, the Color Revolution Era Is Over/ By Pepe Escobar
Al-Tanf
Terrorism in Syria persists from safe havens provided by the USA, Turkey and Israel/ By Prof Anderson
Voices from Syria: Adra Massacre, December 2013
US Syria Plots
SYRIA: NATO's Next "Humanitarian" War?/ By Prof. Chossudovsky/ i- book, Feb....
Louisiana Nurse Blows the Whistle: "We Have Had More Children Die...
Kudos to those who tell the Truth for Peace and Justice....
Was America Attacked by Afghanistan on September 11, 2001?/ By Prof...
Interview 'How Jimmy Carter and I Started the Mujahideen ' Interview... | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 4,004 |
Der Barrenstreit (1860-1863) war eine in Preußen ausgetragene Auseinandersetzung um die Zielrichtung des Turnens, dessen Folgen in der Stellung der Gesundheitserziehung in der Schule und der Ausbildung in Physiotherapie in Deutschland bis heute wirksam sind.
Verlauf des Barrenstreits
Im Oktober 1860 trat Carl Euler seine Stelle als Turnlehrer in der Königl. Preußischen Central Turnanstalt (mit einem militärischen und einem zivilen Zweig) an und forderte die Wiedereinführung von Barren und Reck, die der Leiter der Einrichtung, Hugo Rothstein abgeschafft hatte, um das System der Schwedischen Gymnastik durchzusetzen. Die Schwedische Gymnastik galt einerseits als gesundheitsorientiert, rational und optimal für eine gute Körperhaltung (auch für die Frau), andererseits eigneten sich die Massenübungen besonders zum militärischen Drill.
Das Unterrichtsministerium suchte fachkundigen Beistand und ließ zwei ärztliche Gutachten bei dem königlichen Leibarzt Christian Wilhelm Ludwig Abel und dem Geheimrat Bernhard von Langenbeck, ärztlicher Direktor des königlichen Klinikums in Berlin, fertigen. Beide sprachen sich im Prinzip gegen den Barren aus. Diese Gutachten veranlassten den Physiologen Emil Du Bois-Reymond und Mitglied der Königlich-Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, zu einer scharfen Entgegnung. Schließlich landete der Fall im Preußischen Abgeordnetenhaus und auch Rudolf Virchow wurde noch zu einem Gutachten bewegt. Auch er sprach sich für das Deutsche Turnen und gegen die Schwedische Gymnastik aus. In der Folge trat Hugo Rothstein als Leiter der Central Turnanstalt zurück.
Langfristige Folgen
Die schulischen Leibesübungen (Turnunterricht) wurden in Deutschland mit dem Schwerpunkt auf das Deutsche Turnen betrieben. Der Schwerpunkt lag damit auf Charakterstärke und Gesinnung. Die Ausbildung an den Universitäten wurde damit den Philosophischen Fakultäten übertragen, da z. B. der Geschichtsunterricht auch der Gesinnungsbildung dienen sollte. Die Ausbildung in Physiotherapie (Krankengymnastik) kam an die Medizinischen Fakultäten. Im nahen Belgien, in dem ebenfalls eine Art Barrenstreit – aber mit anderem Ausgang – ausgetragen wurde, haben die Medizinischen Fakultäten sowohl die Sportlehrer als auch die Physiotherapeuten ausgebildet.
Erst durch den Einfluss der USA ist in Deutschland die Gesundheitserziehung wieder in den Sportunterricht integriert worden und auch die Physiotherapie hat sich im Zuge des Bologna-Prozesses in Deutschland akademisiert.
Einzelnachweise
1860er
Sport (Preußen)
Militärgeschichte (Preußen)
Turnen (Deutschland)
Kontroverse
Schulgeschichte (Deutschland)
Sportgeschichte (Deutschland) | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,455 |
{"url":"https:\/\/calculator.academy\/cc-rev-to-gpm-calculator\/","text":"Enter the total cc\/rev and the total rotational speed (RPM) into the GPM from CC\/REV Calculator. The calculator will evaluate the GPM from CC\/REV.\n\nGPM from CC\/REV Formula\n\nThe following two example problems outline the steps and information needed to calculate the GPM from CC\/REV.\n\nGPM = CC\/REV \/ 3785 * RPM\n\nVariables:\n\n\u2022 GPM is the GPM from CC\/REV (gallons per minute)\n\u2022 CC\/REV is the total cc\/rev\n\u2022 RPM is the total rotational speed (RPM)\n\nTo calculate GPM from CC\/rev, divide the cc\/rev by 3785 then multiply by the RPM.\n\nHow to Calculate GPM from CC\/REV?\n\nThe following steps outline how to calculate the GPM from CC\/REV.\n\n1. First, determine the total cc\/rev.\n2. Next, determine the total rotational speed (RPM).\n3. Next, gather the formula from above = GPM = CC\/REV \/ 3785 * RPM.\n4. Finally, calculate the GPM from CC\/REV.\n5. After inserting the variables and calculating the result, check your answer with the calculator above.\n\nExample Problem :\n\nUse the following variables as an example problem to test your knowledge.\n\ntotal cc\/rev = 5\n\ntotal rotational speed (RPM) = 1500\n\nGPM = CC\/REV \/ 3785 * RPM = ?","date":"2022-11-30 03:03:03","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.6765106916427612, \"perplexity\": 5833.864445252463}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": false, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2022-49\/segments\/1669446710719.4\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20221130024541-20221130054541-00618.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
### General Editor
Philip W. Comfort
_D. Litt. et Phil., University of South Africa;_
_Tyndale House Publishers; Coastal Carolina University._
### Consulting Editor, Old Testament
Tremper Longman III
_PhD, Yale University; Robert H. Gundry Professor of Biblical Studies, Westmont College._
### Consulting Editor, New Testament
Grant Osborne
_PhD, University of Aberdeen; Professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School._
### Associate Editors
Jason Driesbach
_MA, Biblical Exegesis and Linguistics, Dallas Theological Seminary; Tyndale House Publishers._
Mark R. Norton
_MA, Theological Studies, Wheaton Graduate School; Tyndale House Publishers._
James A. Swanson
_MSM, Multnomah Biblical Seminary; MTh, University of South Africa; Tyndale House Publishers._
Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, Volume 11
Visit Tyndale online at www.tyndale.com.
_Matthew_ copyright © 2005 by David L. Turner. All rights reserved.
_Mark_ copyright © 2005 by Darrell L. Bock. All rights reserved.
Designed by Luke Daab and Timothy R. Botts.
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the _Holy Bible,_ New Living Translation, copyright © 1996, 2004, 2007, 2013 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.
_TYNDALE, New Living Translation, NLT,_ Tyndale's quill logo, and the New Living Translation logo are registered trademarks of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
**Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data**
Cornerstone biblical commentary. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8423-3437-2 (hc : alk. paper) 1. Bible—Commentaries. I. Turner, David L. II. Bock, Darrell L.
BS491.3.C67 2006
220.7´7—dc22 2005026928
ISBN 978-1-4143-9876-1 (ePub); ISBN 978-1-4143-9875-4 (Kindle); ISBN 978-1-4143-9877-8 (Apple)
Build: 2015-10-05 16:24:24
# CONTENTS
1. Contributors
2. How to Navigate the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary
3. Contributors to Volume 11
4. General Editor's Preface
5. Abbreviations
6. Transliteration and Numbering System
7. Introduction to Matthew
8. Matt 1:1
9. Matt 1:2-17
10. Matt 1:18-25
11. Matt 2:1-12
12. Matt 2:13-23
13. Matt 3:1-12
14. Matt 3:13-17
15. Matt 4:1-11
16. Matt 4:12-25
17. Matt 5:1-10
18. Matt 5:11-16
19. Matt 5:17-20
20. Matt 5:21-32
21. Matt 5:33-48
22. Matt 6:1-18
23. Matt 6:19-34
24. Matt 7:1-6
25. Matt 7:7-11
26. Matt 7:12
27. Matt 7:13-27
28. Matt 7:28-29
29. Matt 8:1-17
30. Matt 8:18-22
31. Matt 8:23-27
32. Matt 8:28-34
33. Matt 9:1-8
34. Matt 9:9-13
35. Matt 9:14-17
36. Matt 9:18-26
37. Matt 9:27-34
38. Matt 9:35-38
39. Matt 10:1-4
40. Matt 10:5-15
41. Matt 10:16-23
42. Matt 10:24-33
43. Matt 10:34-42
44. Matt 11:1-6
45. Matt 11:7-19
46. Matt 11:20-24
47. Matt 11:25-30
48. Matt 12:1-8
49. Matt 12:9-14
50. Matt 12:15-21
51. Matt 12:22-37
52. Matt 12:38-45
53. Matt 12:46-50
54. Matt 13:1-9
55. Matt 13:10-17
56. Matt 13:18-23
57. Matt 13:24-33
58. Matt 13:34-35
59. Matt 13:36-43
60. Matt 13:44-50
61. Matt 13:51-52
62. Matt 13:53-58
63. Matt 14:1-12
64. Matt 14:13-21
65. Matt 14:22-36
66. Matt 15:1-20
67. Matt 15:21-28
68. Matt 15:29-39
69. Matt 16:1-4
70. Matt 16:5-12
71. Matt 16:13-20
72. Matt 16:21-28
73. Matt 17:1-13
74. Matt 17:14-21
75. Matt 17:22-27
76. Matt 18:1-14
77. Matt 18:15-20
78. Matt 18:21-35
79. Matt 19:1-15
80. Matt 19:16-30
81. Matt 20:1-16
82. Matt 20:17-28
83. Matt 20:29-34
84. Matt 21:1-11
85. Matt 21:12-17
86. Matt 21:18-22
87. Matt 21:23-32
88. Matt 21:33-46
89. Matt 22:1-14
90. Matt 22:15-22
91. Matt 22:23-33
92. Matt 22:34-40
93. Matt 22:41-46
94. Matt 23:1-12
95. Matt 23:13-36
96. Matt 23:37-39
97. Matt 24:1-14
98. Matt 24:15-28
99. Matt 24:29-31
100. Matt 24:32-35
101. Matt 24:36-51
102. Matt 25:1-13
103. Matt 25:14-30
104. Matt 25:31-46
105. Matt 26:1-5
106. Matt 26:6-13
107. Matt 26:14-16
108. Matt 26:17-30
109. Matt 26:31-35
110. Matt 26:36-46
111. Matt 26:47-56
112. Matt 26:57-68
113. Matt 26:69-75
114. Matt 27:1-10
115. Matt 27:11-26
116. Matt 27:27-44
117. Matt 27:45-56
118. Matt 27:57-66
119. Matt 28:1-10
120. Matt 28:11-15
121. Matt 28:16-20
122. Bibliography
123. Introduction to Mark
124. Mark 1:1-8
125. Mark 1:9-15
126. Mark 1:16-20
127. Mark 1:21-28
128. Mark 1:29-45
129. Mark 2:1-12
130. Mark 2:13-17
131. Mark 2:18-22
132. Mark 2:23-28
133. Mark 3:1-6
134. Mark 3:7-12
135. Mark 3:13-19
136. Mark 3:20-30
137. Mark 3:31-35
138. Mark 4:1-20
139. Mark 4:21-25
140. Mark 4:26-29
141. Mark 4:30-34
142. Mark 4:35-41
143. Mark 5:1-20
144. Mark 5:21-43
145. Mark 6:1-6a
146. Mark 6:6b-13
147. Mark 6:14-29
148. Mark 6:30-44
149. Mark 6:45-52
150. Mark 6:53-56
151. Mark 7:1-23
152. Mark 7:24-30
153. Mark 7:31-37
154. Mark 8:1-10
155. Mark 8:11-13
156. Mark 8:14-21
157. Mark 8:22-26
158. Mark 8:27-30
159. Mark 8:31-33
160. Mark 8:34–9:1
161. Mark 9:2-13
162. Mark 9:14-29
163. Mark 9:30-32
164. Mark 9:33-37
165. Mark 9:38-50
166. Mark 10:1-12
167. Mark 10:13-16
168. Mark 10:17-31
169. Mark 10:32-34
170. Mark 10:35-45
171. Mark 10:46-52
172. Mark 11:1-11
173. Mark 11:12-25
174. Mark 11:27-33
175. Mark 12:1-12
176. Mark 12:13-17
177. Mark 12:18-27
178. Mark 12:28-34
179. Mark 12:35-37
180. Mark 12:38-44
181. Mark 13:1-37
182. Mark 14:1-2
183. Mark 14:3-9
184. Mark 14:10-11
185. Mark 14:12-26
186. Mark 14:27-31
187. Mark 14:32-42
188. Mark 14:43-52
189. Mark 14:53-65
190. Mark 14:66-72
191. Mark 15:1-15
192. Mark 15:16-20
193. Mark 15:21-39
194. Mark 15:40-47
195. Mark 16:1-8
196. Mark 16:8b
197. Mark 16:9-20
198. Bibliography
199. Note
200. NLT Notes
# HOW TO NAVIGATE THE CORNERSTONE BIBLICAL COMMENTARY
Each section of the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary includes the NLT text for the section's passage, a set of notes commenting on specific verses, and a commentary on the passage as a whole. The "[Commentary]" link in the Bible text heading will take you to the commentary for that passage. In the commentary heading, the "[Text]" link will take you back to the Bible text. In the Bible text, a linked verse number will take you to the note that starts with that verse. The verse reference at the beginning of the note will take you back to the starting verse in the Bible text for that note. In the Bible text, an asterisk in square brackets ([*]) will take you to an NLT footnote. The verse reference at the beginning of the footnote will take you back to the footnote callout in the Bible text. Sometimes the verse reference at the start of a commentary note will take you to an NLT footnote. The reference in square brackets after the verse reference at the start of the footnote will take you back to the commentary note.
# CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME 11
### Matthew: David L. Turner
_BA, Cedarville University;_
_ThD, Grace Theological Seminary;_
_MPhil, PhD Candidate, Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion;_
_Professor of New Testament, Grand Rapids Theological Seminary._
### Mark: Darrell L. Bock
_BA, University of Texas;_
_ThM, Dallas Theological Seminary;_
_PhD, University of Aberdeen; two years post-doctoral study at the University of T _ü_ bingen;_
_Research Professor of New Testament Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary._
# GENERAL EDITOR'S PREFACE
The _Cornerstone Biblical Commentary_ is based on the second edition of the New Living Translation (2013). Nearly 100 scholars from various church backgrounds and from several countries (United States, Canada, England, and Australia) participated in the creation of the NLT. Many of these same scholars are contributors to this commentary series. All the commentators, whether participants in the NLT or not, believe that the Bible is God's inspired word and have a desire to make God's word clear and accessible to his people.
This Bible commentary is the natural extension of our vision for the New Living Translation, which we believe is both exegetically accurate and idiomatically powerful. The NLT attempts to communicate God's inspired word in a lucid English translation of the original languages so that English readers can understand and appreciate the thought of the original writers. In the same way, the _Cornerstone Biblical Commentary_ aims at helping teachers, pastors, students, and laypeople understand every thought contained in the Bible. As such, the commentary focuses first on the words of Scripture, then on the theological truths of Scripture—inasmuch as the words express the truths.
The commentary itself has been structured in such a way as to help readers get at the meaning of Scripture, passage by passage, through the entire Bible. Each Bible book is prefaced by a substantial book introduction that gives general historical background important for understanding. Then the reader is taken through the Bible text, passage by passage, starting with the New Living Translation text printed in full. This is followed by a section called "Notes," wherein the commentator helps the reader understand the Hebrew or Greek behind the English of the NLT, interacts with other scholars on important interpretive issues, and points the reader to significant textual and contextual matters. The "Notes" are followed by the "Commentary," wherein each scholar presents a lucid interpretation of the passage, giving special attention to context and major theological themes.
The commentators represent a wide spectrum of theological positions within the evangelical community. We believe this is good because it reflects the rich variety in Christ's church. All the commentators uphold the authority of God's word and believe it is essential to heed the old adage: "Wholly apply yourself to the Scriptures and apply them wholly to you." May this commentary help you know the truths of Scripture, and may this knowledge help you "grow in your knowledge of God and Jesus our Lord" (2 Pet 1:2, NLT).
PHILIP W. COMFORT
GENERAL EDITOR
# ABBREVIATIONS
## GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS
_b._ Babylonian Gemara
_bar._ baraita
c. _circa_ , around, approximately
cf. _confer_ , compare
ch, chs chapter, chapters
contra in contrast to
DSS Dead Sea Scrolls
ed. edition, editor
e.g. _exempli gratia,_ for example
et al. _et alii,_ and others
fem. feminine
ff following (verses, pages)
fl. flourished
Gr. Greek
Heb. Hebrew
ibid. _ibidem,_ in the same place
i.e. _id est,_ that is
in loc. _in loco,_ in the place cited
lit. literally
LXX Septuagint
Majority Text
_m._ Mishnah
masc. masculine
mg margin
ms manuscript
mss manuscripts
MT Masoretic Text
n.d. no date
neut. neuter
no. number
NT New Testament
OL Old Latin
OS Old Syriac
OT Old Testament
p., pp. page, pages
pl. plural
Q Quelle ("Sayings" as Gospel source)
rev. revision
sg. singular
sv. _sub verbo_ , under the word
_t._ Tosefta
TR Textus Receptus
v., vv. verse, verses
vid. _videtur_ , it seems
viz. _videlicet_ , namely
vol. volume
_y._ Jerusalem Gemara
## ABBREVIATIONS FOR BIBLE TRANSLATIONS
ASV American Standard Version
CEV Contemporary English Version
ESV English Standard Version
GW God's Word
HCSB Holman Christian Standard Bible
JB Jerusalem Bible
JPS Jewish Publication Society Translation ( _Tanakh_ )
KJV King James Version
NAB New American Bible
NASB New American Standard Bible
NCV New Century Version
NEB New English Bible
NET The NET Bible
NIV New International Version (1984)
NIrV New International Reader's Version
NJB New Jerusalem Bible
NJPS The New Jewish Publication Society Translation ( _Tanakh_ )
NKJV New King James Version
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
NLT New Living Translation
REB Revised English Bible
RSV Revised Standard Version
TEV Today's English Version
TLB The Living Bible
## ABBREVIATIONS FOR DICTIONARIES, LEXICONS, COLLECTIONS OF TEXTS, ORIGINAL LANGUAGE EDITIONS
ABD _Anchor Bible Dictionary_ (6 vols., Freedman) [1992]
ANEP _The Ancient Near East in Pictures_ (Pritchard) [1965]
ANET _Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament_ (Pritchard) [1969]
BAGD _Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_ , 2nd ed. (Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker) [1979]
BDAG _Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_ , 3rd ed. (Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich) [2000]
BDB _A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament_ (Brown, Driver, Briggs) [1907]
BDF _A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_ (Blass, Debrunner, Funk) [1961]
BHS _Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia_ (Elliger and Rudolph) [1983]
CAD _Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago_ [1956]
COS _The Context of Scripture_ (3 vols., Hallo and Younger) [1997–2002]
DBI _Dictionary of Biblical Imagery_ (Ryken, Wilhoit, Longman) [1998]
DBT _Dictionary of Biblical Theology_ (2nd ed., Leon-Dufour) [1972]
DCH _Dictionary of Classical Hebrew_ (7 vols., D. Clines) [2000]
DLNTD _Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Development_ (R. Martin, P. Davids) [1997]
DJD _Discoveries in the Judean Desert_ [1955–]
DJG _Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels_ (Green, McKnight, Marshall) [1992]
DOTP _Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch_ (T. Alexander, D. W. Baker) [2003]
DPL _Dictionary of Paul and His Letters_ (Hawthorne, Martin, Reid) [1993]
DTIB _Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible_ (Vanhoozer) [2005]
EDNT _Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament_ (3 vols., H. Balz, G. Schneider. ET) [1990–1993]
GKC _Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar_ (Gesenius, Kautzsch, trans. Cowley) [1910]
HALOT _The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament_ (L. Koehler, W. Baumgartner, J. Stamm; trans. M. Richardson) [1994–1999]
IBD _Illustrated Bible Dictionary_ (3 vols., Douglas, Wiseman) [1980]
IDB _The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible_ (4 vols., Buttrick) [1962]
ISBE _International Standard Bible Encyclopedia_ (4 vols., Bromiley) [1979–1988]
KBL _Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros_ (Koehler, Baumgartner) [1958]
LCL Loeb Classical Library
L&N _Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains_ (Louw and Nida) [1989]
LSJ _A Greek-English Lexicon_ (9th ed., Liddell, Scott, Jones) [1996]
MM _The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament_ (Moulton and Milligan) [1930; 1997]
NA26 _Novum Testamentum Graece_ (26th ed., Nestle-Aland) [1979]
NA27 _Novum Testamentum Graece_ (27th ed., Nestle-Aland) [1993]
NBD _New Bible Dictionary_ (2nd ed., Douglas, Hillyer) [1982]
NIDB _New International Dictionary of the Bible_ (Douglas, Tenney) [1987]
NIDBA _New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology_ (Blaiklock and Harrison) [1983]
NIDNTT _New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology_ (4 vols., C. Brown) [1975–1985]
NIDOTTE _New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis_ (5 vols., W. A. VanGemeren) [1997]
PG _Patrologia Graecae_ (J. P. Migne) [1857–1886]
PGM _Papyri graecae magicae: Die griechischen Zauberpapyri._ (Preisendanz) [1928]
TBD _Tyndale Bible Dictionary_ (Elwell, Comfort) [2001]
TDNT _Theological Dictionary of the New Testament_ (10 vols., Kittel, Friedrich; trans. Bromiley) [1964–1976]
TDOT _Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament_ (15 vols., Botterweck, Ringgren; trans. Willis, Bromiley, Green) [1974–]
TLNT _Theological Lexicon of the New Testament_ (3 vols., C. Spicq) [1994]
TLOT _Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament_ (3 vols., E. Jenni) [1997]
TWOT _Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament_ (2 vols., Harris, Archer) [1980]
UBS3 _United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament_ (3rd ed., Metzger et al.) [1975]
UBS4 _United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament_ (4th corrected ed., Metzger et al.) [1993]
WH _The New Testament in the Original Greek_ (Westcott and Hort) [1882]
## ABBREVIATIONS FOR BOOKS OF THE BIBLE
### Old Testament
Gen Genesis
Exod Exodus
Lev Leviticus
Num Numbers
Deut Deuteronomy
Josh Joshua
Judg Judges
Ruth Ruth
1 Sam 1 Samuel
2 Sam 2 Samuel
1 Kgs 1 Kings
2 Kgs 2 Kings
1 Chr 1 Chronicles
2 Chr 2 Chronicles
Ezra Ezra
Neh Nehemiah
Esth Esther
Job Job
Ps, Pss Psalm, Psalms
Prov Proverbs
Eccl Ecclesiastes
Song Song of Songs
Isa Isaiah
Jer Jeremiah
Lam Lamentations
Ezek Ezekiel
Dan Daniel
Hos Hosea
Joel Joel
Amos Amos
Obad Obadiah
Jonah Jonah
Mic Micah
Nah Nahum
Hab Habakkuk
Zeph Zephaniah
Hag Haggai
Zech Zechariah
Mal Malachi
### New Testament
Matt Matthew
Mark Mark
Luke Luke
John John
Acts Acts
Rom Romans
1 Cor 1 Corinthians
2 Cor 2 Corinthians
Gal Galatians
Eph Ephesians
Phil Philippians
Col Colossians
1 Thess 1 Thessalonians
2 Thess 2 Thessalonians
1 Tim 1 Timothy
2 Tim 2 Timothy
Titus Titus
Phlm Philemon
Heb Hebrews
Jas James
1 Pet 1 Peter
2 Pet 2 Peter
1 John 1 John
2 John 2 John
3 John 3 John
Jude Jude
Rev Revelation
### Deuterocanonical
Bar Baruch
Add Dan Additions to Daniel
Pr Azar Prayer of Azariah
Bel Bel and the Dragon
Sg Three Song of the Three Children
Sus Susanna
1–2 Esdr 1–2 Esdras
Add Esth Additions to Esther
Ep Jer Epistle of Jeremiah
Jdt Judith
1–2 Macc 1–2 Maccabees
3–4 Macc 3–4 Maccabees
Pr Man Prayer of Manasseh
Ps 151 Psalm 151
Sir Sirach
Tob Tobit
Wis Wisdom of Solomon
## MANUSCRIPTS AND LITERATURE FROM QUMRAN
Initial numerals followed by "Q" indicate particular caves at Qumran. For example, the notation 4Q267 indicates text 267 from cave 4 at Qumran. Further, 1QS 4:9-10 indicates column 4, lines 9-10 of the _Rule of the Community_ ; and 4Q166 1 ii 2 indicates fragment 1, column ii, line 2 of text 166 from cave 4. More examples of common abbreviations are listed below.
CD Cairo Geniza copy of the _Damascus Document_
1QH _Thanksgiving Hymns_
1QIsaa Isaiah copy a
1QIsab Isaiah copy b
1QM _War Scroll_
1QpHab _Pesher Habakkuk_
1QS _Rule of the Community_
4QLama Lamentations
11QPsa Psalms
11QTemplea,b _Temple Scroll_
11QtgJob _Targum of Job_
## IMPORTANT NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS
(all dates given are AD; ordinal numbers refer to centuries)
### Significant Papyri ( = Papyrus)
1 Matt 1; early 3rd
4+ 64+ 67 Matt 3, 5, 26; Luke 1–6; late 2nd
5 John 1, 16, 20; early 3rd
13 Heb 2–5, 10–12; early 3rd
15+ 16 (probably part of same codex) 1 Cor 7–8, Phil 3–4; late 3rd
20 Jas 2–3; 3rd
22 John 15–16; mid 3rd
23 Jas 1; c. 200
27 Rom 8–9; 3rd
30 1 Thess 4–5; 2 Thess 1; early 3rd
32 Titus 1–2; late 2nd
37 Matt 26; late 3rd
39 John 8; first half of 3rd
40 Rom 1–4, 6, 9; 3rd
45 Gospels and Acts; early 3rd
46 Paul's Major Epistles (less Pastorals); late 2nd
47 Rev 9–17; 3rd
49+ 65 Eph 4–5; 1 Thess 1–2; 3rd
52 John 18; c. 125
53 Matt 26, Acts 9–10; middle 3rd
66 John; late 2nd
70 Matt 2–3, 11–12, 24; 3rd
72 1–2 Peter, Jude; c. 300
74 Acts, General Epistles; 7th
75 Luke and John; c. 200
77+ 103 (probably part of same codex) Matt 13–14, 23; late 2nd
87 Philemon; late 2nd
90 John 18–19; late 2nd
91 Acts 2–3; 3rd
92 Eph 1, 2 Thess 1; c. 300
98 Rev 1:13-20; late 2nd
100 Jas 3–5; c. 300
101 Matt 3–4; 3rd
104 Matt 21; 2nd
106 John 1; 3rd
115 Rev 2–3, 5–6, 8–15; 3rd
### Significant Uncials
(Sinaiticus) most of NT; 4th
A (Alexandrinus) most of NT; 5th
B (Vaticanus) most of NT; 4th
C (Ephraemi Rescriptus) most of NT with many lacunae; 5th
D (Bezae) Gospels, Acts; 5th
D (Claromontanus), Paul's Epistles; 6th (different MS than Bezae)
E (Laudianus 35) Acts; 6th
F (Augensis) Paul's Epistles; 9th
G (Boernerianus) Paul's Epistles; 9th
H (Coislinianus) Paul's Epistles; 6th
I (Freerianus or Washington) Paul's Epistles; 5th
L (Regius) Gospels; 8th
P (Porphyrianus) Acts—Revelation; 9th
Q (Guelferbytanus B) Luke, John; 5th
T (Borgianus) Luke, John; 5th
W (Washingtonianus or the Freer Gospels) Gospels; 5th
Z (Dublinensis) Matthew; 6th
037 (Δ; Sangallensis) Gospels; 9th
038 (Θ; Koridethi) Gospels; 9th
040 (Ξ; Zacynthius) Luke; 6th
043 (Φ; Beratinus) Matthew, Mark; 6th
044 (Ψ; Athous Laurae) Gospels, Acts, Paul's Epistles; 9th
048 Acts, Paul's Epistles, General Epistles; 5th
0171 Matt 10, Luke 22; c. 300
0189 Acts 5; c. 200
### Significant Minuscules
1 Gospels, Acts, Paul's Epistles; 12th
33 All NT except Rev; 9th
81 Acts, Paul's Epistles, General Epistles; 1044
565 Gospels; 9th
700 Gospels; 11th
1424 (or Family 1424—a group of 29 manuscripts sharing nearly the same text) most of NT; 9th-10th
1739 Acts, Paul's Epistles; 10th
2053 Rev; 13th
2344 Rev; 11th
f1 (a family of manuscripts
including 1, 118, 131, 209) Gospels; 12th-14th
f13 (a family of manuscripts including 13, 69, 124, 174, 230, 346, 543, 788, 826, 828, 983, 1689, 1709—known as the Ferrar group) Gospels; 11th-15th
### Significant Ancient Versions
#### SYRIAC (SYR)
syrc (Syriac Curetonian) Gospels; 5th
syrs (Syriac Sinaiticus) Gospels; 4th
syrh (Syriac Harklensis) Entire NT; 616
#### OLD LATIN (IT)
ita (Vercellenis) Gospels; 4th
itb (Veronensis) Gospels; 5th
itd (Cantabrigiensis—the Latin text of Bezae) Gospels, Acts, 3 John; 5th
ite (Palantinus) Gospels; 5th
itk (Bobiensis) Matthew, Mark; c. 400
#### COPTIC (COP)
copbo (Boharic—north Egypt)
copfay (Fayyumic—central Egypt)
copsa (Sahidic—southern Egypt)
#### OTHER VERSIONS
arm (Armenian)
eth (Ethiopic)
geo (Georgian)
# TRANSLITERATION AND NUMBERING SYSTEM
_Note:_ For words and roots from nonbiblical languages (e.g., Arabic, Ugaritic), only approximate transliterations are given.
## HEBREW/ARAMAIC
### Consonants
aleph _= '_
, beth _= b_
, gimel _= g_
, daleth _= d_
he _= h_
waw _= w_
zayin _= z_
heth _= kh_
teth _= t_
yodh _= y_
, , kaph _= k_
lamedh _= l_
, mem _= m_
, nun _= n_
samekh _= s_
ayin _= '_
, , pe _= p_
, tsadhe _= ts_
qoph _= q_
resh _= r_
shin _= sh_
sin _= s_
, taw _= t, th (spirant)_
### Vowels
patakh _= a_
furtive patakh _= a_
qamets _= a_
final qamets he _= ah_
segol _= e_
tsere _= e_
tsere yod _= e_
short hireq _= i_
long hireq _= i_
hireq yod _= i_
qamets khatuf _= o_
holem _= o_
full holem _= o_
short qibbuts _= u_
long qibbuts _= u_
shureq _= u_
khatef patakh _= a_
khatef qamets _= o_
vocalic shewa _= e_
patakh yodh _= a_
## GREEK
α alpha _= a_
β beta _= b_
γ gamma _= g, n (before_
γ, κ, ξ, χ)
δ delta _= d_
ε epsilon _= e_
ζ zeta _= z_
η eta _= _ē__
θ theta _= th_
ι iota _= i_
κ kappa _= k_
λ lamda _= l_
μ mu _= m_
ν nu _= n_
ξ ksi _= x_
ο omicron _= o_
π pi _= p_
ρ rho _= r (_ ῥ _= rh)_
σ, ς sigma _= s_
τ tau _= t_
υ upsilon _= u_
φ phi _= ph_
χ chi _= ch_
ψ psi _= ps_
ω omega _= _ō__
῾ rough breathing mark _= h (with vowel or diphthong)_
## THE TYNDALE-STRONG'S NUMBERING SYSTEM
The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series uses a word-study numbering system to give both newer and more advanced Bible students alike quicker, more convenient access to helpful original-language tools (e.g., concordances, lexicons, and theological dictionaries). Those who are unfamiliar with the ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek alphabets can quickly find information on a given word by looking up the appropriate index number. Advanced students will find the system helpful because it allows them to quickly find the lexical form of obscure conjugations and inflections.
There are two main numbering systems used for biblical words today. The one familiar to most people is the Strong's numbering system (made popular by the _Strong's Exhaustive Concordance to the Bible_ ). Although the original Strong's system is still quite useful, the most up-to-date research has shed new light on the biblical languages and allows for more precision than is found in the original Strong's system. The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series, therefore, features a newly revised version of the Strong's system, the Tyndale-Strong's numbering system. The Tyndale-Strong's system brings together the familiarity of the Strong's system and the best of modern scholarship. In most cases, the original Strong's numbers are preserved. In places where new research dictates, new or related numbers have been added.[1]
The second major numbering system today is the Goodrick-Kohlenberger system used in a number of study tools published by Zondervan. In order to give students broad access to a number of helpful tools, the Commentary provides index numbers for the Zondervan system as well.
The different index systems are designated as follows:
TG Tyndale-Strong's Greek number
ZG Zondervan Greek number
TH Tyndale-Strong's Hebrew number
ZH Zondervan Hebrew number
TA/ZA Tyndale/Zondervan Aramaic number
S Strong's Aramaic number
So in the example, "love" _agap _ē__ [TG26, ZG27], the first number is the one to use with Greek tools keyed to the Tyndale-Strong's system, and the second applies to tools that use the Zondervan system.
The indexing of Aramaic terms differs slightly from that of Greek and Hebrew. Strong's original system mixed the Aramaic terms in with the Hebrew, but the Tyndale-Strong's system indexes Aramaic with a new set of numbers starting at 10,000. Since Tyndale's system for Aramaic diverges completely from original Strong's, the original Strong's number is listed separately so that those using tools keyed to Strong's can locate the information. This number is designated with an S, as in the example, "son" _bar_ [TA/ZA10120, S1247].
# INTRODUCTION TO
# Matthew
AS THE FIRST GOSPEL in the Christian canon, Matthew has received a great deal of attention through the centuries (Luz 1994). Indeed, Massuax (1990) has argued that Matthew is the New Testament book that most influenced the early church. Matthew's prominence is due to some extent to its unique structure, which focuses the reader's attention on the Sermon on the Mount and four other major discourses of Jesus. The history of the interpretation of Matthew is outside the scope of the present volume, but it is clear that through the centuries, the first Gospel has occupied the minds of many great expositors.
Nevertheless, by the twentieth century Matthean studies had become somewhat passé, due largely to the dominance of the Marcan priority view of the synoptic problem and the ensuing focus on Mark as purportedly embodying an earlier and more authentic version of the life and teaching of the historical Jesus. More recently, however, Matthew has begun to receive more attention, and several major commentaries have been written, among them those by Beare (1981), Blomberg (1992), Davies and Allison (1988, 1991, 1997), France (1985), Garland (1993), Gundry (1982, 1994), Hagner (1993, 1995), Harrington (1991), Keener (1999), Luz (1989, 2001), Meier (1978, 1980), Morris (1992), Nolland (2005), Overman (1996), and Simonetti (2001, 2002). This renewed interest in Matthew is likely due to the rise of the disciplines of redaction and narrative criticism and to the increasing awareness of Matthew's Jewish roots.
With these fine works on Matthew readily available, one may wonder why this one has been written. Many commentaries on Matthew embody a doctrinaire acceptance of the view that Matthew is rewriting and expanding Mark. Be that as it may, it is doubtful that the original readers of Matthew held it in one hand and Mark in the other, assuming that Matthew could not be understood apart from Mark. Thus, the present commentary seeks to understand Matthew in its own right, utilizing the discipline that has come to be known as narrative criticism (Powell 1990). This method of literary study attempts to relate the parts of a Gospel to the whole of it rather than operating from plausible yet unprovable hypotheses about the dependence of one Gospel upon another. Additionally, this commentary attempts to explain Matthew in the context of Second Temple Judaism, which had not yet become unified by the ascendancy of the Jabneh (Jamnia) rabbis after the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem (cf. Lewis in Freedman 1992:3.634-37). It is written from the perspective argued in scholarly studies by Overman (1990b), Saldarini (1994), and Sim (1998) to the effect that Matthew was written to a group of Christian Jews who were still in contact with non-Christian Jews in the synagogue. This view seems to avoid the anachronistic reading of Matthew as promoting a new and distinct religion in opposition to a monolithic old religion, Judaism. In other words, Matthew and his community were part of an ongoing process in which Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Jesus' followers, and others were presenting divergent and competing versions of Judaism. Matthew should not be read from a later perspective that reflects the results of this process after the "parting of the way" between Christianity and Judaism in the second century. Rather, Matthew should be read as the voice of the first "Jews for Jesus," as it were, during a time of much diversity within Judaism.
The origins of the Gospel of Matthew are not easily ascertained. Matthew is anonymous, as are the other three Gospels. One can only make educated guesses about the author, recipients, and setting of this Gospel. Such guesses amount to hypotheses that are formed by noting the book's grammar, syntax, and literary style; studying its distinctive themes; reading "between the lines"; and assessing the patristic traditions about the book.
## AUTHOR
Though the Gospel of Matthew is anonymous, it seems clear that it was ascribed to Matthew the apostle by the first quarter of the second century AD. Notable ancient manuscripts have titles that ascribe the book to the apostle Matthew (Davies and Allison 1988:129). Patristic tradition univocally agrees with this ascription. Eusebius' _Ecclesiastical History_ (early- to mid-fourth century AD) cites Papias (3.39; early second century), Clement of Alexandria (6.14; early third century), and Origen (6.25.4; mid third-century) to this effect. The words of Irenaeus (late second century) agree ( _Against Heresies_ 3.1.1; cf. Eusebius, _Ecclesiastical History_ 5.8.2). Additional fourth century testimony to this effect may be found in Cyril of Jerusalem ( _Catechesis_ 14), Epiphanius ( _Heresies_ 30.3), and Jerome ( _Prologue to Matthew_ ). The remarkable fact that some patristic tradition posits that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew will be discussed later under Canonicity and Textual History.
The patristic testimony aside, most scholars are led by the Jewish orientation of Matthew to conclude that its author was a Jewish Christian. Perhaps "Christian Jew" is a more historically accurate term. But there is a minority view that asserts that Matthew's Jewish trappings are the literary creation of a Gentile author's polemics against Judaism (Meier 1978:17-25).
## DATE
It is very likely that there are allusions to Matthew in Ignatius (late first/early second century AD) and in the _Didache_ (early second century AD). When these allusions are taken in conjunction with Papias' testimony (cited below), it seems clear that Matthew was well known by the early second century. Accordingly, the Gospel must have been written by the turn of the first century AD at the latest. The current scholarly consensus, based on the Marcan priority view of Gospel relationships, places Matthew's origin in the eighties or nineties AD. In some cases, this view is buttressed by the idea that Matthew 24–25 constitutes a _vaticinium ex eventu_ (prophecy after the event), written after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Additionally, it is sometimes argued that the historical situation reflected in Matthew is the conflict of the developing church with the formative rabbinic Judaism that emanated from the council of Jamnia (Jabneh) after the destruction of Jerusalem.
However, if one accepts the patristic testimony to apostolic authorship, the date will probably need to be set earlier. Additionally, if one takes Matthew 24–25 as an authentic word of Jesus, not as prophecy after the event, there is no need to date the Gospel after AD 70. And if one is not convinced of Matthew's dependence upon Mark, there is another reason for an earlier date. Noteworthy scholars who favor a pre- AD 70 Matthew include C. Blomberg, D. A. Carson, R. H. Gundry, G. Maier, B. Reicke, and J. A. T. Robinson. But these scholars are generally not dogmatic.
## OCCASION OF WRITING AND AUDIENCE
Every student of Matthew is compelled to draw some conclusion about the relationship of this Gospel's recipients to Judaism. Matthew's presentation of a Jesus who came not to destroy but to fulfill the law, and his formulaic portrayal of the fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures in Jesus' life make the issue unavoidable. Scholars are divided, with some convinced that Matthew's community contained many Gentiles and had already separated from the synagogue (Gundry, Stanton), and others holding the opposite view that Matthew's community was largely Jewish and was still connected with the synagogue (Harrington, Overman, Saldarini, Sigal, Sim). And there are those who occupy middle ground, arguing that Matthew can be satisfactorily explained only when it is viewed against the background of an embattled minority in the process of leaving the synagogue (Hagner 1993:lxxxi). In this commentary, I maintain the view that Matthew's community was still engaged with the synagogue.
While many theories have been proposed, the location of Matthew's community will likely never be known with anything approaching certainty. Many have advocated the city of Antioch, but others suggest Tyre or Sidon (Kilpatrick), Galilee (Overman), or even Pella in Transjordan (Slingerland). It is a happy fact that grasping the message of the book does not depend on knowing the location of its original recipients.
The occasion of the Gospel's writing and its purposes are, of course, not explicitly stated anywhere in it and can only be approximated in hypotheses inferred from the text. Assuming that the audience is a Christian Jewish community, it is evidently a community that needs to understand how the life of Jesus the Messiah "fulfilled" the Hebrew Bible (see "Major Themes" later in this introduction) and how Jesus' teaching interpreted the Torah of Moses (5:17ff). The community also needed to know why the entrenched, non-Christian Jewish leaders were no longer to be emulated (ch 23). The community also evidently needed to expand its horizons toward Gentile missions. Matthew regularly portrays Gentiles in a positive light, as when the Gentile women are mentioned in Jesus' genealogy (1:3, 5, 6) and the faith of certain Gentiles is stressed (8:10; 15:28; 27:54). Such details from the narrative prepare the reader for the climactic commission that the community take Jesus' message to all the nations (28:19). The following discussion of Matthew's theological emphasis provides additional implications about the occasion and purpose of the Gospel.
## CANONICITY AND TEXTUAL HISTORY
A foundational question in the textual history of Matthew is its possible origin as a Semitic text that was only later translated into our present Greek text. Patristic sources that take this position have been cited in the previous discussion of authorship. The key patristic text is found in Eusebius's _Ecclesiastical History_ 33.39.16, which cites Papias to the effect that "Matthew collected the oracles [ _logia_ , sayings of and about Jesus] in the Hebrew language [ _Hebraidi dialekto_ ] and each one interpreted [ _hermeneusen_ ] them as best he could."
At first glance, Eusebius's citation of Papias seems to say that Matthew was originally composed in Hebrew and that later editions were translated from that Hebrew original. Since our present Greek Matthew does not read like a translation of a Hebrew original, some have argued that Matthew wrote both a Hebrew Gospel and a Greek Gospel. Others think that Papias's _logia_ were the sayings of Jesus that modern source critics call Q, or even the discourses of Jesus found in our Greek Matthew. But there seem to be no manuscripts that exemplify the putative Hebrew Matthew mentioned by Papias (Howard 1987). For these and additional reasons, others (e.g., Gundry 1994:619-20) propose that the expression _Hebraidi dialekto_ does not mean the Hebrew language but Semitic rhetorical style, and that _hermeneusen_ does not refer to translation but to interpretation. If this is the case, Papias says that Matthew's style of composition was Jewish, and that subsequent individuals interpreted this Jewish style to the best of their ability. Perhaps such features as Matthew's genealogy and stress on "fulfillment" are indicative of this Jewish compositional style.
**Greek Manuscripts.** The textual history of Matthew is exemplified in a great number of Greek manuscripts. More than twenty uncial manuscripts contain complete or nearly complete texts of Matthew including the following: and B (fourth century); C, D, and W (fifth century); O, Z, 042, 043 (sixth century); 0211 (seventh century); L (eighth century); K, M, U, 037, and 038 (ninth century); G and S (tenth century).
There are eighteen early and often fragmentary papyrus manuscripts containing portions of Matthew (see Comfort and Barrett 2001:6). These include the following: 104 (Matt 21; second century); 64+67 (Matt 3, 5, 26; late second century); 77 (Matt 23, late second century); 103 (Matt 13-14; second century); 1 (Matt 1, third century); 45 (Matt 20-21; 25-26, third century); 37 (Matt 26, third century); 70 (Matt 2-3, 11-12, 24, third century); 101 (Matt 3; third century); 102 (Matt 4; late third century); 110 (Matt 10; late third century); 53 (Matt 26; late third century); 86 (Matt 5, third/fourth century); 35 (Matt 25; third/fourth century); 25 (Matt 18-19, fourth century); 62 (Matt 11, fourth century); 71 (Matt 19, fourth century); 19 (Matt 10-11, fourth century); and 21 (Matt 12, fourth century).
In addition to its presence in the above papyrus and uncial manuscripts, hundreds of minuscules testify to the text of Matthew. Of course, Matthew is also abundantly cited in patristic sources, often used in church lectionaries, and translated into other languages by the early versions.
**Canonicity.** As the most popular Gospel of the early church, there was no doubt about Matthew's canonicity among the orthodox in either the eastern or western regions of the church. However, the heretic Marcion (second century) and his followers held to a canon that did not include Matthew, not to mention the Old Testament, Mark, John, and the General Epistles. Marcion affirmed a sort of gnostic dualism between the Old Testament and New Testament as revelations of two different gods, so Matthew's insistence on the fulfillment of the Old Testament by Jesus was unthinkable to Marcion, who accepted only an edited version of Luke's Gospel and the Pauline Epistles as his canon. Evidently his attack upon the incipient orthodox canon was a major factor in the process which led to the formalization of the canon in ensuing days.
In addition to the patristic sources already cited, the so-called Anti-Marcionite Prologues to Luke and John (date uncertain) and the Muratorian Fragment (probably late second century) both speak of the undisputed fourfold Gospel tradition of the church (cf. Irenaeus, _Against Heresies_ 3.11.8; Cyprian, _Epistle_ 73:10; Clement of Alexandria, _Stromata_ 3.13; Origen, cited by Eusebius, _Ecclesiastical History_ 6.25.3ff; Eusebius, _Ecclesiastical History_ 3.25.1; Athanasius, _Festal Letter_ 39; [and many others, see Bruce 1988:134-240]).
## LITERARY CONCERNS
**Gospel Genre: The Question of History and Theology.** Due to concerns related to affirming the historicity of the Gospel stories about Jesus, conservative evangelicals have at times been reluctant to view the composition of the Gospels as being theologically motivated. This occurs in response to "liberal" scholarship that tends to view the Gospels as imaginative documents produced to meet the church's needs rather than to transmit reliable traditions about Jesus. Such liberal scholars find in the Gospels stories they think reflect situations and controversies faced by the church after AD 70 rather than what was presented by the historical Jesus (e.g., Beare 1981:13ff). Evangelicals have rightly responded in defense of the historical reliability of the Gospels (e.g., Blomberg 1987), but in so doing, the theological import of the Gospels has sometimes been eclipsed.
Others have argued—at times from misguided dispensational views—that the Gospels simply give us history, and that we get theology from the New Testament Epistles, especially those of Paul. However, the history vs. theology dichotomy is false. The Gospels narrate what really happened but do so for theological reasons. According to Luke's prologue, Luke did careful research in order to ascertain the reliability of oral and written traditions so that Theophilus might be taught reliable truths about Jesus. If one may extrapolate from Luke's Gospel to the Gospels in general, their procedure was to transmit the "Jesus traditions" they had received with a view to meeting the spiritual needs of their audiences.
Thus, we have in the Gospels theological interpretations of selected traditions that the authors believed to be genuine historical events from the life and ministry of Jesus. Some scholars (e.g., Shuler 1982; Talbert 1977) argue that the Gospels are examples of the ancient genre of laudatory biography or encomium, while others hold that they constitute their own genre (e.g., Guelich 1991). Be that as it may, most if not all would agree that the Gospels are not comprehensive biographies or exhaustive histories of Jesus; a perusal of any Gospel synopsis or harmony dispels that notion. But each Gospel amounts to a retelling of stories about Jesus calculated to meet the needs of each author's audience. While there is overall uniformity, at least in the three synoptic Gospels, there is a great deal of individual freedom as the authors "redact" the traditions available to them in order to meet the needs of their respective communities. If John 20:30-31 provides any sort of model, the theological purposes of the evangelists dictated how they edited the available traditions and produced Gospels that were literary narratives, not historical chronicles. Their purpose was not to satisfy intellectual curiosity by compiling historical data. Rather, they wrote to disciple their respective communities by bringing selected episodes from the life of Jesus to bear on their various needs. Thus, the Gospel narratives teach us even today by showing us the theological and existential implications of the reliable words and deeds of Jesus.
This notion that the Gospels contain theologically interpreted history is particularly important when one notes the distinctive emphases of each Gospel. For Matthew, the emphasis on Jesus' discourses and such characteristic motifs as "the Kingdom of heaven" and the "fulfillment" of the Hebrew Bible are crucial for understanding why Matthew was written to begin with. This will become increasingly evident as the discussion of the synoptic problem proceeds.
**Source Criticism and the Synoptic Problem.** Even a cursory reading of the Gospels reveals the fundamental difficulty known as the "Synoptic Problem"—that is, why are the first three Gospels so similar in some respects and so different in others? While evangelicals may instinctively tend toward attributing such matters solely to the Holy Spirit's leading of the Gospel authors, reflection upon Luke's prologue (Luke 1:1-4) will take us beyond naive pietistic answers. It seems clear that Luke was aware of earlier written "accounts" (Luke 1:1), which in turn were based on "reports circulating among us from the early disciples" and eyewitnesses (Luke 1:2). For this reason, it is necessary to discuss the synoptic problem further.
Theories of synoptic origins and interrelationships can be divided into two main groups: those that posit, on the one hand, the literary independence of each Gospel, and those that posit, on the other hand, some literary interdependence between the Gospels.
_Literary Independence._ Certain scholars point out the prevalence of oral transmission of sacred tradition in the ancient Near East and conclude that the phenomena of the Gospels may be explained solely by their individual editing of readily available oral tradition without any necessity of literary borrowing from each other (Farnell in Thomas 2002:226-309; Linneman 1992; Rist 1978). If one approaches Matthew from this perspective and with the traditional view of apostolic authorship, one would view Matthew as reflecting upon his own experiences as an eyewitness of Jesus' words and deeds and augmenting personal experience with oral traditions. Such an approach may account for the differences between the synoptic Gospels with some degree of success, but it may falter as a satisfying explanation of the synoptic agreements, which at times involve identical wording of extended passages.
_Literary Interdependence._ Most scholars conclude that the phenomena of the Gospels are inexplicable without some literary interrelationship. In fact, such a view was held by Augustine and many of the Church Fathers, who believed that the canonical order of the Gospels represented their order of literary dependence. In more recent times the patristic approach to Matthean priority was revised somewhat in the Griesbach hypothesis, which posited that Mark used both Matthew and Luke. While some still hold to Matthean priority, the scholarly consensus today favors Marcan priority, with Matthew and Luke composing their Gospels in dependence on Mark and another hypothetical source known as Q, which purportedly contained a collection of the sayings of Jesus. Sometimes this view is known as the "two source theory," but it has been further developed into a "four source theory" in which Mark and Q are supplemented by the additional hypothetical sources M for Matthew and L for Luke. For critiques of this consensus, see Butler (1951) and Stoldt (1980).
The Marcan priority theory tends to reduce Matthean studies to distinguishing between tradition and redaction by locating Mark, Q, and M within Matthew and looking for Matthew's editorial refinements of these sources as an indication of his unique theological interests. There is often the assumption in this endeavor that Matthew's departures from Marcan tradition are less historically reliable. Yet many evangelical scholars operate from this perspective without diminishing the historicity of Matthew (e.g., Blomberg 1992; Carson 1984). If one accepts the traditional view of apostolic authorship, however, one may wonder why an eyewitness of the words and deeds of Jesus would base his Gospel on the account of Mark, who was not an eyewitness. It is sometimes stated that Mark would not have been needed had Matthew been written first, but this overlooks the many narrative details regularly presented by Mark that are not found in Matthew. In the final analysis, whether Mark abbreviated Matthew's discourses and expanded Matthew's narratives (minority view), or whether Matthew adapted Mark's narrative to his discourses derived from Q (consensus), what matters most to the church is the meaning of the Gospels as literary and theological wholes.
_Narrative Criticism._ The ultimate futility of arriving at anything approaching certainty in solving the synoptic problem, coupled with the atomizing tendencies of source critical studies, has led some to adopt another approach, a literary method commonly known as narrative criticism. Narrative criticism views each Gospel as a whole and draws conclusions about meaning and theology by comparing the parts of each Gospel to the whole instead of to putative sources. Powell states that in order to read the Gospels in this way, "it is necessary to know everything that the text assumes the reader knows and to 'forget' everything that the text does not assume the reader knows" (Powell 1990:20). This approach seems fitting if the Gospels are viewed as theologically interpreted history, written for the edification of Christian communities. One would think that the Gospels functioned as wholes within those communities, not as overlays to be spread upon previous Gospels or other sources. Modern scholars have been understandably preoccupied with uncovering the history of the traditions they find in the synoptic Gospels, but such an approach was hardly that of ancient Christian communities. It seems unlikely that such communities read one Gospel as an overlay of a previous Gospel, and it is difficult even today to utilize source critical methodology for Gospel studies in the context of church ministry.
Narrative criticism seems much more appropriate than source criticism for the study of the Gospels in a church context, given the genre of the Gospels as theologically interpreted history and the canonical function of the Gospels as Holy Scripture. Therefore, this commentary is a narrative critical study, although source critical matters will occasionally be noted (See the plea for methodological eclecticism in Davies and Allison 1988:1-4). A weakness of literary criticism in general and of narrative criticism in particular is that the historical referents of the literary documents are usually ignored as being beside the point of literary studies. But when Holy Scripture is studied in an evangelical context, the historical people and events and literary sources that interpret them must be held together.
**Literary Structure.** Grasping the structure of Matthew is crucial in a narrative critical approach as it attempts to articulate the role of the parts in framing the whole of the Gospel. Although some scholars (e.g., Gundry, Harrington) despair of outlining Matthew, the following approaches are commonly found.
_A Marcan Outline Superimposed on Matthew._ Matthew has frequently been analyzed along the chronological and geographical lines that seemed to work well in analyzing Mark (e.g., Hendriksen 1973; Morris 1992). Such an approach typically yields the following analysis of Matthew:
I. Infancy Narrative (1:1–2:23)
II. Preparation for Ministry (3:1–4:11)
III. Public Ministry in Galilee (4:12–15:20)
IV. Public Ministry outside Galilee (15:21–18:35)
V. Journey to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)
VI. Final Days in Jerusalem (21:1–27:66)
VII. Resurrection and Great Commission (28:1-20)
In some cases an outline like the above is used but with topical themes, such as "King" or "Messiah" (e.g., Toussaint 1980). These all seem to be more or less artificially superimposed upon Matthew rather than derived from within it. Overall, this approach no doubt has some value, but it does not at all engage Matthew's distinctive pattern of alternating narrative and discourse blocks of material.
_"From Then on Jesus Began."_ Certain scholars (e.g., Kingsbury 1988; Bauer 1989) have called attention to a phrase that occurs at two crucial junctures in Matthew's narrative. In 4:17, just after the account of the arrest of John the Baptist, Matthew announces the beginning of Jesus' public ministry with the words, "from then on Jesus began to preach." In 16:21, just after Peter's stirring confession that Jesus is the Messiah, Matthew characterizes Jesus' messianic ministry as one of suffering by commenting, "from then on Jesus began to tell his disciples plainly that it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem . . . and be killed." With this approach, the structure of Matthew is understood as follows:
I. The Preparation of Jesus the Messiah (1:1–4:16)
II. The Proclamation of Jesus the Messiah (4:17–16:20)
III. The Passion of Jesus the Messiah (16:21–28:20)
Although it is significant that Matthew uses the same phrase at two critical points in his narrative, the phrase in question seems to be more of a biographical marker than a literary device. Overall, this approach to Matthew's structure is not that different from the previous chronological-geographical approach. Neither does it handle what is perhaps the most obvious difference between Matthew and the other synoptic Gospels: the alternating narrative-discourse pattern. For this reason, the following approach is preferable, although in fairness, one should note the arguments of Bauer (1989:129-134) to the contrary.
"When Jesus Had Finished." Students of Matthew have long noticed the unique juxtapositioning of narrative and discourse materials. What is more, Matthew marks each of the five transitions from discourse back to narrative with the phrase "when Jesus had finished" (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1; the Gr. is _kai egeneto hote etelesen ho iēsous_ ). Acknowledging this Matthean structural pattern does not necessitate accepting Bacon's view that Matthew sets up five books of Jesus that correspond to the five books of Moses in the Pentateuch. This approach has difficulties in that certain discourse materials in Matthew occur within narrative sections, most notably the warning to the disciples and woes upon the religious leaders found in Matthew 23. On balance, however, this approach has the most to commend it and is presented as follows:
I. Prologue/Introduction: Origin of Jesus the Messiah (1:1–2:23)
II. The Early Days of Kingdom Word and Deed (3:1–7:29)
A. Narrative 1: John and Jesus and the Kingdom of God (3:1–4:25)
B. Discourse 1: The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)
III. The Galilean Ministry Continues (8:1–11:1)
A. Narrative 2: Miracles and Discipleship (8:1–10:4)
B. Discourse 2: Mission and Suffering (10:5–11:1)
IV. Growing Opposition to the Kingdom of Heaven (11:2–13:52)
A. Narrative 3: Grace in the midst of Controversy and Rejection (11:2–12:50)
B. Discourse 3: Parables of the Kingdom of Heaven (13:1-52)
V. Opposition to the Kingdom Intensifies (13:53–19:1)
A. Narrative 4: Various Responses to the Son of God (13:53–17:27)
B. Discourse 4: Life and Relationships in the Kingdom of Heaven (18:1–19:1)
VI. Opposition Comes to a Head: Ministry in Judea (19:2–26:2)
A. Narrative 5: Ministry in Judea (19:2–23:39)
B. Discourse 5: The Judgment of Jerusalem and the Return of Christ (24:1–26:2)
VII. Epilogue/Conclusion: Passion, Resurrection, and Commission (26:3–28:20)
For a similar outline, see Carson. Blomberg attempts a synthesis of this approach with that of Kingsbury, explained above.
**Literary Style.** Scholars generally view Matthew's Greek style as aesthetically adequate if not exceptional. It is likely that the author of Matthew was relatively fluent in Semitic languages (Hebrew and Aramaic) as well as Greek. This accounts for the frequent "Semitisms"—i.e., Semitic ways of expressing ideas in Greek (Davies and Allison 1988:80-85). These Semitisms emanate from Matthew's sources, the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, and Matthew's own personal writing style. Yet Matthew incorporates these frequent Semitisms in a way that avoids awkwardness and harsh expressions and retains the flow of a good Greek style.
Another matter of style relates to Matthew's purported use of sources, primarily Mark, Q and M. Those who work with Matthew from the viewpoint of the Marcan priority view of the synoptic problem conclude that Matthew has often abbreviated Mark's account of a particular episode in Jesus' ministry, while at the same time expanding Mark's version of Jesus' discourses. Whatever one's view of the synoptic problem, it is interesting to note certain words and expressions that Matthew uses much more frequently than Mark and Luke (Davies and Allison 1988:74-80; Gundry 1994:674-682).
Matthew seems to be fond of various numerical patterns, such as the seven petitions in the Lord's Prayer (6:9-13), the seven parables (13), and the fourteen (double seven) generation format of the genealogy (1:1-18). See Davies and Allison (1988: 61–72) for a discussion of Matthew's fondness for threefold structures. Bauer (1989) and Luz (1989) have also done good work on additional features, such as repetition of contrast and comparison, particularization and climax, _inclusio_ , and chiasmus.
## MAJOR THEMES
It is difficult to select and to summarize the major themes of this Gospel briefly, but the following themes are crucial.
**Matthew and the Old Testament: Fulfillment.** Matthew's pervasive use of the Old Testament is one of the major reasons many interpreters note the Jewish orientation of this Gospel. In fact, the prevalence of this intertextuality calls into question the very notion of an "Old Testament" in Matthew's theology. If Matthew's Jesus came not to abolish but to fulfill the law and the prophets (5:17), it is doubtful that Matthew conceived of the Jewish Scriptures as "old," at least in the connotative senses of "antique, outmoded, quaint." Instead, Matthew viewed the ethical standards (e.g., 3:15; 5:17-20), the historical patterns (e.g., 2:15, 18) and the prophetic oracles (e.g., 2:6; 3:3) of the Hebrew Bible as filled with ultimate significance through the ministry and teaching of Jesus.
In addition to numerous informal allusions that are difficult to count, there are around 50 formal quotations. These may be categorized in various ways, such as by introductory formula ("in order that it might be fulfilled," "for it is written," etc.) or speaker (Jesus, Matthew, etc.). The commentary will deal with each of Matthew's citations of the Old Testament individually, but a convenient summary based on Aland (1994:89-99) follows. Those desiring detailed discussions should consult France (1989:166-205), Gundry (1975), and Soares-Prabhu (1976).
_Matthew's Use of the Old Testament._ The following list of Old Testament citations in the order they appear in Matthew uses these abbreviations: (J) = cited by Jesus; (M) = cited in a Matthean authorial comment; * = introductory formula involving fulfillment; and # = introductory formula "it is written."
* 1:23 (M*) Isa 7:14; 8:8, 10 _The virgin will conceive_
* 2:6 (M#) Mic 5:2 _The Ruler from Bethlehem_
* 2:15 (M*) Hos 11:1 _God's Son called from Egypt_
* 2:18 (M*) Jer 31:15 _Wailing for murdered children_
* 2:23 (M*?) Jdg 13:5, 7?; Isa 11:1? _Jesus called a "Nazarene"_
* 3:3 (M) Isa 40:3 _John a voice in the wilderness_
* 4:4 (J#) Deut 8:3 _People live by more than bread_
* 4:6 (M#) Ps 91:11-12 _Angelic protection_
* 4:7 (J#) Deut 6:16 _Do not test God_
* 4:10 (J#) Deut 6:13 _God alone to be worshiped_
* 4:15-16 (M*) Isa 9:1-2 _Galilee sees the light_
* 5:21 (J) Exod 20:13/Deut 5:17 _Do not murder_
* 5:27 (J) Exod 20:14/Deut 5:18 _Do not commit adultery_
* 5:31 (J) Deut 24:1 _Letter of divorce_
* 5:33 (J) Lev 19:12/Num 30:2 _Vows must be carried out_
* 5:38 (J) Exod 21:24/Lev 24:20 _Eye for an eye_
* 5:43 (J) Lev 19:18 _Love your neighbor_
* 8:17 (M*) Isa 53:4 _He took our sicknesses_
* 9:13 (J) Hos 6:6 _God wants mercy_
* 10:35-36 (J) Mic 7:6 _Enemies within the household_
* 11:10 (J#) Mal 3:1 _Messenger prepares the way_
* 12:7 (J) Hos 6:6 _God wants mercy_
* 12:18-21 (M*) Isa 42:1-4 _The beloved Servant_
* 12:40 (J) Jonah 1:17 _Jonah in the fish's belly_
* 13:14-15 (J*) Isa 6:9-10 _Hearing without understanding_
* 13:35 (M*) Ps 78:2 _Mysterious speech in parables_
* 15:4 (J) Exod 20:12/Deut 5:16 _Honor your parents_
* 15:8-9 (J) Isa 29:13 _Hypocritical worship_
* 18:16 (J) Deut 19:15 _Two or three witnesses_
* 19:4-5 (J) Gen 1:27; 2:24 _God made male and female_
* 19:7 (M) Deut 24:1 _Letter of divorce_
* 19:18-19 (M) Exod 20:12-16/Deut 5:16-20 _Do not murder_
* 21:5 (M*) Isa 62:11/Zech 9:9 _The king comes on a donkey_
* 21:9 (M) Ps 118:25-26 _Blessings for the Son of David_
* 21:13 (J#) Isa 56:7 _A den of thieves_
* 21:16 (J) Ps 8:2 _Praise from children_
* 21:42 (J) Ps 118:22-23 _The cornerstone_
* 22:24 (M) Deut 25:5 _A man dies without children_
* 22:32 (J) Exod 3:6, 15 _I am the God of Abraham_
* 22:37 (J) Deut 6:5 _Love the Lord your God_
* 22:39 (J) Lev 19:18 _Love your neighbor_
* 22:44 (J) Ps 110:1 _Sit at my right hand_
* 23:39 (J) Ps 118:26 _Bless the one coming_
* 24:30 (J) Dan 7:13 _The Son of Man arrives_
* 26:31 (J#) Zech 13:7 _The shepherd struck_
* 26:64 (J) Ps 110:1; Dan 7:13 _Son of Man returning_
* 27:9-10 (M*) Zech 11:12-13 _Thirty pieces of silver_
* 27:46 (J) Ps 22:1 _Forsaken by God_
_Matthew's Understanding of Fulfillment._ Matthew's distinctive use of the Old Testament is centered in his ten fulfillment formula quotations that utilize the verb _pleroō_ [TG4137, ZG4444]. These are especially prominent in Matthew 1–2. It is often believed in "lay" circles that fulfillment implies a specific Old Testament prediction being "fulfilled" in a New Testament event. This is largely due to a simplistic equation of prophecy with prediction. But fulfillment in Matthew has as much to do with historical patterns as it does with prophetic predictions. Prophetic prediction involves the prophet's foresight of a future event (cf. 2:4-6), but Matthew's fulfillment quotations more often involve Christian hindsight in which an Old Testament historical event serves as a pattern for a New Testament event that it anticipated. Historical events, whether past, present, or future, are viewed as the providential outworking of God's plan. Also, Old Testament prophecy is not primarily prediction but ethical admonition that utilizes the rehearsal of past events, as well as the prediction of future events, as motivation to effect present covenant loyalty. Fulfillment in Matthew involves ethical and historical matters, as well as predictive prophecy. There are sixteen significant texts.
One passage presents the scribes and Pharisees as fulfilling the measure of the sin of their ancestors (23:32). The implication of Matthew 23:29-36 is that Jesus' enemies are the culmination of previous enmity against God's messengers, the prophets. Just as the prophets anticipate the Messiah, the prophets' enemies anticipate the Messiah's enemies. Old Testament redemptive history provides a pattern that leads up to climactic fulfillment in the New Testament. But the fulfillment is the climax of a historical pattern, not a predictive oracle.
Two passages present Jesus as fulfilling (or epitomizing) certain ideals in his person. He fulfills "all righteousness" at his baptism (3:15), and he comes not to destroy but to fulfill the law and the prophets (5:17). Strictly speaking, messianic prediction alone is not the focus of the baptism. The point is that Jesus' identification with repentant Israelites in his baptism fulfills the uprightness required of Kingdom disciples. To be sure, as the servant of Yahweh, Jesus did fulfill Old Testament prediction, but the point here is that the Messiah's uprightness will please the Father. Jesus' affirmation that he came to fulfill "the law and the prophets" should be viewed as fulfillment of the Old Testament as a whole, not merely its predictive portions. And it is clear from the ensuing context (5:18-20) that ethical concerns are preeminent, not mere predictions.
The remaining thirteen passages (ten in Matthew's narrative comments, three in the words of Jesus) speak of fulfillment of the Old Testament in some fashion. Of the ten passages in Matthew's narrative, four occur in the infancy narrative of Matthew 1–2. Matthew 1:22-23 cites Isaiah 7:14, a passage that is probably misunderstood if it is viewed as a strict prediction of a future virgin-born Messiah. Rather, Isaiah 7:14 speaks of a sign given to King Ahaz in his own lifetime, and Matthew views it as an event that anticipates the virgin birth of the Messiah, an ultimate sign to the nation of Israel. Matthew 2:15 cites Hosea 11:1, which speaks of the historical Exodus of Israel from Egypt. Matthew capitalizes on the metaphor of Israel as God's son to speak of a much greater exodus of God's unique son in recapitulation of redemptive history. Matthew 2:17 cites Jeremiah 31:15, which personifies the nation of Israel at the Babylonian exile as Rachel weeping for her children who were dead. A similar yet much more significant weeping for dead children occurred when Herod ordered the slaughter of babies from the region of Bethlehem. It is significant, though, that the sorrow in both the Old and New Testament texts occurs in the context of hope. Matthew 2:23 significantly speaks of the fulfillment of plural prophets in Jesus' move to the obscure village of Nazareth. It is argued in the commentary on Matthew 2:23 that this passage plays on the similar words Nazareth and Nazarite (Num 6; Judg 13:5-7). It is also possible that Matthew has the branch ( _netser_ [TH5342, ZH5342]) of Isaiah 11:1 in mind. If it is correct that Matthew 2:23 is essentially a messianic pun, it fits with the other Old Testament fulfillments cited in the infancy narratives, which are not primarily predictive in nature.
Matthew 4:14 places the return of Jesus to Galilee after his baptism in the context of Old Testament fulfillment. Isaiah 9:1-2 speaks of a deliverer who will bring salvation to Galilee after the Assyrian attack and exile. No doubt, Matthew connected this with Jesus because of the stress on sonship and the throne of David in Isaiah 9:6-7. Matthew 8:17 views Jesus' ministry of healing and exorcism as fulfillment of Isaiah 53:4, where the Servant vicariously removes the infirmities of the nation by bearing them himself. In the context of growing opposition from the Pharisees, Matthew 12:17 cites Isaiah 42:1-4 to substantiate Jesus' forbidding those whom he had healed from telling who he was. In Isaiah 42, the Spirit-empowered Servant proclaims justice to the Gentiles with mercy and gentleness. In keeping with this model, Jesus did not brashly confront his opponents with examples of spectacular healing. Instead, he chose strategic withdrawal in his mission of bringing hope to the Gentiles. Matthew 13:35 connects Jesus' use of parables to the deep sayings of the psalmist in Psalm 78:2. Though no predictions are made in the verse cited, Matthew nevertheless describes the psalmist as "the prophet." Matthew 21:4 describes Jesus' plans to ride a donkey's colt into Jerusalem as fulfilling what seems to be a composite of Isaiah 62:11 and Zechariah 9:9. Both Old Testament passages speak of the future deliverance of Jerusalem. Matthew 27:9 finds fulfillment of Zechariah 11:12-13 (with similarities to motifs in Jer 18:2-6 and 19:1-13). Apart from the obvious difficulty with a passage from Zechariah being cited as Jeremiah, the connection to the thirty pieces of silver is hermeneutically difficult as well. It seems best to view this as Matthew's application of an Old Testament situation to Jesus' betrayal due to explicit verbal parallels (thirty pieces of silver, etc.) and implicit theological parallels (Israel's apostasy and rejection of God's messengers).
Three references to the fulfillment of the Old Testament occur in the words of Jesus. In his parabolic discourse, Jesus spoke of God's sovereignty and found the unbelief of his audience to be in keeping with Israel's unbelief at an earlier stage of redemptive history (13:13-15). In answer to his disciples' question about why he spoke in parables to the crowds, Jesus first alluded to Jeremiah 5:21 (and/ or other similar Old Testament texts) and then spoke of the fulfillment of Isaiah 6:9-10. In its original context, this passage spoke of the rebellion and unbelief of Israel in the days of the prophet Isaiah, but it also suits Israel's rebellion in the days of the Messiah Jesus. The other two instances of Jesus speaking of Old Testament fulfillment occur in the same context in Matthew 26:54-56. With his arrest imminent, one of his disciples prepared to fight for him. Jesus said to this disciple that the Father could give him power to avoid arrest, but then raised the question, "How would the Scriptures be fulfilled that describe what must happen now?" Then he addressed the crowd and stated that these things had happened so that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled. While no Old Testament text is introduced here, Jesus probably had Zechariah 13:7 in mind (introduced in 26:31). The arrest of the Shepherd led to the scattering of the sheep. But evidently Jesus saw his arrest as the beginning of fulfillment of other Old Testament passages as well, since he spoke of the prophets in the plural. Thus, the reader is sensitized to note Old Testament fulfillment in Jesus' trials, crucifixion, and resurrection.
To conclude this discussion, it has been established that Old Testament fulfillment in Matthew connotes ethical, historical, and prophetical connections. These categories are not discrete but overlapping; individual fulfillments may contain elements of all three aspects. At times, the ethical element is preeminent (3:15; 5:17). At other times, fulfillment of Old Testament prediction is primary (4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 21:4; 26:54, 56). But probably the most prevalent aspect of fulfillment in Matthew concerns historical patterns (1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 13:14, 35; 23:32; 27:9). Events in Old Testament redemptive history anticipate events in Jesus' ministry in that Jesus fills them with new significance. Even Jesus' opponents have their precursors in the Old Testament. By recapitulating these Old Testament events, Jesus demonstrated the providence of God in fulfilling his promises to Israel. As implied in the genealogy, Old Testament redemptive history is fulfilled by Jesus the Messiah, who is Abraham's son and David's son. This is often called typology.
**Christology.** Matthew uses the Old Testament to demonstrate to his readers that the person, ministry, and teaching of Jesus are rooted in the history, ethics, and prophecies of Israel's Scriptures. The many titles ascribed to Jesus throughout the book of Matthew reveal Matthew's Christology. They are presented below in the order in which one encounters them in Matthew. For additional studies, see France 1989:279-317 and Kingsbury 1975:40-127.
_Messiah/Christ._ Jesus is called "the Messiah" in the very first verse of Matthew, at the end of the genealogy (1:16-17), and at the beginning of the description of the circumstances of his birth (1:18). This cluster of references to Jesus as the Messiah strongly links Jesus to Israel's history and hopes. It is certainly the key to the identity of Jesus in Matthew. A "messiah" is literally one anointed by God for special service or office (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:15-16; 10:1; 16:3, 12-13; 1 Chr 29:22; Isa 45:1). Most significantly for Matthew, the term occurs as a royal title in some Old Testament texts (1 Sam 24:6; 2 Sam 1:14; Ps 2:2). But the Christian notion of a lowly, suffering, eventually crucified Messiah was evidently foreign to the Judaism of Jesus' day. Even John the Baptist had doubts about Jesus being the Messiah (Matt 11:2-3), but through divine revelation Peter was enabled to strongly affirm it (16:16). At that time (16:20), the disciples were told not to tell others that Jesus was the Messiah, evidently to forestall the growing opposition to Jesus' ministry.
Another cluster of references stressing Jesus as Messiah occurs in Matthew's description of the Passion Week in Jerusalem. Jesus' clashes with Israel's religious leaders culminate with an episode that stresses Jesus' Davidic messianic connections (22:41). In contrasting his own view of spirituality with that of the religious leaders, Jesus affirmed that no one except the Messiah should be called "master" (23:10). In his answer to the disciples' question about the signs of his return, Jesus warned them not to believe in counterfeit messiahs (24:23-26). At his hearing before the Jewish council, Jesus' affirmative answer to the high priest's question as to whether he was the Messiah takes the language of Daniel 7:13 (26:64), but this only leads to mockery (26:68). Later, when he offers to release Barabbas, Pilate alludes to the fact that some were calling Jesus the Messiah (27:17, 22).
Of course, in Matthew, the Messiah is crucified, but he is raised and given all authority (28:18), an allusion to Daniel 7:13-14, which recalls Jesus' use of the language of that text in 26:64. It is this exalted Messiah who sends the disciples out to disciple the nations. Perhaps the key to Matthew's distinct view of Jesus as Messiah is the linkage of "Messiah" to "Son of God" in two key passages (16:16; 26:63-64). This will be discussed below under the heading "Son of God."
_Son of David._ This title occurs more frequently in Matthew than in the other Gospels. Matthew identifies Jesus as the Son of David immediately after identifying him as the Messiah in 1:1 and establishes Jesus' Davidic lineage in the infancy narrative (1:20). Subsequent uses of the title occur on the lips of those who call on Jesus to heal them (9:27; 15:22; 20:30-31). On another occasion, a healing leads the crowds to wonder whether Jesus is the Son of David, the Messiah (12:23). Here the one term seems to be tantamount to the other. These texts that connect Jesus' Davidic lineage with his healing ministry demonstrate that Jesus uses his royal authority to help, not to oppress the needy. At Jesus' triumphal entry (21:9), the crowd shouts praise to God for Jesus the Son of David, echoing the language of Psalm 118:25-26. Later that day, Jesus' acceptance of this praise becomes the occasion for the indignation of the religious leaders against him (21:15). When the conflict between Jesus and the religious leaders escalates during the Passion Week, Jesus' final disputation with those leaders is put in terms of the identity of the Messiah as the Son of David. Jesus cites Psalm 110:1 to the effect that David's Son is also David's Lord ( 22:41-45), asserting that the Son of David is also the Son of God. Matthew's use of the Son of David motif stresses Jesus' messianic credentials to heal and to rule. This stress seems to be rooted in such Old Testament texts as 2 Samuel 7:12-16; Psalms 2 and 89; Isaiah 9:6-7 and 11:1ff; and Jeremiah 23:5-6. Jesus, as the Davidic Messiah, inherits the promises God made to David and brings God's rule to bear upon Israel.
_Son of Abraham._ Jesus' title Son of Abraham occurs immediately after his identification as the Messiah, the Son of David in 1:1. Evidently this title in itself does not have messianic implications. The ensuing genealogy stresses this Abrahamic lineage in 1:2, 17—not simply to show Jesus' Jewish roots but to portray Jesus as the one who culminates God's plans and promises to Abraham. One should also note John the Baptist's warning that the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism should not rely on their Abrahamic origins (3:9). For John, repentance, not descent from Abraham, was required to avoid the coming judgment (3:8-10). This theme is furthered by the response of Jesus to the remarkable faith of the Roman officer (8:10-12). Gentiles like this officer (not Jews like those leaders who came to John) would share in the great eschatological banquet with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Ethics, not ethnicity, is the issue. Matthew was not excluding the Jews as a whole from God's eschatological blessings but, rather, stressing the need of all humans, Jew and Gentile alike, to believe in Jesus. Matthew's mention of Abraham reminds us of God's call of Abraham, the promise that in Abraham all nations would be blessed (Gen 12), and the near sacrifice of Abraham's only son (Gen 22). Evidently, the promise to Abraham would not be totally fulfilled in the present world because Jesus took this promise to imply that there would be a resurrection of the dead (22:32; cf. Exod 3:6).
_Immanuel._ The significance of Jesus as "God with us" is developed through the citation of Isaiah 7:14 in 1:23 (cf. Isa 8:8, 10). This crucial passage looms large in Christian theology of the virgin birth of Jesus. Matthew's closing portrayal of Jesus' promise to be with the disciples until the end of the age (28:20) forms a literary inclusion with 1:23 in which the presence of God in the person of Jesus is stressed at both the beginning and the end of the narrative. Another instance of this motif is 18:20.
_King._ The arrival of the "wise men" ( _magoi_ [TG3097, ZG3407]) in Matthew 2 in search of the newborn King of Israel sets in motion a story of conflict between God's true ruler and the evil pretender Herod. Matthew understood Jesus' Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem near the end of his life as the act of a king (21:5), since he cited Isaiah 62:11 to that effect. Jesus' prediction of future judgment portrays him as the enthroned Son of Man (25:31), a king who separates the blessed from the cursed (25:34, 40, 41). Later, at his hearing before Pilate, Jesus accepted Pilate's question as a true statement of his kingship (27:11). Then he endured the soldiers' mocking use of the title (27:29) and Pilate's evidently sarcastic reference to it on the signboard placed over his head on the cross (27:37). Even the Jewish religious leaders mocked Jesus' kingship (27:42), but after his resurrection, he was given all authority and sent his apostles out into the world as their exalted king (28:18; cf. 26:64; Dan 7:13-14).
_Son of God._ Some would argue that "Son of God" is the preeminent title of Jesus in Matthew (Kingsbury 1975:89). With such Old Testament texts as Psalm 2:7 and 89:27 as likely background, Matthew presents Jesus as the virginally conceived Son who uniquely signifies the presence of God with his people (1:23; cf. Isa 7:14). Jesus' sojourn in Egypt reenacted the history of Israel (2:15; cf. Hos 11:1). At his baptism, Jesus was endorsed as the Father's beloved Son and endowed with the Spirit for ministry (3:17; cf. Isa 42:1). Satan soon challenged this endorsement when the Spirit led Jesus to fast in the wilderness, but through reliance on the Scriptures, Jesus vanquished Satan and thereby recapitulated Israel's wilderness wanderings victoriously (4:3, 5). He did not succumb to the temptation to manifest his unique sonship by spectacular acts. Rather, he showed that divine sonship is evident in submission to the will of the Father.
Jesus' divine sonship is also shown in Matthew through his authority over evil spirits and the weather (8:29; 14:32-33). This authority is shared only by the Father and the Son, who is the sole agent through whom people may come to know the Father (11:27). This was recognized by Jesus' apostles, who through Peter acknowledged that he was "the Messiah, the Son of the living God" (16:16). This linkage of the titles Messiah and Son of God is quite significant, although Peter still had a lot to learn about divine sonship as submission to the Father (16:22-23). Soon afterward, Jesus' transfiguration demonstrated to his disciples that as God's Son, his word alone must be heeded.
Jesus' conflict with the religious leaders intensified over time; Matthew portrays this rejection through parabolic imagery (21:33ff; 22:2ff). At the end of their disputes, Jesus' allusion to Psalm 110:1 indicated (to their chagrin) that his sonship was both Davidic and divine (22:45). At his trial before the high priest, Caiaphas asked Jesus whether he was "the Messiah, the Son of God," echoing ironically the testimony of Peter (26:63; cf. 16:16). Jesus' reply ominously cited Daniel's words (Dan 7:13) about the coming of the Son of Man. The irony continues as Matthew records Jesus' crucifixion, where the mockery of the criminals and the religious leaders contrasts with the confession of the Roman soldiers—both the mockers and the confessors referred to Jesus' claim to be the Son of God (27:40, 43, 54).
_Lord._ Matthew's use of this title for Jesus occurs against the background of the use of the term in Graeco-Roman times, ranging from a polite greeting to a human superior (like our "sir") to a term for the Roman emperor, who was thought to be divine. The term also occurs around six thousand times in the Septuagint as a translation of the Hebrew _yhwh_ (Yahweh), the sacred Tetragrammaton, the name of God. Matthew is not at all hesitant to apply the term "Lord" ( _kurios_ [TG2962, ZG3261]) to Jesus. Matthew 3:3 cites Isaiah 40:3, applying to Jesus a passage originally referring to Yahweh. In Matthew 7:21-22 (cf. 25:37, 44) Jesus is addressed as "Lord" in reference to his role as eschatological judge. Frequently, those desiring to be healed addressed Jesus as Lord (8:2, 6, 8; 15:22, 25, 27; 17:15; 20:30-31, 33), as did the disciples (8:21, 25; 14:28, 30; 16:22; 17:4; 18:21; 26:22).
At times Jesus called himself Lord, as when he warned his disciples that if he their Lord (NLT "master") is called prince of demons, it will be worse for them, his servants (10:24-25). Jesus expressed his authority over Sabbath law by referring to himself as Lord of the Sabbath (12:8). He described himself as Lord when he sent the disciples to get a donkey and its colt for the Triumphal Entry, instructing them to tell objectors, "the Lord needs them" (21:3). He described his return as the coming of the Lord (24:42).
The ambiguity of this term means that we must look at each of its usages carefully in context. At times it carries contextual overtones of Jesus' divinity, while at other times, it is merely a respectful way of addressing Jesus.
_Teacher._ In Matthew the disciples never call Jesus "teacher." Rather, this term is nearly always reserved for addresses to Jesus by those who do not follow him, such as the teachers of religious law, Pharisees, tax collectors, supporters of Herod, and Sadducees (8:19; 9:11; 12:38; 17:24; 19:16; 22:16, 24). On three occasions, Jesus called himself teacher (10:24-25; 23:8; 26:18), so it must be noted that for Matthew, there was nothing necessarily sinister in the use of the term.
_Son of Man._ The Gospels use this expression more than any other to refer to Jesus, and it is found with only one exception (John 12:34, in response to a saying of Jesus) in statements ascribed to Jesus. The expression is found over one hundred times in the Old Testament, more than ninety times in Ezekiel alone. It most often describes frail, finite humanity in contrast to the awesomeness of God, and often occurs in synonymous parallelism with "man" (e.g., Num 23:19; Ps 8:4, where NLT translates it as "mortals"). This term is used throughout Ezekiel when God addresses the prophet (e.g. Ezek 2:1, 3, 6; cf. Dan 8:17).
Matthew uses "son of man" thirty times, but with three primary nuances. First, Son of Man occurs in passages that stress Jesus' suffering and humility. As Son of Man, he has no place to lay his head (8:20), he is called a drunk and a glutton (11:19), and he will be in the heart of the earth for three days and nights (12:40). While he was on earth, people thought he was merely a prophet (16:13-14), and the story of his glorious transfiguration would not be told until after his resurrection (17:9). He would be mistreated and suffer just like John the Baptist did (17:12), even to the extent of being betrayed by a close associate (17:22; 20:18; 26:2, 24, 45). Despite this treatment, he would serve others and give his life as a ransom for many (20:28). This corresponds to the Old Testament uses of this title to describe humanity in general and a prophet in particular.
Second, Son of Man occurs in certain passages that stress Jesus' present power and authority. Thus, he had authority on earth to forgive the paralytic's sins, and he healed him to demonstrate that authority (9:6). He is the Lord of the Sabbath (12:8), though his authority was so controversial that he was slandered by his enemies (12:32). His ministry planted the seed of the authoritative Kingdom message (13:37).
Third, the term occurs in passages that focus on Jesus as the glorious coming king. He will send his angels to remove sinners from his Kingdom (13:41) as he comes in the glory of his Father to judge all people (16:27-28; 24:27, 30, 37, 39; 25:31; 26:64). At the time of his glorious Kingdom, his followers will also be abundantly rewarded (19:28), but they must first be on constant alert for his unexpected return (24:44).
The background for the second and third uses of the term to stress Jesus' present authority and glorious return is no doubt Daniel 7:13, to which Jesus alludes in 26:64. The context of Daniel 7:13 involves a judgment scene in which God, pictured as the "Ancient of Days," delivers the rule of the earth to "someone like a son of man," who with his people prevails over his enemies and rules the earth. There are also overtones of Daniel 7:13-14 in the language of the great commission (28:18-20). This duality of present and future nuances, involving both the authority exercised by Jesus during his earthly ministry and the glorious authority he will exercise at his return, is crucial for one's understanding of Matthew's "Kingdom of Heaven."
_Additional Titles._ There are other less significant titles that Matthew applies to Jesus. Among them are bridegroom (9:15; 25:1), the Coming One (11:2; 21:9; 23:39), Servant (12:18; cf. Isa 42:1), prophet (13:57; 16:14; 21:11, 26, 46; cf. Deut 18:15), stone (21:42-44; cf. Ps 118:22-23; Dan 2:44), and rabbi (26:25, 49).
**The Kingdom of Heaven.** While Matthew does speak of the "Kingdom of God" occasionally (12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43), his unique term "Kingdom of Heaven" occurs thirty-two times. Some interpreters attempt to distinguish between the expressions "Kingdom of God" and "Kingdom of Heaven," but this is untenable for at least three reasons. First, Matthew 19:23-24 uses both expressions in a synonymous fashion. Second, a comparison of parallel synoptic texts indicates that Matthew often uses the expression Kingdom of Heaven when Mark and/or Luke use the expression Kingdom of God (e.g., Matt 13:31 with Mark 4:30; Matt 19:14 with Mark 10:15 and Luke 18:17). Third, Matthew's terminology is likely due to the association of heaven as God's realm with God himself (cf. the prominence of this association in Dan 2:18-19, 28, 37, 44; 4:34-35, 37; 5:23; 12:7). This is called metonymy, and it is likely occasioned by reverence for the name of God in Matthew's Christian Jewish community (cf. Luke 16:18, 21). Matthew's four Kingdom of God texts are probably just stylistic variations for literary purposes.
Generally, the Kingdom of Heaven refers to the nearness or even presence of the rule of God in the person, works, and teaching of Jesus (3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 11:12; cf. 12:28), but there are times when it implies (5:19; 7:21; 13:24, 47; 25:1) or clearly describes (8:11; cf. 6:10; 13:38-43; 25:34; 26:29) the future reign of Jesus upon the earth. Perhaps the best way to describe the dynamic nature of God's reign is to say that it has been inaugurated at Jesus' first coming and will be consummated when he returns. Matthew characterizes the preaching of Jesus, John, and the apostles as being centered on the Kingdom (3:2; 4:17; 10:7). References to the present experience of the Kingdom (5:3, 10) frame the beatitudes, which otherwise speak of future Kingdom blessings. Jesus' Kingdom involves a radical righteousness greater than that of the Jewish teachers of the law (5:19-20); it requires disciples to seek it first, before their daily needs (6:33). Even John's greatness as a prophet of the Kingdom is eclipsed by the least one who experiences eschatological Kingdom realities (11:11-12). The preaching of the Kingdom and responses to it are presented figuratively in the parables of the Kingdom in Matthew 13, and its authority is further symbolized by the keys of Matthew 16:19. Entrance into this Kingdom requires childlike humility (18:3-4; 19:14), and the unknown time of its future arrival mandates constant alertness (25:1ff).
**Conflict.** The key motif in Matthew that moves the plot and portrays the struggles involved in the advance of the Kingdom is conflict (cf. 11:12). At the outset of Matthew's story, there is conflict between Herod the Great and the infant Messiah just born in Bethlehem (ch 2). Divine intervention preserves Jesus, but the male babies in Bethlehem perish. As John the Baptist announces Jesus, conflict arises between him and Israel's religious leaders over genuine righteousness (3:7ff). Later John's prophetic denunciation of Herod Antipas's illegal marriage to his brother's former wife results in his imprisonment and grisly execution (14:1-12), and Jesus likens his own treatment to that of John (17:12). Satan himself tries to tempt Jesus to gratify his human needs and accomplish his messianic mission in ways that were disobedient to the Father (4:1-11).
Once Jesus' public ministry began, his teaching about righteousness in the Sermon on the Mount clashed with that of the religious leaders (5:20–6:18), and the people were quick to pick up on the contrast (7:28-29). This led to further, more intense controversies about the forgiveness of sins (9:1-8) and Jesus' associating with sinners (9:9-13). His ministry of exorcism led to the Pharisees' charges that he was collaborating with the devil (9:34; 12:22-24). Soon he had to warn his followers that their ministries would be attended with much opposition (10:16ff; cf. 24:9). Many of the people who heard Jesus' teaching and saw his miracles did not repent and follow him, and he denounced them for their unbelief (11:16-24). The rules of Sabbath observance occasioned a heated dispute (12:1-14); and after that, skeptical religious leaders with evil motives asked Jesus for a sign (12:38; cf. 16:1-4). Jesus' parables of the Kingdom of Heaven also spoke of conflict engendered by varying responses to the message of the Kingdom (13:19-21, 38-39). Even the people in his own synagogue in Nazareth did not believe in his message (13:53-58). Jesus' teaching about inner purity clashed with the Pharisaic tradition of ritual purity through washing hands before meals (15:1-20; cf. 16:5-12). Later, as he moved toward Jerusalem, he debated the matter of divorce with the Pharisees, contrasting their relatively liberal view of it with his own stricter view based on God's original design for marriage (19:3-9).
When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the conflict entered its most intense phase. The Jerusalem leaders were offended at the crowds who shouted Psalm 118:25-26 during the entry and at Jesus' cleansing of the Temple (21:8-17). Then Matthew's narrative presents a conflict over the source of Jesus' authority (21:23-27). This led to Jesus confronting the leaders over their unbelief in his authority (21:28-44), and they wanted to arrest him (21:45-46). Additional conflicts occur in chapter 22, leading to Jesus' indictment of the leaders (23:1-12) and his pronouncement of woes upon them (23:13-36). All that remained was for them to plan (26:3-5) and carry out his arrest (26:47-56), trials (26:57-68; 27:11-26), and crucifixion (27:32-44). Even Jesus' resurrection did not end the enmity, as the Jewish religious leaders conspired with the Roman soldiers to spread the lie that Jesus' disciples stole his body from the tomb, a lie that still circulated when Matthew wrote his Gospel (28:11-15).
Why did these controversies with the religious leaders occur? Jesus claimed that his mission was not to destroy the law and the prophets but to fulfill them, but his interpretations of the Old Testament conflicted with those of the religious leaders, who were committed to the oral traditions passed on to them from previous teachers. So it came down to who was the authoritative interpreter of Moses—Jesus or the religious leaders? For Matthew and his Christian Jewish community, Jesus' teaching about the law of Moses (halakha) was authoritative, and this brought them into conflict with the leaders of the synagogues with which they continued for a time to be associated. It is assumed in this commentary that Matthew's Gospel was written while the community was still associated with the synagogues.
Does Matthew's emphasis on the conflict between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders involve and incite anti-Semitism? There can be no doubt that Christian anti-Semites have used Matthew to promote their agenda. But this was certainly not Matthew's purpose. Most likely Matthew was a Jew and was writing to Jews who believed that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah. These Christian Jews were evidently in a heated religious conflict with non-Christian Jews, but sectarian conflict was common during the time of Second Temple Judaism. No doubt Matthew's agenda was to refute the non-Christian Judaism of the Jewish establishment, regardless of whether that establishment was the Jerusalem leaders whom Jesus opposed or the proto-rabbinic movement that evidently came to be centered in Jabneh (Jamnia) after AD 70 (and therefore regardless of the date of Matthew's composition with respect to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 ). But the situation involved a religious dispute between Jews, not a Gentile polemic against the Jewish race. Christians must acknowledge with shame the fact that Matthew has been misused by anti-Semites, but it is anachronistic to interpret Matthew as a (Gentile) Christian polemic against the Jewish race. (See the commentary on Matthew 23 and the helpful essays of Russell 1986 and McKnight 1993 for additional discussion of Matthew and anti-Semitism.)
**The Church and Gentile World Mission.** The Gospel of Matthew, while often and truly described as the most Jewish of the Gospels, is also the only Gospel that uses the word "church" ( _ekklēsia_ [TG1577, ZG1711]; 16:18; 18:17). As in Daniel 7, so in Matthew—the Son of Man has a community of saints who confess his identity and maintain their own unity. The identity of this community can be gleaned by reading Matthew from the beginning and noting the hints dropped by Matthew concerning the type of people who are followers of Jesus. Or it can be ascertained by taking note of the final triumphant commission Jesus gave his disciples (28:18-20).
From the beginning of the Gospel, Matthew begins to make it clear that the community of the Messiah is formed from unexpected sources. The mention of Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba (1:3, 5, 6), all evidently Gentiles with overtones of scandal in their backgrounds, prepares the reader for Jesus' association with the sinners of his own day. The inexplicable arrival of the mysterious wise men (Magi) from the east who wish to worship Jesus (2:1-2) foreshadows the power of the message of the Kingdom to summon followers in surprising ways. Jesus' amazement at the faith of the Roman officer (8:10-12) and his acknowledgement of the faith of the Canaanite woman (15:28) encourage the readers of this Gospel to believe that the message of the Kingdom is able to engender faith from unlikely sources in their own day. The Roman soldier's amazed confirmation of Jesus' true identity at the crucifixion (27:54) has a similar effect. All of these episodes from the narrative collectively encouraged Matthew's original Jewish readers to expand their vision of the people of God. It was not that they should abandon their fellow Jews, but they were to take the message of the Kingdom to "all the nations" (28:19).
Jesus' final commissioning of his disciples was based on his exalted, post- resurrection status. Having received all power, he sent the eleven to all the nations to make disciples who would obey all his commands, and he armed them with the promise that he would constantly be with them until the end of the age (28:18-20). The universal scope of this commission is daunting, but it can be accomplished if the disciples remember that their Messiah, like the victorious Son of Man in Daniel 7, has received universal authority.
There is some tension in Matthew between Jesus' exclusive ministry to Israel (10:5-6; 15:24) and his subsequent mandate for mission to all nations. The transition from an exclusively Jewish mission to an inclusive mission encompassing all the nations is best explained as Jesus preparing an eschatological Jewish remnant to be a light to the Gentiles. See further the notes and commentary on 10:5-6; 15:24.
## OUTLINE (SEE ALSO "LITERARY STRUCTURE" UNDER LITERARY CONCERNS IN THE INTRODUCTION)
I. Introduction: Origin of Jesus the Messiah (1:1–2:23)
A. Title (1:1)
B. Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah (1:2-17; cf. Luke 3:23-38)
C. Birth of Jesus the Messiah (1:18-25)
D. Visit of the Magi (2:1-12)
E. The Escape and Return of the Messiah (2:13-23)
II. The Early Days of Jesus' Kingdom Ministry (3:1–7:29)
A. Ministry of John the Baptist (3:1-12; cf. Mark 1:1-8; Luke 3:1-14)
B. The Baptism of Jesus (3:13-17; cf. Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22)
C. Testing of the Son of God (4:1-11; cf. Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13)
D. Ministry in Galilee (4:12-25 cf. Mark 1:14-20; Luke 3:19-20; 4:14-15, 44)
E. The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)
1. The Beatitudes (5:1-10; cf. Luke 6:20-26)
2. Persecution and witness (5:11-16)
3. Jesus' teaching about the law (5:17-20)
4. Jesus' teaching about anger, adultery, and divorce (5:21-32)
5. Jesus' teaching about vows, revenge, and love (5:33-48)
6. Religious practices (6:1-18)
7. Material possessions (6:19-34)
8. Discernment in dealing with people (7:1-6; cf. Luke 6:37-42)
9. God answers prayer (7:7-11; cf. Luke 11:9-13)
10. The Golden Rule (7:12; cf. Luke 6:31)
11. Warnings (7:13-27)
12. Result of the Sermon (7:28-29)
III. The Galilean Ministry Continues (8:1–10:42)
A. Three Cycles of Miracles and Discipleship (8:1–10:4)
1. Three healing miracles (8:1-17)
2. Two would-be disciples (8:18-22)
3. A storm tests the disciples' faith (8:23-27)
4. Jesus exorcises demons (8:28-34)
5. Jesus heals a paralyzed man (9:1-8; cf. Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26)
6. Jesus calls Matthew (9:9-13; cf. Mark 2:13-17; Luke 5:27-32)
7. A discussion about fasting (9:14-17; cf. Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39)
8. Jesus raises a synagogue official's daughter and heals a woman (9:18-26)
9. Jesus heals the blind and mute (9:27-34)
10. A compassionate shepherd and a plentiful harvest (9:35-38)
11. Jesus commissions the Twelve (10:1-4)
B. Mission and Suffering (10:5-42)
1. The apostles' commission (10:5-15; cf. Mark 6:8-11; Luke 9:3-5)
2. Jesus warns of persecution (10:16-23)
3. Jesus forbids fear (10:24-33)
4. Jesus promises reward after suffering (10:34-42)
IV. Increased Opposition to the Kingdom of Heaven (11:1–12:50)
A. John the Baptist's Question (11:1-6; cf. Luke 7:18-23)
B. Jesus' Testimony to John the Baptist (11:7-19)
C. Jesus Pronounces Woe to Unbelievers (11:20-24)
D. Jesus' Thanksgiving and Invitation (11:25-30)
E. Controversy about the Sabbath (12:1-8; cf. Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-5)
F. Healing on the Sabbath in the Synagogue (12:9-14; cf. Mark 3:1-6; Luke 6:6-11)
G. Jesus, the Servant of the Lord (12:15-21)
H. Jesus and the Prince of Demons (12:22-37; cf. Mark 3:20-30)
I. The Sign of Jonah (12:38-45)
J. The True Family of Jesus (12:46-50; cf. Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21)
V. Parables of the Kingdom of Heaven (13:1-53)
A. The Parable of the Sower (13:1-9; cf. Mark 4:1-9; Luke 8:4-8)
B. The Reason for Parables (13:10-17)
C. Jesus Explains the Parable of the Sower (13:18-23)
D. Jesus Tells Three More Parables (13:24-33; cf. Mark 4:30-34)
E. Matthew Explains Why Jesus Told Parables (13:34-35)
F. Jesus Explains the Parable of the Weeds and Wheat (13:36-43)
G. Jesus Tells the Parables of the Hidden Treasure, the Pearl, and the Fishing Net (13:44-50)
H. Jesus Tells the Parable of the Homeowner (13:51-52)
VI. Opposition to the Kingdom Continues (13:53–18:35)
A. Various Responses to the Son of God (13:53–17:27)
1. Jesus rejected at Nazareth (13:53-58; cf. Mark 6:1-6)
2. The death of John the Baptist (14:1-12; cf. Mark 6:14-29; Luke 9:7-10)
3. Jesus feeds five thousand (14:13-21; cf. Mark 6:31-44; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15)
4. Jesus walks on water (14:22-36; cf. Mark 6:45-56; John 6:16-21)
5. Conflict over the tradition of the elders (15:1-20; cf. Mark 7:1-23)
6. Faith of a Gentile woman (15:21-28; cf. Mark 7:24-30)
7. Miracles by the Sea of Galilee (15:29-39; cf. Mark 7:31–8:10)
8. The demand for a sign (16:1-4; cf. Mark 8:11-13)
9. The leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16:5-12; cf. Mark 8:14-21)
10. Peter's confession and Jesus' promise (16:13-20; cf. Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21)
11. Jesus' suffering and a model of discipleship (16:21-28; cf. Mark 8:31–9:1; Luke 9:22-27)
12. Jesus' transfiguration (17:1-13; cf. Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36)
13. Jesus heals an epileptic boy (17:14-21; cf. Mark 9:14-29; Luke 9:37-43)
14. Jesus predicts his death and pays his tax (17:22-27; cf. Mark 9:30-32; Luke 9:44-45)
B. Life and Relationships in the Kingdom (18:1-35)
1. Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-14; cf. Mark 9:33-50; Luke 9:46-50)
2. Correcting a sinning believer (18:15-20)
3. Forgiving a sinning believer (18:21-35)
VII. Opposition Comes to a Head in Judea (19:1–25:46)
A. Ministry in Judea (19:1–23:39)
1. Teaching on marriage and divorce; blessing little children (19:1-15; cf. Mark 10:1-16; Luke 18:15-17)
2. Riches or the Kingdom? (19:16-30; cf. Mark 10:17-31; Luke 18:18-30)
3. The parable of the vineyard workers (20:1-16)
4. Jesus predicts his death as a ransom for many (20:17-28; cf. Mark 10:32-45; Luke 18:31-33)
5. Jesus heals two blind men (20:29-34; cf. Mark 10:46-52; Luke 18:35-43)
6. The Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (21:1-11; cf. Mark 11:1-11; Luke 19:29-44; John 12:12-19)
7. Jesus clears the Temple (21:12-17; cf. Mark 11:15-18; Luke 19:45-48)
8. Jesus curses the fig tree (21:18-22; cf. Mark 11:19-25)
9. The authority of Jesus challenged (21:23-32; cf. Mark 11:27-33; Luke 20:1-8)
10. The parable of the evil farmers (21:33-46; cf. Mark 12:1-12; Luke 20:9-19)
11. The parable of the wedding feast (22:1-14)
12. Paying taxes to Caesar (22:15-22; cf. Mark 12:13-17; Luke 20:20-26)
13. The Sadducees' question concerning marriage in the resurrection (22:23-33; cf. Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40)
14. The Pharisee lawyer's question concerning the greatest commandment (22:34-40; cf. Mark 12:28-34; Luke 10:25-28)
15. Jesus questions the Pharisees concerning the Messiah's sonship (22:41-46; cf. Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44)
16. Jesus' teachings on leadership (23:1-12; cf. Mark 12:38-40; Luke 20:45-47)
17. Jesus' prophetic woes against the religious leaders (23:13-36)
18. Jesus' lament over Jerusalem (23:37-39)
B. The Judgment of Jerusalem and the Coming of Christ (24:1–25:46)
1. The first pains of childbirth: life in the present age (24:1-14; cf. Mark 13:1-13; Luke 21:1-19)
2. The desecration of the Holy Place: the Temple destroyed (24:15-28; cf. Mark 13:14-23; Luke 21:20-24 )
3. The coming of the Son of Man (Matt 24:29-31; cf. Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)
4. The parable of the fig tree (24:32-35; cf. Mark 13:28-31; Luke 21:29-33)
5. The necessity of alertness (24:36-51; cf. Mark 13:32).
6. The parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids (25:1-13)
7. The parable of the three servants (25:14-30)
8. The final judgment (25:31-46)
VIII. Conclusion: Passion, Resurrection, and Commission (26:1–28:20)
A. The Plot to Kill Jesus (26:1-5; cf. Mark 14:1-2; Luke 21:37–22:2)
B. The Anointing at Bethany (26:6-13; cf. Mark 14:3-9; John 12:2-11)
C. Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus (26:14-16; cf. Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6)
D. The Last Supper (26:17-30; cf. Mark 14:12-25; Luke 22:7-20; John 13:21-30)
E. Prediction of the Disciples' Desertion (26:31-35; cf. Mark 14:26-31; Luke 22:31-34; John 13:31-38)
F. Jesus Prays in Gethsemane (26:36-46; cf. Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:39-46)
G. The Arrest of Jesus (26:47-56; cf. Mark 14:43-52; Luke 22:47-53; John 18:1-12)
H. Jesus Appears before the Sanhedrin (26:57-68; cf. Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54-55, 63-71)
I. Peter's Three Denials (26:69-75; cf. Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:55-62; John 18:25-27)
J. The Suicide of Judas (27:1-10)
K. Jesus' Trial before Pilate (27:11-26; cf. Mark 15:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16)
L. The Crucifixion of Jesus (27:27-44; cf. Mark 15:16-32; Luke 23:26-43; John 19:17-27)
M. The Death of Jesus (27:45-56; cf. Mark 15:33-41; Luke 23:44-49; John 19:28-37)
N. The Burial of Jesus (27:57-66; cf. Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:38-42)
O. The Resurrection of Jesus (28:1-10; cf. Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18)
P. The Report of the Guard (28:11-15)
Q. The Commission of the Risen Lord (28:16-20; cf. Mark 16:15-18)
# COMMENTARY ON
# Matthew
## TEXT [Commentary]
I. Introduction: Origin of Jesus the Messiah (1:1–2:23)
A. Title (1:1)
1 This is a record of the ancestors of Jesus the Messiah, a descendant of David and of Abraham[*]:
## NOTES
1:1 **record of the ancestors.** This translates a phrase that is lit. "book of the beginning" (cf. Gen 5:1). As such, 1:1 is an introduction to the genealogy of 1:2-17 rather than a title for the infancy narrative of Matt 1–2, the narrative of Jesus' life up to the beginning of his ministry (1:1–4:11), or for the Gospel as a whole. Strictly speaking, it seems most likely that this "record of the ancestors of Jesus the Messiah" introduces the infancy narrative of Matt 1–2. However, when Matthew is read as a literary whole, the key ideas of 1:1 are found throughout this Gospel. Thus, from a literary standpoint, it is difficult to limit the title to the genealogy. Davies and Allison (1988:150) argue from the LXX usage of this expression (Gen 2:4; 5:1) that Matthew's entire book is involved in this title.
**Son of David and son of Abraham.** These are key persons in the genealogy that follows this verse (cf. 1:2, 6, 17).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
While the word "Jesus" in 1:1 is obviously a personal name, the NLT's "the Messiah" indicates that the Greek _Christos_ [TG5547, ZG5986] ("Christ," "Messiah," "anointed one"; cf. 1:16, 17, 18; 2:4; 11:2; 16:16, 20; 22:42; 23:10; 24:5, 23; 26:63, 68; 27:17, 22) should be viewed as a title that indicates Jesus' supreme role and office in God's plan. Both _Christos_ and its Hebrew equivalent ( _meshiakh_ ) are related to the ceremony of anointing a king or priest for office in recognition of God's approval (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:15-16; 10:1; 16:3, 12-13; 1 Chr 29:22). In some Old Testament passages the term "the LORD's anointed" is a title for the divinely endorsed king (1 Sam 24:6; 2 Sam 1:14; Ps 2:2). During intertestamental times, messianic speculation flourished as Israel reflected on the prophetic hope of a restored Davidic monarchy. Messianic hope was tied to Israel's longing for God's final judgment of the nations and Israel's resulting freedom from Gentile domination. In Matthew _Christos_ is a key title that portrays Jesus as the one who fulfills these promises.
When Matthew joins "Son of David, Son of Abraham" to "Messiah," Jesus' unique status is even more strongly stressed. "Son of David" is frequently a messianic title (1:1, 6, 17, 20; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30, 31; 21:9, 15; 22:42, 45), drawing from such Old Testament material as 2 Samuel 7:11-16 and Psalm 91. "Son of Abraham" occurs only in 1:1, but Abraham is mentioned elsewhere (1:2, 17; 3:9; 8:11; 22:32) as the proto-typical Israelite whose eminent status in God's Kingdom is unquestionable. This close connection of Jesus with Abraham may be contrasted with John's and Jesus' severance of the Jewish religious leaders from any connection with Abraham (3:9; 8:11). Perhaps Matthew's stress on Gentiles (e.g., 2:1; 4:15; 8:5; 15:22; 27:54) implies that in Jesus, the promise that all nations would be blessed through Abraham is fulfilled (Gen 12:1-3).
It is obvious even to the casual reader that each of the four Gospels begins uniquely. Mark begins in the most concise fashion and has the reader at the outset of Jesus' ministry by 1:9. The Johannine prologue (1:1-18) concerning the "Word" who became flesh sets the tone for many of the themes of John's Gospel. Matthew and Luke alone contain material about Jesus' infancy and early years, though this material seldom overlaps. All four Gospels do, however, stress the preparatory ministry of John the Baptist before they launch into the ministry of Jesus.
Matthew's story of the origin of Jesus begins with a title and genealogy (1:1-17) that show who Jesus is. Matthew continues with the account of his miraculous birth (1:18-25), which shows how Jesus entered the world. Matthew then follows with the events surrounding the arrival of the mysterious Magi, Jesus' sojourn in Egypt, and his return to Nazareth (2:1-23), showing where Jesus lived. This unique Matthean material leads into the shared story of John's ministry (3:1-12), Jesus' baptism (3:13-17), and Jesus' temptation (4:1-11). All this paves the way for the beginning of his ministry (4:12ff) while introducing the reader to such crucial Matthean themes as the sonship of Jesus and his role in fulfilling the Old Testament.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah (1:2-17; cf. Luke 3:23-38)
2 Abraham was the father of Isaac.
Isaac was the father of Jacob.
Jacob was the father of Judah and his brothers.
3 Judah was the father of Perez and Zerah (whose mother was Tamar).
Perez was the father of Hezron.
Hezron was the father of Ram.[*]
4 Ram was the father of Amminadab.
Amminadab was the father of Nahshon.
Nahshon was the father of Salmon.
5 Salmon was the father of Boaz (whose mother was Rahab).
Boaz was the father of Obed (whose mother was Ruth).
Obed was the father of Jesse.
6 Jesse was the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon (whose mother was Bathsheba, the widow of Uriah).
7 Solomon was the father of Rehoboam.
Rehoboam was the father of Abijah.
Abijah was the father of Asa.[*]
8 Asa was the father of Jehoshaphat.
Jehoshaphat was the father of Jehoram.[*]
Jehoram was the father[*] of Uzziah.
9 Uzziah was the father of Jotham.
Jotham was the father of Ahaz.
Ahaz was the father of Hezekiah.
10 Hezekiah was the father of Manasseh.
Manasseh was the father of Amon.[*]
Amon was the father of Josiah.
11 Josiah was the father of Jehoiachin[*] and his brothers (born at the time of the exile to Babylon).
12 After the Babylonian exile:
Jehoiachin was the father of Shealtiel.
Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel.
13 Zerubbabel was the father of Abiud.
Abiud was the father of Eliakim.
Eliakim was the father of Azor.
14 Azor was the father of Zadok.
Zadok was the father of Akim.
Akim was the father of Eliud.
15 Eliud was the father of Eleazar.
Eleazar was the father of Matthan.
Matthan was the father of Jacob.
16 Jacob was the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary.
Mary gave birth to Jesus, who is called the Messiah.
17 All those listed above include fourteen generations from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the Babylonian exile, and fourteen from the Babylonian exile to the Messiah.
## NOTES
1:2 With this verse, the familiar genealogical pattern "A was the father of B, B was the father of C" begins. As the genealogy proceeds, the pattern is slightly changed in a few places by the addition of certain details (mentioned in the notes below), until it is decisively modified in the description of Jesus' birth in 1:16. Here in 1:2 the phrase "and his brothers" is added, perhaps as an allusion to the twelve tribes who form the nation of Israel and the pattern for the twelve apostles (Carson 1984:65; cf. 8:11; 19:28). It is important to read 1:2 in light of 1:1. Mention of Abraham concludes 1:1 and begins 1:2, initiating an _inclusio_ that begins with Messiah, David, and Abraham (1:1) and concludes with Abraham, David, and Messiah (1:17). Abraham stands at the decisive point of the origin of the nation of Israel (Gen 12:1ff) and is also at the root of the new people of God (3:9; 8:11). In view of the women mentioned later, it is noteworthy that the matriarchs of Israel are not mentioned here alongside the patriarchs.
**Judah.** Prominent among his brothers due to the fact that his tribe bears the scepter (Gen 49:10; cf. Matt 2:6; Heb 7:14).
1:3 **Tamar.** Here it is added that Tamar was the mother of Perez, and that Zerah was Perez's brother. Tamar, the wife of Judah's son Er, is the first woman mentioned in the genealogy. Genesis 38:6-30 relates the story of her incestuous liaison with her father-in-law Judah after Judah did not fulfill his obligation to provide a levirate husband for her.
1:5 **Rahab . . . Ruth.** Here it is added that Rahab was the mother of Boaz and that Ruth was the mother of Obed. Rahab is well known to readers of the Bible (Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). According to Joshua 2, Rahab, the prostitute of Jericho, protected the Israelite spies due to her fear of the God of Israel. Her family was spared from the destruction of that city and lived among the Israelites. The OT does not indicate that Rahab married Salmon and became the mother of Boaz. The story of Ruth the Moabitess coming to Bethlehem with her mother-in-law Naomi and marrying Boaz is told in the book of Ruth. Ruth 4:18-22 is likely a source for Matt 1:3b-6.
1:6 **King David.** Here it is added that David was king, which stresses his centrality in Matthew's genealogy and theology. David is the pivotal person at the end of Matthew's first set of fourteen generations and at the beginning of the second set. The name Bathsheba does not occur in the verse but is added in the NLT to clarify the Gr. expression that is more lit. translated "the one who had been Uriah's wife." This is a curious way to refer to Bathsheba. Perhaps it is a euphemism, or perhaps it calls attention to David's sin in having Uriah killed in battle. More likely it hints that Solomon's mother was a Gentile (since Uriah was a Hittite). Second Samuel 11–12 relates the sad story of Bathsheba's adultery with David, the ensuing intrigue and death of her husband Uriah, the death of her son by David, and finally the birth of Solomon. With the mention of Bathsheba, Matthew has now included in Jesus' genealogy the names of four women, all of whom were evidently Gentiles with somewhat tawdry pasts.
1:11 **exile to Babylon.** Here the brothers of Jehoiachin are mentioned, along with the pivotal event of the exile to Babylon (cf. 1:12, 17). Matthew's second set of fourteen generations descends from the glories of King David to the shameful rebellion of his successors, which leads to the judgment of God in the Exile.
1:12 **Babylonian exile.** The final set of "fourteen" generations pivots on the exile to Babylon and moves from the abyss of the Exile to the apex of the Messiah.
1:13-15 **Abiud . . . Jacob.** The nine people named from Abiud to Jacob in 1:13-15 evidently span a time period of around 500 years, but none of them are mentioned in the OT.
1:16 **Joseph, the husband of Mary.** The line of Jesus from prototypical Abraham to royal David now comes down to unpretentious Joseph. In 1:18–2:23 Joseph's obedient care for his adopted son is stressed, but here in 1:16 he is described only as Mary's husband. His brief appearance in Matthew underlines his modeling of obedience and his Davidic descent, even as a humble carpenter (1:16, 18, 19, 20, 24; 2:13, 19; 13:55). His wife Mary is not mentioned frequently either (1:16, 18, 20; 2:11; 13:55; 27:56, 61; 28:1).
**Mary gave birth to Jesus.** After stating thirty-nine times since 1:2 that A "was the father of" B, Matthew breaks the pattern by describing the birth of Jesus only in terms of his mother. The unique circumstances of Jesus' birth, to be explained more fully as a miracle in 1:18-25, are expressed here simply by stating that Jesus was born from Mary, the wife of Joseph. The active verb _egennēsen_ [TG1080, ZG1164] has occurred thirty-nine times in 1:2-16a, but in 1:16b the passive _egennēthij_ occurs so that 1:16b reads "from whom (Mary—the pronoun is fem.) was born Jesus." Thus the reader is already made aware that the birth of Jesus who is called the Messiah is very different from the previous births in the genealogy and is thereby prepared for the more detailed explanation in 1:18-25.
1:17 **fourteen generations.** This verse summarizes the genealogy and clarifies its structure. The genealogy has three movements of fourteen generations: (1) from Abraham to David (1:2-6a), (2) from David to the Exile (1:6b-11), and (3) from the Exile to Jesus the Messiah (1:12-16). Careful readers will note that it is difficult to arrange the genealogy into three groups of fourteen generations, but Matthew was more interested in the symbolism of "fourteen" than in the precision of his scheme. David is the fourteenth person in the genealogy, which matches up with the symbolic number of his name when its consonants in Heb., ( _Daleth-Waw-Daleth_ ) are added up because = 4 ( _Daleth_ is the fourth letter of the Heb. alphabet), and = 6 ( _Waw_ is the sixth letter). Such addition of the numerical values corresponding to letters in words is called _gematria_. By using this literary technique, Matthew underlines the importance of Jesus' Davidic roots and the providence of God through Israel's history.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
After mentioning the Messiah, David, and Abraham in his title (1:1), Matthew uses a chiastic pattern in his genealogy to mention Abraham (1:2), David (1:6), and the Messiah (1:16). The structure of the genealogy is made clear by its summary in 1:17. It traces fourteen generations from Abraham to David, fourteen generations from David to the exile in Babylon, and fourteen generations from the Exile to the Messiah. Modern readers should beware a tendency to dismiss the genealogy as a boring, irrelevant way to begin a book about Jesus. If Jesus is to be Messiah, he must be connected to David and Abraham, as 1:1 affirms, and the genealogy develops this connection. However, it is clear from 1:17 and from a comparison with Luke 3:23-38 that the genealogy does not purport to be an exhaustive or chronologically exact record of Jesus' family tree. While genuine historical information is provided, the purpose is primarily theological, not chronological.
The three sections of the genealogy pivot on King David and the exile to Babylon. David represents one of the highest points of the Old Testament narrative, and the Exile represents one of the lowest points. It is likely that in Jesus, the Son of David, Matthew saw one who would restore a new Israel from an exile even more deplorable than the one in Babylon. Matthew had evidently chosen fourteen generations to structure his genealogy because David is the fourteenth name in the genealogy and fourteen is the numerical value of David in Hebrew (see note on 1:17). Matthew's use of this _gematria_ stresses the centrality of David in Jesus' background as well as the centrality of David the great's even greater son, Jesus, for Matthew's readers.
In the "fourteen" generations from Abraham to King David, Matthew demonstrates Jesus' sonship and aligns Jesus as Messiah with the historical outworking of the promise of God. In the "fourteen" generations from David to the Exile, Matthew recounts the decline of Israel under the judgment of God. And in the "fourteen" generations from the Exile to the Messiah, Matthew traces the faithful purpose of God in fulfilling his promise despite the rebellion of his people.
Three issues in the genealogy call for more extended discussion: (1) the discrepancy with the number fourteen, (2) the reason why Matthew included the women in the genealogy, and (3) the relation of Matthew's genealogy to Luke's.
The Number Fourteen. The table on the following page displays the discrepancy in the use of the number fourteen. It shows that only the second set of "fourteen" generations actually has fourteen. The first and third sets actually have thirteen generations.
Scholars have responded to this discrepancy in different fashions. One can come up with three sets of fourteen names in the following way. The first set of fourteen runs from Abraham to David (1:2-6a). The second set runs from Solomon to Jeconiah (1:6b-12). The third set runs either from Shealtiel to Jesus (including Mary) or from Jeconiah to Jesus (excluding Mary; 1:12-16). The first option for the third set is more plausible, since Jeconiah has already been counted once as the last name in the second set. Brown (1993:82) notes that there are indeed fourteen names in the first set, so perhaps Matthew intended that Abraham (1:2) be viewed as a generation. But this will not work in the third set, where the first name (Jeconiah) represents the last generation of the second set. But all this may be irrelevant, since Matthew is speaking of generations (1:17), not names.
THE THREE "FOURTEENS" OF MATTHEW'S GENEALOGY
---
Matthew 1:1-6a | Matthew 1:6b-11 | Matthew 1:12-16
1. Abraham-Isaac | David-Solomon | Jeconiah-Shealtiel
2. Isaac-Jacob | Solomon-Rehoboam | Shealtiel-Zerubbabel
3. Jacob-Judah | Rehoboam-Abijah | Zerubbabel-Abiud
4. Judah-Perez | Abijah-Asa | Abiud-Eliakim
5. Perez-Hezron | Asa-Jehoshaphat | Eliakim-Azor
6. Hezron-Ram | Jehoshaphat-Jehoram | Azor-Zadok
7. Ram-Amminadab | Jehoram-Uzziah | Zadok-Akim
8. Amminadab-Nahshon | Uzziah-Jotham | Akim-Eliud
9. Nahshon-Salmon | Jotham-Ahaz | Eliud-Eleazar
10. Salmon-Boaz | Ahaz-Hezekiah | Eleazar-Matthan
11. Boaz-Obed | Hezekiah-Manasseh | Matthan-Jacob
12. Obed-Jesse | Manasseh-Amon | Jacob-Joseph
13. Jesse-David | Amon-Josiah | Joseph (Mary)
14. | Josiah-Jehoiachin
|
Blomberg (1992:53) remarks that ancient literary convention often alternated between inclusive (first and third sets) and exclusive (second set) reckoning. If this is true, the shift between thirteen and fourteen is understandable. It has been suggested that names were omitted due to errors in the transmission of the text, but there is no manuscript evidence for any such omissions. Gundry (1994:19) solves the problem in the third set by suggesting that Matthew counts Joseph and Mary as separate generations, but this breaks the literary pattern in 1:16 and seems to count the "non-generation" of Jesus by Joseph as a generation. There are also numerous other suggestions, all of which are even less convincing.
However one handles this problem, Carson's point (1984:68) is noteworthy: "The symbolic value of the sets of fourteen is of more significance than their precise breakdown." Matthew certainly knew basic arithmetic, but Matthew's literary conventions are ancient, not modern. By modern standards, Matthew's linear genealogy is artificial because it is not exhaustive. Matthew has omitted three names found in 1 Chronicles 3:10-14 between Solomon and Josiah, and other omissions can also be noted (Brown 1993:82-84). But it is not that Matthew has erred, since he did not intend to work exhaustively and precisely. The fact that David is the fourteenth name in the genealogy, along with the symbolic significance of fourteen as the numerical value of David's name, explains the artificiality of the genealogy.
The Women in Matthew's Genealogy. A second feature of the genealogy that calls for comment is the inclusion of the women. It is generally acknowledged that women are seldom included in Jewish genealogies, which are usually patrilineal. (For some exceptions, see Gen 11:29; 22:20-24; 35:22-26; 1 Chr 2:18-21, 24, 34, 46-49; 7:24.)
Since the days of the church fathers, it has been proposed that Matthew includes the women as prototypical sinners whom Jesus came to save. Thus, the women take their place in the narrative alongside the Magi, the Roman centurion, the Canaanite woman, and others in Matthew who bear testimony to the grace of God. A similar view has it that all these women were guilty of scandalous sexual union. To be sure, Tamar and especially Rahab were guilty of heinous sins, but this does not seem to be the case with Ruth and Bathsheba. The Old Testament account of Bathsheba's adultery with David (2 Sam 11) appears to characterize her as the passive victim of his aggression. Ruth's contact with Boaz at night (Ruth 3:7-15) is not a steamy scene of seduction but involves a marriage proposal to a kinsman as enjoined in the Old Testament. Another problem here concerns Matthew's intent in listing these women alongside Mary, whose virtuous character is stressed. Unless Matthew intended these women to contrast with Mary, it makes little sense to mention them.
Another popular approach to this question asserts that all these women were Gentiles who typify Matthew's intent to stress that the gospel is for all the nations. This is repeatedly shown in the narrative and in a climactic manner at the conclusion to the book. Tamar and Rahab were Canaanites. Ruth was a Moabite, and Bathsheba was evidently a Hittite like her husband Uriah. Against this, it is argued that Jewish tradition generally viewed these women as virtuous proselytes. But their Gentile origins are not thereby denied, and this would make them even better prototypes of Matthew's stress on Gentile mission. The problem of relating these women to Mary remains, however. If this view is adopted, it must be assumed that Matthew intended for these women to neither be contrasted with Mary nor considered typical of her.
Blomberg (1991), interacting with Schaberg (1987) and Horsley (1989), argues that all these women bore illegitimate children and thus paved the way for the suspicion that Jesus was also illegitimately conceived by Mary. Thus Matthew 1–2 implies that God liberates people from the stigma of illegitimacy through the virgin birth of the Messiah. This view has the strength of tying these four women to Mary with a common thread, something lacking in the preceding views. But the view can only presume that the prostitute Rahab had an illegitimate child, since the Old Testament is silent on this. Furthermore, Ruth's union with Boaz seems to be legitimate. In these two cases, only the suspicion of illegitimacy can be implied.
It appears that Matthew's inclusion of four noteworthy or even notorious women in his genealogy has not yet been satisfactorily explained. Certain elements of all the views have merit. Perhaps all that can be said is that the presence of these women in the genealogy implies Matthew's stress on the universal world mission of the gospel and his later focus on genuine piety. God's grace in Jesus the Messiah reaches beyond Israel to Gentiles, beyond men to women, beyond the self- righteous to sinners. In saving his people from their sins, Jesus is not bound by race, gender, or even scandal.
Matthew's Genealogy and Luke's. A third area of discussion in Matthew's genealogy concerns its relationship to Luke's genealogy (Luke 3:23-38). My discussion will first compare and contrast the genealogies and then turn to the theological issues. While Matthew's genealogy selectively and thus somewhat artificially traces Jesus' ancestors from Abraham on, Luke more comprehensively covers this ground from Jesus all the way back to Adam. There are over sixty persons mentioned by Luke who are not mentioned by Matthew. Luke has twenty-one pre-Abrahamic generations and fourteen generations between Abraham and David (one more than Matthew's "fourteen"). Between David and Shealtiel, Luke has twenty-one generations to Matthew's fifteen. From Shealtiel to Jesus, Luke has twenty generations to Matthew's twelve. The syntax of the genealogies differs in that Matthew follows the "A was the father of B" pattern, while Luke utilizes the genitive of relationship: "A was the son of B." Context differs as well: Matthew places his genealogy at the outset of his Gospel, while Luke sandwiches his between his accounts of Jesus' baptism and temptation. Matthew's 3 x 14 structure is a transparent feature of his genealogy, but there is a great deal of debate over the possibility of an 11 x 7 structure for Luke's.
A major difference occurs in Matthew 1:6 and Luke 3:31, where Matthew puts Solomon after David and Luke puts Nathan after David. From this point, the genealogies diverge totally until they converge briefly with Shealtiel and Zerubbabel in Matthew 1:12 and Luke 3:27. Then they diverge again until Joseph in Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23. In other words, the genealogies converge in Matthew 1:2-6 and Luke 3:32-34 (with one difference); Matthew 1:12 and Luke 3:27; and Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23. But they diverge much more often: in Matthew 1:3 and Luke 3:33; Matthew 1:6-16 and Luke 3:24-31 (with one agreement). Between Abraham and Jesus, Luke has 56 generations, and only 12 of these converge with Matthew's 42 generations. Convergence occurs during the premonarchial period, divergence elsewhere.
These genealogies and their relationship to each other raise some theological questions, beginning with historicity. Both genealogies have their individual historical problems, and additional problems arise when they are compared. People are mentioned in the genealogies who do not turn up in the Old Testament or anywhere else that we know of. And people in one genealogy do not match up with people in the other. At this point, one's overall theological perspective informs exegesis. Scholars who are skeptical of the historical accuracy of the Gospels tend to deprecate the historicity of the genealogies and totally despair of ever reaching anything approaching a solution to the problems. Such scholars see the genealogies as theological constructions with dubious historical moorings. There are, of course, others who prefer to remain in ignorance of the difficulties while proclaiming a faith that does not wish to be confused by facts. However, there is good reason to accept the historical reliability of the Gospels, and those who are committed to this (see Blomberg 1987) point to solutions that are plausible, though not totally satisfying. It is the faith commitment of the individual scholar that is decisive. The problem is that there is simply insufficient information for convincing conclusions to be reached.
Another line of theological discussion is the question of the differences in the genealogies and their respective purposes. It has been argued by many older commentators (e.g., Broadus 1886:6; though disputed by Barnes 1868:2 and Calvin 1972:54-55) that Matthew gives Joseph's genealogy, while Luke gives Mary's. While it is possible that Mary was a descendant of David (Luke 1:32), she is not mentioned in the genealogy. Rather Joseph is (Luke 3:23). This theory arises not from reading Luke but as an expedient to relieve a difficulty (Carson 1984:64).
Another approach sees both genealogies as Joseph's, but with the nuance that Matthew provides Joseph's royal succession to the throne and Luke provides his real genealogy. In this approach, Joseph's real father was Heli (Luke 3:23), and Jacob (Matt 1:16) was Heli's full brother, who died without an heir. Heli carried out a levirate marriage (Deut 25:5-10) with Jacob's widow. But this theory raises many other questions too numerous to be discussed here.
When all is said and done, it is clear that the overall theological perspective of the interpreter is decisive. Evangelicals must admit that there are insuperable difficulties in fully resolving all the problems in the genealogies. But this does not amount to rejecting biblical authority and accuracy. While there is not sufficient evidence to solve the difficulties, there is likewise insufficient evidence to falsify the biblical record. No doubt, both genealogies are based on traditions available to Matthew and Luke, which they passed on in good faith (Albright and Mann 1971:5-6). Matthew and Luke had distinct purposes in composing their genealogies, and neither of their intentions was to exhaustively summarize the biological lineage of Jesus (Brown 1993:85). With this in mind, many of the difficulties are more understandable. Difficulties aside, both Matthew and Luke affirm Jesus' Abrahamic and Davidic ancestry, as well as his miraculous conception by the virgin Mary.
Another area of theological concern is the respective purposes of the genealogies in their literary contexts. Matthew used his genealogy primarily for Christological purposes, to demonstrate the Abrahamic and Davidic ancestry of Jesus the Messiah while showing him to be the fulfillment of God's promises. Additionally, the presence of the women (who are probably all Gentiles) hints at Matthew's agenda for universal mission to all the nations.
The situation is quite different for Luke's genealogy, which occurs not at the beginning of his gospel but between his accounts of Jesus' baptism and temptation. It seems significant that both the preceding baptism pericope and following temptation pericope stress the divine sonship of Jesus. At the baptism, the Father affirmed this unique sonship (3:22), and at the temptation the devil unsuccessfully tested it (4:3, 9). The genealogy, tracing Jesus back to Adam and to God himself (3:38), leads one to the same conclusion: Jesus is the Son of God. The first Adam was also a son of God, but he failed under satanic testing. Endued with the Spirit (3:22; 4:1, 14, 18), the second Adam is victorious over Satan. Thus at the beginning of his ministry Jesus is viewed as the representative person for all human beings (Marshall 1978:161). Luke mentions Abraham and David, just as Matthew does, but Luke's purpose is not to relate Jesus to Abraham and David. Rather, it is to relate all mankind to the God of Abraham, of David, and, preeminently, of Jesus.
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. Birth of Jesus the Messiah (1:18-25)
18 This is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But before the marriage took place, while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit. 19 Joseph, to whom she was engaged, was a righteous man and did not want to disgrace her publicly, so he decided to break the engagement[*] quietly.
20 As he considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream. "Joseph, son of David," the angel said, "do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife. For the child within her was conceived by the Holy Spirit. 21 And she will have a son, and you are to name him Jesus,[*] for he will save his people from their sins."
22 All of this occurred to fulfill the Lord's message through his prophet:
23 "Look! The virgin will conceive a child!
She will give birth to a son,
and they will call him Immanuel,[*]
which means 'God is with us.'"
24 When Joseph woke up, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded and took Mary as his wife. 25 But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. And Joseph named him Jesus.
## NOTES
1:18 **This is how Jesus the Messiah was born.** The verb in this rendering is based on the word _genesis_ [TG1078, ZG1161], which occurred previously in 1:1.
**Mary, was engaged . . . she became pregnant.** Two details provided in 1:18 are crucial for understanding Joseph's dilemma in 1:19. Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before their marriage was consummated she was discovered to be pregnant. Engagement or betrothal frequently occurred when girls were twelve years old. When the groom had completed his obligations to the bride's father according to the marriage contract, the bride came under the authority of her husband, though she did not necessarily move to her husband's house at that time. Evidently, the situation in 1:18 involved all but the final stage of the process (cf. 25:1-12 and Brown 1993:123-124). Joseph had become engaged to Mary and had assumed authority over her. He was already her husband, but planned to divorce Mary because of the apparent unfaithfulness (1:21; cf. Deut 22:23-24).
**while she was still a virgin.** Lit., before she and Joseph "came together" sexually, she became pregnant from the work of the Holy Spirit (cf. Luke 1:34-35).
**through the power of the Holy Spirit.** The Holy Spirit is mentioned here for the first time in Matthew. The Spirit is involved in Jesus' conception (cf. 1:20), empowerment (3:16; 12:18, 28), and leading (4:1). In Jesus' view, the OT Scriptures came from the Spirit (22:43). John spoke of the day when Jesus would baptize in the Spirit (3:11), and Jesus promised his disciples that the Spirit would supply their testimony during persecution (10:20). They were mandated to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (28:19).
1:19 **decided to break the engagement.** Joseph's plan to quietly divorce Mary (see NLT mg) is explained here. The plan emanated from Joseph's character as a just man who did not want to publicly disgrace Mary. This seems to mean that though Joseph was a law- abiding man, he did not want to use the law in all its rigor against Mary. Instead, he planned a quiet divorce. If this interpretation is correct, Joseph becomes something of a model of one whose high standards were balanced with compassion. (For Matthew's approach to righteousness as obedience to the law, see 3:15; 5:6, 10, 20, 45; 6:1, 33; 9:13; 10:41; 12:37; 13:17, 43, 49; 20:4; 21:32; 23:28, 29, 35, 37; 25:46; 27:19. For general discussion of righteousness in Matthew see Przybylski 1980.)
1:20 **an angel of the Lord appeared to him.** Joseph's plans were suddenly changed by the angelic visitation and revelation. Revelation in dreams was not uncommon in the OT (Gen 37:5-7; Job 33:15-17; Dan 2; 7) or in Matthew (1:25; 2:12, 13, 19, 22; 27:19). Since Joseph was called a son of David by the angel, the story of Jesus' birth is thereby tied to the genealogy and Jesus' Davidic roots. This is the only time in Matthew that "son of David" does not refer to Jesus. Joseph was commanded not to fear taking Mary as his wife because her pregnancy was induced by the Holy Spirit. Joseph finally knew what the narrator told the reader in 1:18. What follows shows how well Joseph heeded this command.
1:21 **she will have a son, and you are to name him Jesus.** The angel's annunciation to Joseph continues. Mary will bear a son whom Joseph will name Jesus, because of the son's mission to save his people from their sins. This angelic annunciation has a form common to other biblical birth announcements (Gen 16:11; 17:19; Luke 1:13, 30). The name "Jesus" fits the predicted mission of this son. It is a Gr. form of the OT name Joshua, and was a common name among Jews. It was popularly related to the Heb. verb "to save" and understood to mean "Yahweh saves." By naming Mary's son, Joseph was accepting legal paternity. By naming him Jesus, Joseph was making a statement about Jesus' redemptive mission: "he will save his people from their sins." A similar play on words (paronomasia) with a personal name occurs with Simon Peter in 16:18 (cf. 1 Sam 25:25).
"Jesus" is the appropriate name for Mary's son because as Messiah he will fulfill the eschatological hopes of the OT by "saving his people from their sins" (cf. Ps 130:8). Salvation in Matthew can refer to deliverance from physical danger, illness, and death (8:25; 9:21-22; 24:22). But salvation from sins is the focus of the angel's announcement. In Matthew, sins are confessed by those whom John baptizes and forgiven by Jesus (3:6; 9:2, 5, 6; 12:31; 26:28). Forgiveness is accomplished by Jesus' gift of himself as a ransom for sinners in sacrificial death, as exemplified in the elements of the Last Supper (20:28; 26:26-30). It is perhaps significant that the allusion to Psalm 130:8 substitutes "his people" for "Israel." Jesus' saving ministry creates a division within Israel. Those who admit they are sick come to Jesus as their physician, but most Israelites will not admit their sickness (9:9-12). Thus Jesus begins to build his church (16:18-19), "a nation that will produce [the Kingdom's] fruit" (21:43). Israel as a nation is not abandoned, but only those Jews who will repent and turn to Jesus the Messiah will receive the forgiveness of their sins and experience all of the OT eschatological blessings (19:28-30).
1:22 **fulfill the Lord's message.** There is some question as to whether the angel's announcement to Joseph continues in 1:22 or whether it concludes in 1:21, with 1:22 beginning Matthew's explanation of the prophetic significance of the situation. Most likely the latter is the case. Whoever the speaker is, it is crucial to grasp the meaning of the fulfillment concept mentioned in 1:22. Note the discussions of this concept in the Introduction and in the following commentary on 1:18-25.
1:23 **The virgin will conceive a child!** Through the centuries there has been a great deal of discussion concerning the Gr. and Heb. words for "virgin" in Isa 7:14 and Matt 1:23. The Gr. word in Matt 1:23 is _parthenos_ [TG3933, ZG4221], while the Heb. word in Isa 7:14 is _'almah_ [TH5959, ZH5959], which refers to a young woman who is old enough to be married. The reference in Isaiah is not to a virgin birth in its immediate historical setting, as the context makes clear. However, the LXX uses the term _parthenos_ (virgin) to translate the Heb. word. Matthew followed this. There has never been any debate about what Matthew intended; his wording makes it absolutely clear that he was describing a female with no sexual experience. The debate has been over the term Isaiah used, as to whether it means "virgin" or "young woman" (see Walker 2005:45).
Isaiah 7:14 is cited as the text "fulfilled" by Mary's virginal conception of Jesus. The nature of the fulfillment of Isa 7:14 has produced a great deal of discussion. Some take the view that Isa 7:14 is a direct prediction of the virgin birth of Jesus. Others believe that Matthew saw in the historical circumstances of Isa 7:14 a type of the virgin birth of Jesus. An extended discussion of this passage with an argument for the latter view will be found in the following commentary section.
**Immanuel.** See Isa 7:14; 8:8, 10.
1:24 **he did as the angel of the Lord commanded.** Joseph is a model of quiet obedience (Bruner 1987:35-36) to three angelic revelations in Matt 1–2 (cf. 2:13-15, 19-21). He got up and did exactly as he was told without hesitation or question. Given his previous plan (1:19), this is nothing less than remarkable and compares with Mary's humble obedience in Luke 1:38.
1:25 **he did not have sexual relations with her.** Joseph took Mary to his house as his wife, yet (Matthew adds another detail to underline Jesus' miraculous birth) Joseph had no sexual relations with Mary (lit., "he was not knowing Mary") before Jesus was born. This statement does not affirm the perpetual virginity of Mary, because she had other children (cf. 12:46; 13:55, 56; Mark 3:31-32; 6:3; Luke 8:19-20; John 2:12; 7:3, 5, 10; Acts 1:14). Mary is best honored as a model believer if she is given the normal role of wife and mother (Bruner 1987:36-40).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew announced that he was giving a record of the birth of the Messiah (1:1), and he provided an overview of the Messiah's Abrahamic and Davidic ancestry (1:1-17). Now that the Messiah has been firmly rooted in the context of redemptive history, Matthew goes on to provide the specifics of his birth. The miraculous birth of Jesus, hinted at in 1:16, is now explained. Matthew 1:18-25 is a commentary on 1:16. In the following commentary, two major matters will be discussed: Matthew's use of Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew's understanding of fulfillment.
Matthew's Use of Isaiah 7:14. At the heart of this passage on the miraculous birth of Jesus is the citation of Isaiah 7:14 in Matthew 1:23. According to Isaiah 7, King Ahaz of Judah was under threat of attack by the kings of Aram and Israel. But God promised Ahaz that the threatened attack would not take place, and invited him to ask for a sign to that effect. Ahaz refused, but God supplied a sign anyway: "the virgin will give birth to a child." Matthew's citation of this passage has given rise to three major interpretive approaches, which may be categorized as typological, predictive, and multiple fulfillment.
The typological view stresses the immediacy of the sign to Ahaz (Isa 7:14a, 16) and the possible fulfillments of Isaiah 7:14 in the near future of the Old Testament context (Isa 8:3-4, 8, 10, 18). Thus, Isaiah 7:14 is viewed as a sign to Ahaz that was fulfilled during his days, and Matthew sees in the passage a historical pattern that comes to fulfillment with the birth of Jesus. A young woman in Isaiah's day conceived a significant son who served as a sign of deliverance from Syria to Ahaz and the house of David (Isa 7:2, 13). But much more significantly, a young woman in Matthew's day who was literally a virgin conceived, by the Spirit, a Son of ultimate significance to the house of David, the nation of Israel, and to all the nations of the earth. In Isaiah's day, the son was a token of divine presence and deliverance. In Matthew's day, the Son was himself "God with us," the deliverer of his people (Barnes 1868:7-8; Broadus 1886:12).
The predictive view takes Isaiah 7:14 as foreseeing the eventual miraculous birth of the Messiah from a woman who was literally a virgin. Matthew interpreted this predictive prophecy literally and viewed it as predicting the birth of Jesus alone. Thus, the prophecy transcends the contemporary difficulties facing King Ahaz and points to a sign in the future. Nevertheless, the overwhelming significance of the sign transcends its temporal distance. Proponents of this view (e.g., Barbieri 1983:20; Calvin 1972:65-69; Carson 1984:78-79; Fowler 1968:38-42; Hendriksen 1973:134-141) argue that the normal birth of a son from a young woman (as required in the typological view) would have little or no force as a sign to King Ahaz. Additionally, they believe that only the predictive view does justice to the son's name being "Immanuel" (meaning "God with us").
The strength of the typological view is its focus on the historical context of the original prophecy, and the strength of the predictive view is its focus on the New Testament fulfillment. The third view, multiple fulfillment, attempts to draw from both of these strengths. In this approach, the prophecy foresees not only a partial fulfillment in the days of Ahaz but also a climactic fulfillment in New Testament times (Blomberg 1992:59-60; Gundry 1982:24-25; Toussaint 1980:44-46). The human prophet Isaiah may not have fully grasped this, but after all, the prophecy is the Lord's, and Isaiah is merely the messenger. Such a _sensus plenior_ (fuller meaning) was intended by the divine author if not fully understood by the human author.
One should hesitate to be dogmatic on this matter since each position has its credible advocates and arguments. However, the typological view seems best for several reasons. First, there are the weaknesses of the other views. The multiple fulfillment view introduces an unwarranted distinction between what the prophet predicted and what God intended to reveal by the text. Additionally, the double fulfillment view assumes that the esoteric connection between the near and far fulfillments of the prophecy is available only to one who is divinely inspired. But if the Christological significance of the Old Testament is accessible only from such a revelatory stance, the organic unity of the Bible is compromised and made inaccessible to ordinary believers (cf. Luke 24:27, 44-45; John 5:39). Instead of this view, which posits enigmatic double entendre and subsequent divine inspiration to recognize it, it is much better to assert a typological connection in which the Old Testament historical events contain theological motifs that anticipate the Christ-event when seen with Christian hindsight. Such hindsight is not limited to those who wrote the New Testament but is available to all who will search the historical events and theological motifs of the Old Testament. The dynamic that connects Isaiah 7:14 to Matthew 1:23 is not two levels of foresight, one on the surface of the text and the other beneath it. Rather, Matthew read the events of the Old Testament from a Christian perspective and from a belief in divine providence. Thus, he discovered events and motifs that come to climactic fulfillment in Jesus the Messiah, who is David's son, a descendant of Abraham.
The predictive view has its problems with relevance to the immediate historical context, and the original context must be primary in any sound exegesis. It seems clear from Isaiah 7:15-17 that the son to be born signals the demise of Ahaz's enemies, for they will be forsaken before the son comes to the age of moral discretion. It is difficult, if not impossible, to relate this to the birth of Jesus several hundred years later. It is sometimes argued that only a miraculous event such as Jesus' virgin birth could have value as a "sign," but a study of Isaiah's use of this word elsewhere (Isa 7:11, 14; 8:18; 19:20; 20:3; 37:30; 38:7, 22; 55:13; 66:19) shows that this is not always the case. Additionally, such a study shows that signs in Isaiah are contemporaneous with the time frame of the prophecy, not distantly removed from it. This would indicate that signs in Isaiah are "present persuaders," not "future confirmation" (contra Carson 1984:79). Even more problematic to the predictive view, it is doubtful that Isaiah 7:14 should even be translated as a prediction of the future, since it is a verbless clause, and such clauses are normally translated as present or past tense, depending on the context (Walton 1987:290-291). Thus, the translation should likely be "a young woman is pregnant, and is about to bear a son."
Though some believe that Isaiah 7:14 describes the birth of Maher-shalal-hash-baz (Isa 8:3-4, 10, 18), Walton (1987:289-297; cf. Willis 1978:1-18 for a similar approach) has argued plausibly that Isaiah 7:14 originally described the coming birth of a son to a nameless young woman in Ahaz' harem. Perhaps this son was Hezekiah himself, a common Jewish view, but this is conjecture. The issue is not _who_ the child was but _what_ the child signified. The point is that even though times were bad at the moment, judgment would soon fall on the enemies Pekah and Rezin. Thus, the young woman should give her son the name Immanuel, since God was still with his people and would deliver them.
When Matthew, as a disciple of Jesus the Messiah, read Isaiah 7, Isaiah's prophecy came to new significance. Matthew did not create the virgin birth narrative as an imaginative midrash on Isaiah 7. Neither did he view Isaiah 7 as an intended prediction of Jesus' virgin birth. Rather, he saw the motifs of the oracle of Isaiah 7, particularly its stress upon the house of David (Isa 7:2, 13; 9:7), a young girl giving birth to a son (Isa 7:14-16; 8:3-4), and the presence of God with his people (Isa 7:14; 8:8, 10), in light of the miraculous birth of the Messiah. Matthew was obviously aware of these Isaianic motifs, as well as Isaiah's specific future predictions of the Messiah in the following context (Isa 9:1-7, cf. Matt 4:15-16. Isa 11:1-5, cf. Matt 2:23?; 3:16. Isa 42:1-4, cf. Matt 12:18-21). The motifs of Isaiah 7–8 anticipated and thus supported the message of Jesus the Messiah as Matthew understood it and wished to communicate it. In Jesus the Messiah, the house of David was culminated. Mary's virginal conception of Jesus the Messiah amounted to an infinitely greater sign to Israel. And Jesus the Messiah was himself God with the nation of Israel.
Though the preceding extended discussion is necessary for this _crux interpretum_ , it runs the risk of causing the reader to "miss the forest for the trees." Whatever position one takes on the matter of Matthew's characteristic understanding of the Old Testament, one must not miss the most crucial matter, that Mary's son Jesus is Immanuel, God-with-us. This was Matthew's main concern here, and there is a risk of missing it if attention is given only to the preceding controversy. Matthew's Christian Jewish community would evidently already know the Hebrew name _Immanuel_ (Gr. _Emmanouēl_ [TG1694, ZG1842]), but for added emphasis Matthew also translated the meaning into Greek: "God is with us." This "name" is more of a title signifying the character and mission of Jesus as God with his people to save them from their sins. It is not just that God is present in Jesus to help his people (Hill 1972:80). Judging from the implications of his previous material (1:1, 16, 18, 20) and his overall high Christology (e.g., 3:17; 11:27; 28:18-20), it is likely that Matthew intended this in the fullest sense: Jesus as God's Son is also God himself with his people, effecting their deliverance. This is the ultimate manifestation of God's presence, and the significance of Isaiah's Immanuel, though great in itself, pales in comparison to it.
That Jesus is God with his people is a recurring theme in Matthew. Jesus was with his disciples when the storm struck and he saved them from it (8:23-27). He was with them as they were received or rejected while preaching his Kingdom (10:25, 40; 17:17). He would be with them as they solemnly handled intractable offenders in his new community (18:15-20). He is so identified with their experiences that he views them as his own (25:40, 45). In fact, the final reference to the Immanuel theme concludes the gospel and creates an _inclusio_ enveloping the entire Gospel with this motif. As the church obeys its mandate to disciple all the nations, Jesus promises to continue his presence with the church all the days until the end of the age (28:18-20).
Summary. Matthew 1 has two major sections: the genealogy and the virginal conception story. This chapter reveals who Jesus is and what he has come to do. He is the Messiah, son of David and son of Abraham. In fulfillment of God's plan for redemptive history, he has come as the "with-us God" (Bruner 1987:28) who will save his people from their sins. In Matthew 1, then, we have in seed form the two doctrines that are widely acknowledged to be Matthew's chief concerns, Christology and ecclesiology.
## TEXT [Commentary]
D. Visit of the Magi (2:1-12)
1 Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the reign of King Herod. About that time some wise men[*] from eastern lands arrived in Jerusalem, asking, 2 "Where is the newborn king of the Jews? We saw his star as it rose,[*] and we have come to worship him."
3 King Herod was deeply disturbed when he heard this, as was everyone in Jerusalem. 4 He called a meeting of the leading priests and teachers of religious law and asked, "Where is the Messiah supposed to be born?"
5 "In Bethlehem in Judea," they said, "for this is what the prophet wrote:
6 'And you, O Bethlehem in the land of Judah,
are not least among the ruling cities[*] of Judah,
for a ruler will come from you
who will be the shepherd for my people Israel.'[*]"
7 Then Herod called for a private meeting with the wise men, and he learned from them the time when the star first appeared. 8 Then he told them, "Go to Bethlehem and search carefully for the child. And when you find him, come back and tell me so that I can go and worship him, too!"
9 After this interview the wise men went their way. And the star they had seen in the east guided them to Bethlehem. It went ahead of them and stopped over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they were filled with joy! 11 They entered the house and saw the child with his mother, Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasure chests and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.
12 When it was time to leave, they returned to their own country by another route, for God had warned them in a dream not to return to Herod.
## NOTES
2:1 **Jesus was born in Bethlehem.** A comparison of 2:1 with 2:7 and 16 indicates that the wise men evidently arrived around two years after the birth of Jesus. Luke 1:26; 2:1-7 mentions Joseph and Mary's origins in Nazareth and trip to Bethlehem in response to the decree of Caesar Augustus. Matthew says nothing of this background, simply mentioning that Jesus was born in Bethlehem and connecting this in 2:5ff with Mic 5:2. Readers of Matthew who were familiar with the OT would recognize Bethlehem as David's city and connect it with Matthew's earlier stress on David (1:1, 6, 17, 20).
**during the reign of King Herod.** Jesus was born near the end of the reign of Herod the Great. Modern scholars often date his birth around 6–4 BC. The puzzling BC dating of Christ's birth is due to mistakes made when the Christian calendar was instituted in the sixth century AD. Herod the Great ruled from 37–4 BC. Half Jewish and half Idumean, he was known for his shrewd diplomacy and his many public works programs, including his expansion of the Second Temple. But Herod's personal life was in shambles, and palace intrigue was rampant. The Bethlehem atrocity (2:16) kept with Herod's usual manner of guarding his throne from any potential usurpers. Josephus ( _Antiquities_ 14–18) describes many of Herod's atrocities, including the murder of one of his wives and three of his sons.
**wise men from eastern lands.** The "wise men" (Gr. _magoi_ [TG3097, ZG3407]; see NLT mg) were not kings but more likely prominent priestly professionals involved in studying the stars and discerning the signs of the times. They may have come from Arabia, Babylon, or Persia. Perhaps there are historical connections between them and the "Chaldeans" mentioned in Dan 1:20; 2:2; 4:7; 5:7, who were adept in the interpretation of dreams. How these men came to interpret the star as an indication of the birth of the Messiah is a mystery, though some speculate that they were somehow aware of the prophecy of Balaam in Num 24:17. Matthew includes this incident to contrast the mysterious insight of the wise men with the incredible obtuseness of Herod and the religious leaders.
2:2 **as it rose.** The Gr. means "in the east." "Star in the east" (NLT mg) is preferable because the wise men came from the east (2:1), not from the west toward an eastern star. Modern readers wonder whether the rising of the star may be explained scientifically as a comet, a planetary conjunction, or a supernova providentially arranged by God. Whether these modern explanations have merit or not, Matthew would evidently view it as a miracle. In some mysterious manner, the rising star led the wise men to Jerusalem to worship the one born king of the Jews. This contrasted with Herod's kingship, which was merely the result of shrewd political manipulation.
**we have come to worship him.** It is remarkable that the wise men came to worship Jesus. This word (cf. 2:8, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 18:26; 20:20; 28:9, 17) is not limited to religious contexts and may simply signify bowing or kneeling to pay homage or respect to a superior, such as a king. But given Matthew's high Christology and the stricture of 4:10, one wonders whether religious worship is indicated in every passage referring to Jesus.
2:3 **King Herod was deeply disturbed.** When King Herod heard that the wise men had come to worship the newborn king he became quite disturbed at this threat to his own rule.
**as was everyone in Jerusalem.** It is not clear whether all of Jerusalem was disturbed due to the prevalence of messianic speculation in those days or whether the residents of the city feared that Herod would be provoked to further cruelty by the wise men's arrival (Carson 1984:86). As Matthew's story proceeds, the Jerusalem "establishment" will unite in diametrical opposition to the newly born king of the Jews (see 15:1; 16:21; 20:17-18; 21:1, 10; 23:37).
2:4 **He called a meeting of the leading priests and teachers of religious law.** Because he feared the news brought by the wise men, Herod gathered the religious experts to find the answer to their question about the place of Jesus' birth. This reveals Herod's ignorance of the OT, as well as his quick response to a potential rival. The mention of the leading priests and the teachers of religious law at Jesus' birth tends to anticipate their active involvement in his death (16:21; 20:18; 21:15; 26:57). Matthew mentions the high priests in 2:4; 16:21; 20:18; 21:15, 23, 45; 26:3, 14, 47, 59; 27:1, 3, 6, 12, 20, 41, 62; 28:11. The high priest himself is mentioned in 26:51, 57, 62, 63, 65 and the teachers of the law in 2:4; 5:20; 7:29; 8:19; 9:3; 12:38; 13:52; 15:1; 16:21; 17:10; 20:18; 21:15; 23:2, 13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29, 34; 26:57; 27:41. The two groups are mentioned together in 2:4; 16:21; 20:18; 21:15; 26:57. Another group connected at times to the high priests and teachers of the law is the elders (usually "leaders" in the NLT; 15:2; 16:21; 21:23; 26:3, 47, 57; 27:1, 3, 12, 20, 41; 28:12). The three groups are portrayed together as plotting against Jesus in 16:21; 26:57; 27:41. Evidently these three groups made up the high court or Sanhedrin. Herod would soon die (2:19), but the religious leaders remained and came to violently oppose Jesus. Herod's question equates the wise men's "king of the Jews" with "the Messiah." The linkage of Messiah with king also appears in the passion narrative (26:63, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 29, 37).
2:5 **Bethlehem in Judea.** The Jewish religious leaders univocally answered Herod's question and cited Mic 5:2 (combined with 2 Sam 5:2) in support. They believed that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem of Judea because it was so written by the prophet. This introductory formula differs from the others in Matt 1–2 in that "fulfillment" is not mentioned. The leaders cite the OT here as a text that proves their answer to Herod. This would make little sense unless they understood Mic 5:2 as a direct prediction of the Messiah's birth place.
**what the prophet wrote.** This introductory formula (lit., "it is written") generally occurs on the lips of Jesus in Matthew, with the exception of its use here by the leaders and Satan's use of it in 4:6. Its nine uses in Matthew are as follows: the leaders (2:5; cites Mic 5:2/2 Sam 5:2), Satan (4:6; cites Ps 91:11-12), Jesus (4:4, 7, 10; 11:10; 21:13; 26:24; 26:31; cite [in order] Deut 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; 11:10; Exod 23:20/Mal 3:1; Isa 56:7/Jer 7:11; no specific text; Zech 13:7).
2:6 The form of the text of Mic 5:2 appearing in Matthew differs from both the Hebrew Bible and the LXX. The key difference between Matthew and MT/LXX is his addition of a Gr. word ( _oudamōs_ [TG3760, ZG4027], "by no means;" rendered "not just" in the NLT) to the second line of the quote. Where MT and LXX make a simple assertion to the effect that Bethlehem is insignificant among the clans of Judah, Matthew's addition asserts the contrary: "by no means are you least among the rulers of Judah." But this contradiction is only superficial. In the MT and LXX, the geographical insignificance of Bethlehem is implicitly contrasted with its theological significance. Micah foresaw that the Messiah would rise from a geographically insignificant town. As Matthew looked back to Micah's prophecy, he noted in hindsight that the birth of Jesus had transformed the significance of Bethlehem.
The OT quotation is actually a combination of Mic 5:2 and 2 Sam 5:2. Matthew omits the end of Mic 5:2, "whose origins are in the distant past" and appends a line from 2 Sam 5:2 to the effect that Jesus will shepherd God's people Israel. While the last line of Mic 5:2 is certainly compatible with Matthew's high Christology, the material from 2 Sam fits Matthew's Davidic emphasis. The image of Jesus as shepherd fits into Matthew quite well (9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 25:31-46; 26:31) and is based on the OT (cf. Ps 23; Jer 23; Ezek 34; Mic 2:12–3:3). There is also an implicit contrast between Jesus as the genuine Davidic shepherd of Israel and Herod with his religious leaders, who are false shepherds, counterfeit successors of David.
2:7-8 **he learned from them the time.** By the time Herod had secretly summoned the wise men, he had already concocted his scheme to murder Jesus. He needed to ascertain from them the time when the star that marked the birth of Jesus had first appeared (cf. 2:16). In their naiveté, the wise men unwittingly gave Herod the information he needed. He also surreptitiously asked them to report the child's exact whereabouts under the pretense of wanting to go and worship him. Then he sent them off to Bethlehem, only five miles or so to the south. So Herod already knew when the helpless baby had been born and where he was living. As the unknowing wise men eagerly completed their long journey, Herod anticipated that their report would confirm the child's exact identity, making his plot quite easy to accomplish.
From a literary standpoint this situation is interesting. Matthew the narrator knew all about Herod's duplicity, but the wise men as characters in the story have not yet even a clue of it. The perceptive reader might gradually pick up on this, perhaps with previous knowledge of Herod's character (2:1), with possible suspicion of Herod's ignorance of the Messiah's birth place (2:4), and with probable suspicion of Herod's conspiratorial, if not sinister, secret meeting with the wise men (2:7-8). The perceptive reader's suspicions are confirmed as the story unfolds in 2:12-20.
2:9-10 **the wise men went their way.** After learning from the king where to go and becoming unwitting accomplices in his plot to murder Jesus, the wise men set out on the short trip to Bethlehem. As they went, the star they originally saw unexpectedly reappeared and miraculously led them to the vicinity of Jesus, perhaps to his exact location. This astral guarantee of God's guidance exhilarated the wise men. Whatever the merit of positing an explanation from known astronomical phenomenon for what the wise men saw earlier (2:1), no comet, supernova, or planetary conjunction would exhibit the characteristics observed here by the wise men.
2:11 **They entered the house.** Led by the miraculous star, the wise men arrived at the house where Jesus resided. The house is not a contradiction to the "manger" of Luke 2:7 (contra Davies and Allison 1988:248), since perhaps as much as two years had passed since Jesus was born (2:16). The focus of the wise men was on the child Jesus, not on his mother Mary (who is mentioned) or on his adoptive father Joseph (who is not).
**they bowed down and worshiped him.** The wise men's worship has already been mentioned in 2:2, and here is reason to see in their worship a high Christology: If "worshiped" implies only a kneeling down before a superior, "bowed down" is redundant. Their worship was followed by opening their "treasures" (cf. 6:19-21; 19:21) and giving to Jesus gifts appropriate for a king: gold, frankincense (Exod 30:34-38; Lev 2:1-2, 14-16; 6:14-18; 24:7; Neh 13:5, 9; Isa 60:6; Jer 6:20), and myrrh (Gen 37:25; Exod 30:23; Esth 2:12; Ps 45:8; Song 1:13; 3:6; Mark 15:23; John 19:39). Frankincense and myrrh were both aromatic gum resins derived from trees and bushes and imported from the east. Commentators from Origen to Hendriksen (1973:171-176) have found symbolic significance in these gifts, gold for a king, frankincense for deity, and myrrh for death (Davies and Allison 1988:249-250). More likely, 2:11 alludes to such OT passages as Pss 72:10-12; 110:3; and Isa 60:6. Solomon received gifts from Gentile visitors and the prophets foresaw glorious days when Gentile tribute would be brought to Zion.
2:12 **they returned to their own country by another route.** Before they could unwittingly participate in Herod's monstrous scheme, the wise men were warned by God in a dream not to go back to Herod. Dreams occur frequently in Matthew's infancy material (1:20; 2:12, 13, 19, 22), but angelic visitation is not mentioned here or in 2:22. The wise men returned by another route, evidently bypassing Jerusalem entirely and following trade routes through the wilderness of Judah to the east. They could have traveled either north or south of the Dead Sea, but the southern route might have promised more secrecy. The departure of the wise men is expressed by the verb _anachoreō_ [TG402, ZG432], which often expresses what might be called "strategic withdrawal" from those who oppose Jesus and the message of the Kingdom. Thus the wise men, along with Joseph, Mary, and Jesus, withdraw at crucial times to places of safety (2:12, 13, 14, 22; 4:12; 12:15; 14:13; 15:21).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The RSV and Fenton (1963:44ff), among others, divide Matthew 2 into five sections, each concluding with an Old Testament allusion. This scheme places a break between 2:6 and 2:7, due to an unwarranted stress on minor Old Testament allusions in 2:11. It is better to stress the four major Old Testament quotations and have four sections (1-12, 13-15, 16-18, 19-23). This chapter can also be profitably viewed as a drama in two acts comprising 2:1-12 and 2:13-23 respectively (Brown 1993:178-179). This is the approach followed here. The worship of the wise men in the first act contrasts with the treachery of Herod in the second. There is also the strange indifference of the chief priests and scribes (2:4-6), who quickly displayed knowledge of the Old Testament but did not act in obedience to that knowledge. Through it all, God protected the nascent Messiah by angelic appearances in dreams to the wise men and especially to Joseph, who obeyed at each juncture. These events hint at two motifs that are stressed as Matthew's story of Jesus develops further. First, the worship of the wise men implies that God's redemptive purposes extend beyond the nation of Israel. Second, the treachery of Herod and the indifference of the religious leaders shows that many within Israel will not believe in Jesus. Herod's unbelief is particularly blatant and also instructive. He used his newly acquired knowledge of Jesus the Messiah to plot against him. Ironically, as the chapter comes to a close, we see that Herod is dead (2:19), while Jesus is alive, still fulfilling the patterns and predictions of the Old Testament. Further occurrences of these motifs may be found in 8:10; 15:28; 21:31; 22:8-10.
Matthew 2:1-12 can also be displayed chiastically. This helps to place the focus of the pericope on the citation of Micah 5:2 (see note on 2:6) and thus on Matthew's characteristic emphasis on Jesus' continuity with Old Testament patterns and predictions:
2:1 Wise men arrive from the east.
2:2 Wise men have seen a special star and seek to worship Jesus.
2:3 Herod is terrified of the one born king of the Jews.
2:4 Herod questions the religious leaders.
2:5-6 Religious leaders answer Herod.
2:7-8 Herod plots against the one born king of the Jews.
2:11 Wise men see the star again and are enabled to worship Jesus.
2:12 Wise men depart to their own country.
It is significant in view of later developments that Matthew referred to Herod as king and then specified that the wise men arrived in Jerusalem. Herod's kingship was merely a political office and he would guard it against any potential rival. By contrast, Jesus' kingship, like David's (1:6), is genuine and legitimate, given him by God at birth (2:2). As such, it is appropriate that the wise men arrived in Jerusalem, David's capital city, the city of the great king (5:35; Ps 48:2), to worship the newly born king. It is the city of Solomon's Temple, but Jesus is greater than Solomon and his Temple (12:6, 42). He would cleanse the Temple when he entered the city as its rightful king (ch 21), only to be crucified there a few days later (ch 27).
It is ironic that the birth of Jesus produced only anxious fear in the leaders of Israel (2:3), while it was an occasion of overwhelming joy for the mysterious Gentile wise men. The devotion of the wise men is in stark contrast to Herod's treachery and the seeming apathy of the chief priests and teachers of the law. Why were these wise men the only ones who traveled to Bethlehem?
How the wise men originally understood that an astral phenomenon signaled prophetic fulfillment and the birth of the Messiah is shrouded in mystery. Numbers 24:17 was evidently understood as messianic by the Jews, but how the wise men might have come to associate a particular star with that prophecy is unclear. Dispersed Jews in the east may have influenced the wise men, but in the final analysis their worship of the Messiah was nothing less than a miracle of divine grace. Matthew 11:25-27 explains the divine initiative involved when anyone comes to faith in Jesus the Messiah, and 11:28-29 supplies Jesus' invitation for others to emulate the example of the wise men. This incident illustrates a truth that has become something of a cliche: God works in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform. The religious leaders, replete with scriptural knowledge, reacted with apathy here and with antipathy later. The wise men, whose knowledge was quite limited, nevertheless offered genuine worship to the newly born king of the Jews.
## TEXT [Commentary]
E. The Escape and Return of the Messiah (2:13-23)
13 After the wise men were gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up! Flee to Egypt with the child and his mother," the angel said. "Stay there until I tell you to return, because Herod is going to search for the child to kill him."
14 That night Joseph left for Egypt with the child and Mary, his mother, 15 and they stayed there until Herod's death. This fulfilled what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: "I called my Son out of Egypt."[*]
16 Herod was furious when he realized that the wise men had outwitted him. He sent soldiers to kill all the boys in and around Bethlehem who were two years old and under, based on the wise men's report of the star's first appearance. 17 Herod's brutal action fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet Jeremiah:
18 "A cry was heard in Ramah—
weeping and great mourning.
Rachel weeps for her children,
refusing to be comforted,
for they are dead."[*]
19 When Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. 20 "Get up!" the angel said. "Take the child and his mother back to the land of Israel, because those who were trying to kill the child are dead."
21 So Joseph got up and returned to the land of Israel with Jesus and his mother. 22 But when he learned that the new ruler of Judea was Herod's son Archelaus, he was afraid to go there. Then, after being warned in a dream, he left for the region of Galilee. 23 So the family went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what the prophets had said: "He will be called a Nazarene."
## NOTES
2:13 **After the wise men were gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph.** After they left, the divine intervention to thwart Herod's plot took another step. For the second time (cf. 1:20), Joseph unexpectedly received a revelation from an angel in a dream. He was to take Jesus and Mary to Egypt and stay there until he received further notice, because Herod was going to try to murder Jesus.
2:14 **That night Joseph left for Egypt.** Joseph again responded to the angel with prompt, unquestioning obedience (cf. 1:24). Under cover of darkness, Joseph, Mary, and Jesus withdrew to Egypt and remained there until Herod died and they received another angelic revelation (2:19). Egypt was a natural place to flee from Herod. He had no jurisdiction there and many Jews lived there. Perhaps Matthew wanted his readers to remember the family of Jacob sojourning in Egypt to avoid famine in Palestine (Gen 46–50). On the level of the infancy story, the withdrawal to Egypt preserved Jesus from Herod's plot, but Matthew had a deeper purpose in mind in presenting this event.
2:15 **This fulfilled.** God in his sovereignty achieved not only the immediate welfare of the infant Jesus but also the ultimate fulfillment of a well-known OT pattern. Matthew's second fulfillment formula quotation (see the discussion in the commentary on Matt 1) alludes to the new significance of the event described in Hos 11:1, "I called my son out of Egypt." The introductory formula is identical to the one that occurs in 1:22 and denotes the accomplishment of God's purpose in his word through the prophetic channel. Matthew cited only the last clause of Hos 11:1. No doubt, the concept of sonship was the reason Matthew was attracted to Hos 11:1 in the first place. The initial words of Hos 11:1, though not cited by Matthew, are also crucial for the sonship theme. The verse as a whole affirms that God loved Israel and called him from Egypt when he was a child. (See commentary below for further discussion.)
2:16 **he realized that the wise men had outwitted him.** With 2:16-18, Matthew returns to the story of Herod and the wise men. Since Bethlehem is only five or six miles from Jerusalem, Herod would soon realize that the wise men were not coming back. So he used the information he had previously received from the religious leaders and the wise men. He knew from the religious leaders where Jesus was born (2:5-6), and he knew from the wise men when Jesus was born (2:7). With this information, he launched the atrocity of murdering all the male children in the Bethlehem area who were under two years of age. Since Bethlehem was a small village, the loss of life was relatively low, but the innocence of the victims underscores the outrageous nature of this heinous act. While there is no other record of this atrocity, it fits well into what is known from Josephus about the ruthless nature of Herod's rule.
While Herod believed that the wise men had tricked him, their lack of complicity in his plot was due to divine intervention. Herod's rage was not in reality directed against the wise men; it was against God, who directed them not to return to Herod. Thus his fury is pathetic and futile, like that of the kings whom God warned in Ps 2 (cf. Acts 4:24-28).
2:17-18 **fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet Jeremiah.** Herod's heinous act fulfills his own rage and paranoid fear, but Matthew was more interested in how it fulfilled Scripture. He introduced Jer 31:15 with a fulfillment formula similar to those used earlier in 1:22 and 2:15. For the first time, he named the prophet he was citing. Jeremiah was named only by Matthew in all of the NT writings (2:17; 27:9). See the commentary below for discussion on the significance of Jeremiah's words as used by Matthew.
2:19 **an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph.** This is the fourth dream and third appearance of an angel of the Lord in the infancy narratives. The death of Herod allowed for the safe return of Jesus to Israel, but Joseph thought it wise to live in Nazareth of Galilee, not in Judea, where Herod's son Archelaus ruled in the place of his father. This unit picks up again the narrative of 2:13-15, which was briefly interrupted by the story of the murder of Bethlehem's male infants. Herod was the antagonist of Jesus up to this point and attempted to annihilate any potential rivals to his throne. But due to divine intervention, Jesus was still alive when Herod died. Herod's final illness and death is described in gruesome detail in Josephus's _Antiquities_ 17.6.5.
2:20 **those who were trying to kill the child are dead.** The words of the angel commanding Joseph to take Mary and Jesus and return to Israel repeat the instructions given in 2:13 that they should leave Israel. There is also a similar clause explaining why the instructions must be followed in both 2:13 and 2:20. The plural "those who were trying to kill the child are dead" is curious since it was Herod alone who died.
2:21-22 **Joseph got up and returned.** By now Joseph's pattern of immediate response to angelic instructions is expected (cf. 1:24; 2:14). Joseph evidently planned to settle in Bethlehem, perhaps because he assumed Herod's son Antipas would succeed his father as ruler there. But he changed his plans when he learned that Herod's son Archelaus ruled Judea. Archelaus had a reputation for ruthlessness and cruelty (Josephus _Antiquities_ 17.9.3). Herod had made a late change in his will, dividing his kingdom into three parts. Archelaus received Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. Antipas was to rule Galilee and Perea, and Philip received Iturea and Trachonitis. Joseph's fear of Archelaus was confirmed by yet another angelic dream revelation that warned him to avoid Judah and Archelaus. The interplay here between Joseph's responsible decision making and God's leading is intriguing. The warning of the angel underlined the fear Joseph already felt and evidently left it up to him where to settle. The withdrawal to Egypt was due to specific angelic revelation, and similarly the decision to withdraw to Galilee was influenced by a more general angelic warning.
Galilee is very important in Matthew's portrayal of Jesus as the one who fulfills Isa 9:1-2 (see Matt 4:12-16). After John's imprisonment, Jesus withdrew there and began his Kingdom ministry in "Galilee where so many Gentiles live" (4:15). Other important events also occurred there, but it is important to note that it is from this same Galilee that Jesus sent his successors to disciple all the nations (28:7, 16). Some have found a contradiction between Matthew and Luke regarding Galilee. It is clear from Luke 1:26-27; 2:1-7 that Mary and Joseph originally lived in Nazareth. While one would not gather this from Matthew, nothing said by Matthew contradicts it. Matthew simply picks up the story after Joseph and Mary have arrived in Bethlehem to register for Augustus's census. Another supposed discrepancy is the sojourn in Egypt, mentioned by Matthew but not by Luke. But Luke's account does not contradict Matthew's Egyptian visit, which may be placed in Luke 2 at some time prior to the return to Nazareth described in 2:39. Evidently, the presentation of Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:21-38; cf. Lev. 12:2-8) should be viewed as historical background for the arrival of the wise men some time later. Certainly popular messianic speculation would be stirred by both events. At any rate, both of these difficulties are examples of the selectivity of the Gospel authors in omitting material that did not fit their individual theological interests or literary structure.
2:23 **the family went and lived in a town called Nazareth.** Due to political danger, common sense, and the angelic warning, Joseph decided to settle in Nazareth. One does not learn from Matthew what readers of Luke would know; it was only natural for Joseph and Mary to return to their hometown. Nazareth was an obscure village, not mentioned anywhere in pre-Christian literature. Fifteen miles west of the southern tip of the Sea of Galilee, it sat on the northern rim of the Megiddo valley just south of the thriving city of Sepphoris.
**This fulfilled what the prophets had said, "He will be called a Nazarene."** Joseph's decision to settle in this unremarkable hamlet had one consequence that was remarkable to Matthew: the fulfillment of the prophetic word. The introductory formula is like those used earlier in 1:22; 2:15, 17. It indicates that Joseph's decision to settle in Nazareth was a matter of God's purpose. It may be noteworthy that Matthew used the plural "the prophets" (cf. 26:54, 56), since this may help to explain which text (or texts) Matthew had in mind as being fulfilled by Jesus' settling in Nazareth. This is discussed further in the commentary.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 2:13-23 concludes Matthew's infancy narrative, which has explained the origins of Jesus the Messiah and his early movements. It contains three sections: the flight to Egypt (2:13-15), the massacre of the infants in Bethlehem (2:16-18), and the return to Israel (2:19-23). Each of these sections ends with an Old Testament citation introduced with Matthew's characteristic language of fulfillment. Each of these is worthy of detailed comment.
The Flight to Egypt: Fulfillment of Hosea 1:11. There are essentially three approaches to understanding Matthew's use of Hosea 11:1. Some believe that Matthew saw in the passage a prediction of Jesus' sojourn in Egypt and departure from there. But most would agree that in its original context Hosea 11:1 is not a prediction of the future but a reference to the Exodus, God's past redemptive act of bringing the nation of Israel out of Egypt. Thus, those who think that Matthew saw a prediction of Jesus in Hosea 11:1 must either disparage Matthew's hermeneutic or attribute to Matthew a revelatory insight into the _sensus plenior_ (fuller meaning) of Hosea. Neither of these views is satisfactory. In its original context, Hosea 11:1 is not a prediction of Jesus but a reminiscence of the Exodus. That was at least as clear to Matthew as it is to modern interpreters. But Hosea 11:1 alludes to a theological motif that was dear to Matthew—namely, divine sonship. The Exodus demonstrated Israel's unique status as God's firstborn son. What was true of Israel on a metaphorical level is more profoundly true of Jesus the Messiah. Matthew has already shown the uniqueness of Jesus' sonship from the perspective of his Davidic genealogy and miraculous conception. He will go on to show how his baptism and temptation demonstrate his divine sonship even more fully. In Hosea 11:1, the Exodus provides a historical pattern of God's loving preservation of his son Israel from Pharaoh's wrath. From a Christian perspective, this past event is recapitulated by God's loving preservation of his son Jesus from Herod's wrath. In the Old Testament the nation is the son of God (Exod 4:22-23; Jer 31:9, 20; Hos 1:10), and the Davidic kings are sons of God (2 Sam 7:14-15; Ps 2:6-7, 12; 72:1; 89:26-37). God's special love and covenant loyalty were promised to both the nation and the kings. For Matthew, these themes are consummated in Jesus, whose life is an antitypical microcosm of the typical journey of the historical people of Israel.
The Mothers Mourning in Bethlehem: Fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:15. Jeremiah 31:15 occurs in an oracle of hope to those who were about to be exiled, probably to Babylon due to Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Judah in 587 BC. The captivity was unavoidable. The captives had to wait seventy years before God would restore them to the land God promised to their forefathers (Jer 29:4-14). God punished Israel and Judah for their apostasy, but he would restore them to himself and to the Davidic dynasty (Jer 30:8-9; 33:14-15, 17). Israel was viewed as a virgin (Jer 31:4, 21) whom God loved as his special people (Jer 30:3, 22; 31:1, 2, 7, 33) and would save as a remnant (Jer 31:7). God yearned for Israel because he was Israel's father and Israel was his firstborn (Jer 31:9, 20). Thus, there was hope that Israel's children would return (Jer 31:17) because God would make a new covenant with the nation and forgive their sins (Jer 31:31, 34). Nevertheless, there was great mourning by Rachel (who personified the mothers of Israel) for her children who had died in the ravages of war.
In light of this background, it seems that "fulfillment" here should not be viewed simplistically as the eventuation of a prediction. Jeremiah 31:15 is not a prediction but a lament in the context of hope for future blessing. This context of hope is probably Matthew's main theological interest (Carson 1984:95; Tasker 1961:44). In Jeremiah's view of the eschaton, Rachel's mourning for her children would be consoled by Israel's return to the land and the beginning of a new covenant. The similar mourning of the mothers of Bethlehem also occurs in the context of hope, but the hope there was about to be actualized through the sacrificial death and resurrection of the Messiah (26:27-28). God comforted the exiles with the hope of restoration and the new covenant, and this hope was about to be actualized through the Messiah. Thus, the mourning mothers of Bethlehem were anticipated by the mothers who lost children at the time of the Exile.
"He Will Be Called a Nazarene": Fulfillment of the Prophets. The difficulty involved here is very simple—there are no Old Testament texts that refer to Jesus as a Nazarene, let alone explicitly say "he shall be called a Nazarene." Gundry (1975:97-104) has a very thorough discussion of this matter. There are two major approaches to solving the difficulty. The one posits a pun or paronomasia where Matthew is associating the place name "Nazareth" and the word for a resident of Nazareth, "Nazarene," with either the Hebrew word for "branch" ( _netser_ [TH5342, ZH5342]; Isa 11:1; cf. synonyms in Isa 4:2; 53:2) or the Old Testament "Nazirite" [TH5139B, ZH5687], one especially dedicated to God (Num 6; Judg 13:5, 7; 16:17; 1 Sam 1:11; Lam 4:7; Amos 2:11-12; cf. Luke 1:15; Acts 18:18; 21:23-24). In light of Matthew's emphasis on Jesus' Davidic roots, the "branch" pun is plausible. But the Nazirite pun seems unlikely, given the insistence of Matthew 11:18-19 that Jesus did not live an ascetic lifestyle.
Another approach views the pun theories as overly subtle and posits instead that Matthew was drawing together the obscure geographical origins of the Messiah and the theological thrust of the Old Testament that the Messiah would be humble and despised. This view notes the obscurity and humility of the Messiah in Matthew and connects this with the general tenor of the Old Testament that the Messiah would be despised and rejected (Ps 22:6-8, 13; 69:8, 20-21; Isa 49:7; 53:2-3, 7-8; Dan 9:26). Matthew's mention of the transformation of obscure Bethlehem by Jesus' birth (2:6), along with his stress on Jesus' humility (11:29; 12:19; 21:5) and rejection (8:20; 11:16-19; 15:7-8), are cited by advocates of this position (Carson 1984:97; Gundry 1975:103-104; Morris 1992:49; Tasker 1961:45; Toussaint 1980: 56-57). Other references to Nazareth in Matthew also imply its unsavory Gentile connections and obscurity—that is, from the perspective of urban Jerusalem (4:13; 21:11; 26:71). Additional support is found in the evidence elsewhere in the New Testament that Nazareth was a despised place (John 1:46-47; 7:41-42, 52) and that "Nazarene" was a term of derision for the early disciples of Jesus (Acts 24:5).
Though it is difficult to rule out the first approach as a possible secondary allusion, the second approach is preferable. Matthew's introductory formula cites the prophets in general, so it seems that he was alluding to the general teaching of the prophets, not to a word play on a specific word in a single passage. The general tenor of the prophets that the Messiah would be lowly and despised is echoed repeatedly in Matthew, though it evidently cut against the grain of first-century messianic speculation.
The Significance of the Infancy Narratives. In retrospect it is clear that the message of the narratives in Matthew 1–2 has little to do with Jesus' infancy. Rather, it traces his ancestry, miraculous conception, early worship and opposition, and residence in Nazareth. All this is interwoven with Old Testament historical pattern and prophetic prediction. Jesus is the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham. He is the culmination of Old Testament history and prophecy. As the son of David, he is the genuine king of Israel, contrasted with the wicked usurper Herod. As the son of Abraham, he brings the blessings of God to the Gentile wise men. Davies and Allison (1988:282) put all this deftly: "Jesus culminates Israel's history in chapter 1; in chapter 2 he repeats it." As Matthew's story of Jesus continues, both of these themes are developed. The contrast between Jesus and the false leaders of Israel erupts into full fledged hostility leading to his death. But his outreach to the Gentiles culminates with his resurrection and mandate to the disciples to take the gospel to all the nations (28:19-20).
Jesus' genuine kingship is tied to his Davidic sonship, as is shown in the genealogy. Yet Jesus is also the Son of God, as implied in 1:18-25; this is made more explicit as the narrative proceeds in chapter two. As the king of the Jews, Jesus could resist Satan's test in offering him all the world's kingdoms (4:8). He could affirm his superiority to king Solomon (12:42) and promise a glorious future return to the earth (16:28; 19:28; 20:21; 25:34). Yet he could enter Jerusalem humbly (21:5) and endure the unspeakable mockery leading to his crucifixion (27:11, 29, 37, 42). The resurrection would vindicate his claims and validate him as the king of the Jews, to whom all power had been given (28:18).
## TEXT [Commentary]
II. The Early Days of Jesus' Kingdom Ministry (3:1–7:29)
A. Ministry of John the Baptist (3:1-12; cf. Mark 1:1-8; Luke 3:1-14)
1 In those days John the Baptist came to the Judean wilderness and began preaching. His message was, 2 "Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.[*]" 3 The prophet Isaiah was speaking about John when he said,
"He is a voice shouting in the wilderness,
'Prepare the way for the LORD's coming!
Clear the road for him!'"[*]
4 John's clothes were woven from coarse camel hair, and he wore a leather belt around his waist. For food he ate locusts and wild honey. 5 People from Jerusalem and from all of Judea and all over the Jordan Valley went out to see and hear John. 6 And when they confessed their sins, he baptized them in the Jordan River.
7 But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to watch him baptize,[*] he denounced them. "You brood of snakes!" he exclaimed. "Who warned you to flee the coming wrath? 8 Prove by the way you live that you have repented of your sins and turned to God. 9 Don't just say to each other, 'We're safe, for we are descendants of Abraham.' That means nothing, for I tell you, God can create children of Abraham from these very stones. 10 Even now the ax of God's judgment is poised, ready to sever the roots of the trees. Yes, every tree that does not produce good fruit will be chopped down and thrown into the fire.
11 "I baptize with[*] water those who repent of their sins and turn to God. But someone is coming soon who is greater than I am—so much greater that I'm not worthy even to be his slave and carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.[*] 12 He is ready to separate the chaff from the wheat with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, gathering the wheat into his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire."
## NOTES
3:1 **In those days.** This is intentionally somewhat vague (cf. 13:1; 24:22, 29, 36; 26:29). Unlike Luke, Matthew did not mention the circumstances surrounding the birth of John the Baptist.
**Judean wilderness.** John's ministry was carried out in the desert (cf. 3:3; 4:1; 11:7; 15:33) of Judea, the barren area just west of the Dead Sea. This largely uninhabited area is characterized by a dry climate and a topography featuring valleys (wadis) running from the hills in the west to the geological Rift Valley of the Jordan River and Dead Sea in the east. During the rainy season, these wadis become swift streams, but they are largely dry the rest of the year (cf. 7:26-27). Therefore, the NLT's translation "wilderness" should not be understood as a forest or jungle. The role of the wilderness in redemptive history as the place of refuge, testing, the Exodus, and the giving of the law may be significant here.
**began preaching.** Though he is known as "the baptizer," John commenced his ministry with preaching (cf. 4:17; 10:7; 24:14).
3:2 **Repent . . . the Kingdom of Heaven is near.** John's message is characterized as having two aspects, (1) an ethical imperative ("Repent"), based on (2) an eschatological reality ("the Kingdom of Heaven is near"). This is the first occurrence of the message that echoes throughout Matthew's gospel (cf. 4:17, 23; 9:35; 10:7; 13:19; 16:19; 21:43; 24:14). Repentance is the turning of the whole person from sin to God in obedience to the message of the Kingdom. This involves cognition of need, sorrow for sin, a decision to turn from sin to God, and subsequent obedient lifestyle. The "Kingdom of Heaven" is a distinctively Matthean expression for the Kingdom of God. Matthew probably used it in order to avoid mentioning the name of God, which was held in awe by pious Jews. "Heaven" stands for "God" by metonymy (cf. Dan 4:26; Matt 21:25; Luke 15:18, 21), which is the substitution of one word for another with which it is readily associated. Instead of thinking of the Kingdom as a concrete entity, which is either present or future, one should view it as gradually and dynamically exerting its power through the words and works of God's messengers. God's reign has drawn near in redemptive history; it is imminent. Matthew portrays John, Jesus, the first disciples, and subsequent Christians as proclaiming this message. (3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 24:14). For a more extended discussion of Matthew's use of the phrase "Kingdom of Heaven," see the discussion of Major Themes in the Introduction.
3:3 **The prophet Isaiah.** Having summarized John's message (3:1-2), Matthew now turns to his characteristic motif of OT support. John's origins in the obscurity of the desert as well as Jesus' origins in the small village of Bethlehem are both grounded in the OT. Although the characteristic fulfillment formula is not present here, Matthew's "the prophet Isaiah was speaking about John when he said, . . ." clearly points to John as the eschatological fulfillment of Isa 40:3.
**Prepare the way . . . Clear the road.** The topographical changes mentioned here allude to the ancient custom of building or repairing roads to honor the visit of a king. John used them to picture the need for moral change. In its immediate context, Isa 40:3 comforted the exiles in Babylon with the hope of return to the land. But in the larger context of Isa 40–66 the prophecy of Isaiah describes the eschatological restoration of Israel with worldwide consequences experienced by all mankind (Isa 40:5). The overall perspective of Isa 40–66 involves the Spirit-endowed Messiah (Isa 42:1-4; see Matt 12:18-21), who is the suffering servant (Isa 52:15; see Matt 28:19; Isa 53:4; see Matt 8:17; Isa 53:7; see Matt 26:63; 27:14), envisioning nothing less than a new heavens and new earth (Isa 65:17; 66:22; see Matt 19:28).
3:4 **clothes were woven from coarse camel hair . . . he ate locusts.** According to Davies and Allison (1988:295-296), modern Bedouin still wear camel hair garments and eat locusts (grasshoppers). A camel hair garment bound with a leather belt might suggest poverty in another context, but here it is suggestive of John's prophetic role and stern message of repentance. In fact, John was much like Elijah in this respect (2 Kgs 1:8; Zech 13:4; cf. Mal 4:5; Matt 11:7-9, 14; 17:10-13). Eating locusts was permitted by the OT (Lev. 11:20-23), and wild honey is mentioned several times there (Gen 43:11; Exod 3:8; Deut 32:13; Judg 14:8; 1 Sam 14:25; Ps 81:16; Ezek 27:17). All in all, John's clothing and diet modeled the message he preached. He was unconcerned with the niceties of wardrobe and food (11:8, 18), and he called Israel away from preoccupation with such things and toward the Kingdom.
3:5 **People from Jerusalem and from all of Judea and all over the Jordan valley went out.** Actually, the tense of the Gr. verb (imperfect) implies that there was a steady stream of people regularly going out to John. The three place names and the words "all" and "all over" add to the impression that the response to John was truly sensational. This is corroborated by Josephus ( _Antiquities_ 18.5.2).
3:6 **when they confessed their sins, he baptized them.** The meaning of the word "baptize" (to immerse), along with the fact that the baptisms were being done in the Jordan River, probably indicates that John immersed those who had repented. Their confession of sins probably occurred at the same time as their baptism. In light of 3:7-8, there is the additional implication that John did not baptize those whom he deemed unrepentant. Thus, Matthew evidently did not mean to imply that baptism itself effected repentance. Rather, baptism was a confirmation of repentance and a seal of forgiveness. Perhaps the custom was for repentant baptismal candidates to confess their sins publicly as they were being baptized. The implications of 3:6 for a theology of John's baptism must be compared with the similar statements of 3:11. John's baptism evidently had some connections with OT ritual cleansings, Jewish proselyte baptism, and the cleansing rituals of the Qumran community (see Taylor 1997).
3:7 **many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to watch him baptize.** Though the popular response to John's ministry was sensational, Matthew here indicates the contrasting response of the religious establishment. But it is difficult to know exactly why the Pharisees and Sadducees came to John's baptism. The Gr. phrase translated by the NLT as "coming to watch him baptize" is ambiguous. It is doubtful that it was simply a matter of curiosity. Possibly they had come to be baptized (see NLT mg), or they were there in an official capacity to investigate the furor in the desert. At any rate, John did not view their motivation as genuine.
**brood of snakes!** His vivid accusatory description of the Pharisees and Sadducees as an evil "brood of snakes" is twice echoed by Jesus (12:34; 23:33, cf. Gen 3:1; Ps 58:4). They viewed themselves as children of Abraham (3:9), but John had a very different idea of their spiritual ancestry.
**Who warned you to flee the coming wrath?** John's sarcastic question indicates that he did not believe that the Pharisees and Sadducees were genuine converts. If the emphasis is placed on "who," John was disclaiming any connection with their pilgrimage to the Jordan. He certainly hadn't warned them to flee the coming judgment. If the emphasis is placed on "you," the implication is that they were unrepentant and thus were not fit candidates for baptism. Those who do not repent when they hear the message of God's eschatological rule will face imminent judgment, "the coming wrath."
3:8-9 **Prove by the way you live.** Lit., "produce fruit." John's observation of the Pharisees and Sadducees led him to believe they were unrepentant, so he demanded that they produce fruit (3:8) and then responded to an anticipated objection (3:9). Producing fruit as a metaphor for a repentant lifestyle occurs elsewhere in Matthew (3:10; 7:16-20; 12:33; 13:8, 23, 26; 21:19) and is common in the OT (Ps 1:3; Isa 3:10; 5:1-7; Hos 10:1). John now and Jesus later both affirm that the lifestyle of converts must fit or correspond to their profession of repentance. Such a change in lifestyle will never occur if confidence is placed in descent from Abraham.
3:10 **chopped down and thrown into the fire.** John's demand for proof of repentance (3:8) is underlined with a vivid picture of judgment. Unrepentant hearers of the Kingdom message are likened to trees that do not bear fruit—they are cut down and thrown into the fire. A similar picture of false prophets as unfruitful trees is found in 7:19 (cf. Isa 10:15-19; Jer 11:16), and 13:24-30 pictures the weeds among the wheat being thrown into the fire at the harvest (cf. the chaff in 3:12). Jesus' cursing the unfruitful fig tree in 21:19 is another similar image. The burning of unfruitful trees is also related to the punishment of evildoers in the fires of hell (5:22; 13:42, 50; 18:8-9; 25:41). The vividness of the picture is heightened by the words "even now," which depict the chopping down of unfruitful trees as a process that is presently occurring. As the Kingdom message is preached, those who reject it are already being marked out for judgment, even though the full force of that awful judgment has not yet been felt.
3:11 **I baptize with water . . . He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.** John contrasts his ministry with that of the one who is coming after him. John's water baptism for repentance prepares Israel for the more powerful "Spirit and fire" baptism of Jesus. John is not even fit to perform the menial task of carrying Jesus' shoes. Jesus' powerful ministry is likened to a harvest in which the grain is gathered (cf. 6:26; 13:30) and the chaff is burnt. Jesus, the mighty one who comes after John, is the eschatological harvester who saves and judges. The imagery of 3:12 is similar to that of such OT texts as Ps 1:4; Isa 5:24; Dan 2:35; and Hos 13:3.
There is no little controversy over the relationship of John's baptism to repentance. The NLT's "I baptize with water those who repent . . ." interpretively translates a clause that is more lit. rendered "I baptize you with water for repentance" (see NASB, NIV, NJB, and NRSV). But this might be taken to mean that baptism in water somehow accomplishes repentance, which seems contrary to the contextual call for repentance, evidently as a prerequisite for baptism (3:7-9). Perhaps the meaning is simply that the baptism is in reference or connection to repentance. This connection is twofold in that baptism both assumes and expresses repentance.
John's baptism uses water, but Jesus' baptism will involve the Holy Spirit and fire. Though some (e.g., Bruner 1987:79-80; Luz 1989:171; Ridderbos 1987:55) see two baptisms here, one in the Spirit indicating salvation and the other in fire indicating judgment, it is preferable to see only one purifying baptism (Davies and Allison 1988:317). In this understanding the phrase, "Spirit and fire," is understood as a hendiadys, a figure of speech in which one idea is expressed by two words. This seems to be indicated also by OT texts that associate the eschatological outpouring of the Spirit with both cleansing water (Isa 32:15; 44:3; Ezek 36:25-27; Joel 2:28-29; cf. 1QS 4:20-22) and refining fire (Isa 1:25; 4:4; 30:27-30; Zech 13:9; Mal 3:1-3; 4:1; cf. Acts 2:3; _4 Ezra_ 13:8-11). So it is best to conclude that the one eschatological outpouring of the Spirit through Jesus will purify and judge. The Holy Spirit has been mentioned as the miraculous agent behind Jesus' conception (1:18, 20). Now as John speaks of the future, he asserts that Jesus will baptize in the Holy Spirit. Though he would eventually dispense the Spirit to others (3:11), Jesus presently needs the empowerment of the Spirit for his own mission (4:1; 12:18, 28). For a perceptive study of the ministry of the Spirit to Jesus see Hawthorne 1991.
3:12 **separate the chaff from the wheat.** The purifying judgment of Jesus is pictured here as a harvest in which the threshing process separates the wheat from the chaff (cf. Ps 1:4; Prov 20:26; Isa 41:14-16; Jer 15:7; 51:33; Dan 2:35; Hos 6:11; 13:3; Joel 3:13; Mic 4:12-13; Rev 14:14-20). The fork or shovel was used to toss the harvested and threshed grain in the air, and the wind dispersed the chaff while the heavier grain fell to the floor. The grain was gathered, but the chaff was swept up and burnt. Matthew's capsulized portrayal of John's Kingdom message stresses the judgment of God upon the unrepentant.
**never-ending fire.** The image of "never-ending" (lit. "unquenchable") fire underlines the severity of the punishment in a way that is tantamount to the Christian doctrine of eternal punishment.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 3 is the first section in Matthew with synoptic parallels (Mark 1:1-11; Luke 3:1-14, 21-22). The chapter naturally divides into three sections: (1) John's ministry in the desert (3:1-6), (2) John's conflict with the Pharisees and Sadducees (3:7-12), and (3) John's baptism of Jesus (3:13-17). Nearly thirty years (Luke 3:23) had evidently transpired between the events of Matthew 2:23 and 3:1. Though the apocryphal Gospels contain many fanciful stories about Jesus' childhood, the New Testament is largely silent. What little scriptural knowledge that is available for this period is found in the Gospel of Luke. According to Luke, Joseph and Mary returned to Nazareth amazed at the revelations given about Jesus in the Temple (2:25-38). Jesus' childhood and early adolescence are described in Luke 2:40, 52. But Matthew says nothing directly about the years between Jesus' coming to live in Nazareth as a small child and his coming to John for baptism as an adult (2:22; 3:13). One can draw a few inferences from Matthew 13:54-58 about Jesus' upbringing in Nazareth, but the fact is that Matthew's theological purposes are not furthered by biographical details of this period. Matthew is interested in telling the story of Jesus' origins (chs 1–2) and his preparation for ministry (3:1–4:16).
The story of Jesus' preparation for ministry begins with the ministry of John the Baptist and ends with John's imprisonment. John's ministry in the desert of Judea, predicted in Isaiah 40:3, results in many Judeans coming to him for baptism (3:1-6). It seems best to see John's baptism against a broad background of similar activities in Second Temple Judaism rather than to attempt an explanation that draws from only one of the possible backgrounds, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Old Testament itself frequently alludes to water cleansing as a picture of forgiveness, spiritual purity, and eschatological blessing (Ps 51:6-9; Isa 4:4; 44:3; Jer 4:11-14; Ezek 36:24-27; Zech 13:1). But there are three important contrasts between John's baptism and these possible backgrounds. First, John insisted on repentance and baptism for Jews, not Gentile proselytes. This would counter the current view that Israel's problems were due only to Gentile oppression, and that the Messiah's mission was merely to set Israel free from this oppression. Descent from Abraham was no guarantee of God's favor (3:9). Second, John's baptism was a single act of confession, not a repeated ritual as in the Old Testament and in the Qumran community. Third, John's ministry and baptism were directed toward the nation of Israel as a whole, not toward a sectarian monastic community as at Qumran. Therefore, Davies and Allison (1988:299) seem to be correct in viewing John's baptism as a creative reapplication of biblical and cultural motifs.
When John's ministry attracted Pharisees and Sadducees, he rebuffed them and warned them of judgment (3:7-12). Matthew speaks of the Pharisees often—nearly 30 times. On eleven occasions, they are mentioned alone (9:11, 14, 34; 12:2, 14, 24; 15:12; 19:3; 22:15, 41; 23:36). They are linked with the teachers of the law (scribes) ten times (5:20; 12:38; 15:1; 23:2, 13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29). Five times they appear (as here) with the Sadducees, although the other four times occur in one pericope (3:7; 16:1, 6, 11, 12). The Pharisees also appear with the chief priests, who were Sadducees, in 21:45 and 27:62. In 22:34-35 one of the Pharisees is described as a lawyer. According to Josephus ( _Antiquities_ 17.2.4) there were over 6,000 Pharisees. Their roots are most likely traced to the _Hasidim_ who rebelled against the Seleucid king Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) in the 160s BC. The name "Pharisee" may be derived from a word meaning "separatist." Their chief characteristic was rigorous adherence to the law, which in their view encompassed both the written Old Testament and the oral traditions that had grown up as a "fence around the law" ( _Pirke Avoth_ 1:1). In Matthew their preoccupation with the "traditions of the elders" as rules of conduct put them at loggerheads with Jesus. Their views of such matters as Sabbath observance and ritual washings were determined by the oral law. But these were viewed by Jesus as pedantic and burdensome additions to the genuine (written) law of God (cf., e.g., 15:1-20; 23). Blomberg (1992: 77) rightly points out that not all Pharisees were hypocrites.
The Sadducees are mentioned much less frequently in Matthew, seven times in three pericopes. They appear with the Pharisees in the context of John's ministry (3:7) and later join with them in an attempt to put Jesus to the test by asking for a heavenly sign (16:1, 6, 11, 12). Once Jesus entered Jerusalem, they unsuccessfully attempted to question him on the resurrection (22:23, 34). Less is known about the Sadducees. Josephus spent some time describing them in _Wars_ 2.8.14, _Antiquities_ 13.5.9; 13.10.6; and 18.1.1, 4. A smaller group than the Pharisees, they evidently were made up of wealthy priests who had no use for the oral law of the Pharisees. They were evidently more pro-Roman than the Pharisees, and they stressed human freedom more than the Pharisees did. Their denial of the resurrection and the afterlife is well known (cf. 22:23-33). Perhaps this was due to preoccupation with the five books of Moses and neglect of the rest of the Old Testament, though Davies and Allison (1988:302-303) doubt this. Pharisaic Judaism lived on after the AD 70 destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, but this event evidently marked the end of the Sadducees.
Just as Matthew 2 presents Herod and the Jewish teachers as a foil to the wise men, so here John's baptism of the repentant masses is contrasted with his denunciation of the religious leaders who have come only to watch the baptisms. The linkage of the Pharisees and Sadducees, two entrenched groups that were theologically and socially disparate, shows that both "establishment" movements were unified in opposition to the mass appeal of the charismatic prophet John. This anticipates their later unified opposition to Jesus (cf. 16:1, 6, 11, 12).
John pronounced judgment on them in no uncertain terms. His message of repentance and fruitbearing, winnowing and eternal fire are poignant. The images of 3:7-12 present a very different picture of God and his rule than is often presented in pulpits today, where the stress is on God's provision of goods and services to meet people's felt needs. One wonders whether John would even recognize this "gospel" of self-actualization as an authentic interpretation of the message of God's Kingdom.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. The Baptism of Jesus (3:13-17; cf. Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22)
13 Then Jesus went from Galilee to the Jordan River to be baptized by John. 14 But John tried to talk him out of it. "I am the one who needs to be baptized by you," he said, "so why are you coming to me?"
15 But Jesus said, "It should be done, for we must carry out all that God requires.[*]" So John agreed to baptize him.
16 After his baptism, as Jesus came up out of the water, the heavens were opened[*] and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and settling on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy."
## NOTES
3:13 **to be baptized by John.** Jesus' arrival at the Jordan (cf. 3:6) to be baptized by John led to a brief discussion between John and Jesus before John acquiesced (3:14-15). The statement that Jesus had come from Galilee connects with 2:22-23 and resumes the narrative of Jesus' preparation for ministry. According to Luke 3:23, Jesus was about 30 years old at this time.
3:14 **I am the one who needs to be baptized by you.** The paradoxical character of Jesus' baptism has always challenged interpreters. John was baptizing those who repented and confessed their sins (3:6). John refused to baptize those who bore no fruit of repentance (3:8). In contrast, Jesus was initially refused baptism because he evidently did not need to repent and bring forth fruit (3:14). John did not view his baptism as worthy of Jesus (Carson 1984:107). In historical perspective, if John's baptism only prepared people for Jesus' ultimate baptism in Spirit and fire, why should Jesus submit to John's authority (Davies and Allison 1988:324)? John expressed his incredulity at Jesus' request by noting that their roles should be reversed: Jesus should baptize John. It is unclear how John came to his convictions about Jesus, but it seems plausible that John would have learned from his mother Elizabeth about the remarkable circumstances of Jesus' birth and his own role as Jesus' forerunner (Luke 1).
3:15 **It should be done.** Jesus commanded John to perform the baptism immediately because it was appropriate for them in this way to fulfill all righteousness. It is anachronistic to take this statement as pertaining to Christian baptism (as does Bruner 1987:84-85). This statement features two key Matthean themes, fulfillment (see the discussion in the commentary on 1:25) and righteousness. It has been argued that fulfilling all righteousness means that Jesus was taking upon himself the obligation to obey the law, which had been stressed by John (Harrington 1991:62; Hill 1972:96; cf. 21:33). This fits Matthew's theology but still does not adequately handle the fulfillment theme in Matthew. It seems best to conclude with others (Carson 1984:105-108; Davies and Allison 1988:325-327) that Jesus fulfilled all righteousness by fulfilling the OT pattern and prediction about the Messiah. In Jesus' baptism, he and John fulfilled the OT by introducing the Messiah to Israel. This baptism, an inauguration of Jesus' ministry to Israel, led immediately to OT fulfillment in that the Spirit, as a dove, came upon the Messiah (Isa 11:1-2; 42:1; cf. Matt 12:18, 28) and the Father endorsed his Son in the voice from heaven (Ps 2:7; Isa 42:1; cf. Matt 17:5). In baptism, Jesus as the servant proclaimed and exemplified the righteousness envisioned by the prophets. Additionally he identified in baptism with the repentant righteous remnant within the nation of Israel (cf. 3:5-6). Though he had no sin to confess, his baptism nevertheless demonstrated his humility and anticipated his ministry to lowly but repentant people (cf. 2:23; 11:19; 12:20; 21:5).
3:16 **After his baptism.** Matthew passed over the baptism of Jesus quickly in order to stress two attesting events that pertain to OT fulfillment: the heavenly vision (3:16) and the heavenly voice (3:17). The former relates to the coming of the Spirit upon Jesus (cf. Isa 11:1; 42:1; 61:1), and the latter relates to the Father's endorsement of Jesus (cf. Ps 2:7; Isa 42:1). Taken together, the two events foreshadow two key interrelated features of Jesus' ministry. He is empowered by the Spirit (cf. 12:18, 28) and he is approved by the Father (cf. 17:5). Theologians often look at this text as an anticipation of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity (cf. 28:19). In 3:16 Matthew stresses the immediacy of the dramatic attesting events that followed the baptism. Jesus left the water, received the vision of the heavens standing open, and saw the Spirit descending as a dove upon him (cf. Gen 1:2; 8:8-12; Hos 7:11). The opening of heaven is a regular feature of biblical apocalyptic visions (cf., e.g., Isa 64:1; Ezek 1:1; John 1:51; Acts 7:56; Rev 4:1). It is likely that the dove's descent recalls Gen 1:2 and hints that Jesus is the agent of God's eschatological new creation (19:28).
3:17 **This is my dearly loved Son.** The heavenly voice confirms and interprets the import of the heavenly vision of the Spirit's descent. The words of the heavenly voice express the Father's approval of the Son (cf. 17:5) in words blending the suffering servant motif from Isa 42:1 with the sonship motif of Ps 2:7. The servant motif interprets the baptism by which Jesus identified with the righteous remnant of Israel. The sonship motif recalls the unique circumstances of Jesus' conception and infancy (1:16, 18-25; 2:15) and sets the scene for Satan's tests (4:3, 6). The sonship motif also implies Jesus' Davidic connections (1:1; cf. 2 Sam 7:13-14; Ps 89:27). Although it is true, as a matter of Christian theology, that the Father is eternally pleased with the Son, it is more likely here that the baptism of Jesus is the specific event that pleased the Father (Gundry 1982:53).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The story of Jesus in Matthew 3:1–4:16 centers on John's ministry. John prepared the way for Jesus, and his baptism of Jesus was the occasion for the coming of the Spirit and the Father's approval of his beloved son. This sonship, affirmed by the Father at John's baptism of Jesus, was immediately tested by Satan. After this testing, the imprisonment of John led to the beginning of Jesus' ministry in Galilee. With the presentation of the ministry of John, Matthew's Gospel for the first time parallels Mark (1:1-11), Luke (3:1-23), and John (1:19-34).
When compared to Mark and Luke, Matthew's account presents two very noticeable unique features. He alone presents the dialogue between Jesus and John in which John hesitates and Jesus ties the necessity of his baptism to the fulfilling of all righteousness (3:14-15). This unique section highlights distinctive Matthean themes of fulfillment and righteousness.
Another unique feature of Matthew is his account of the Father's endorsement of the Son (3:17). Here Matthew couches the Father's words in the third person (" _this_ is my son . . . with _him_ I am pleased"), instead of the second person (" _you_ are my son . . . with _you_ I am pleased"). As frequently noted by interpreters, this has the effect of making the endorsement more public in Matthew, though Matthew may intend the endorsement to be only for John's benefit. Also this form of the endorsement brings it into conformity with the Father's words at the transfiguration (17:5). Perhaps the third person language is also intended to confront Matthew's audience more directly with the truth of Jesus' sonship.
The concluding pericope of Matthew 3 on Jesus' baptism (3:13-17) has profound Christological implications. Several trajectories should be mentioned. In 3:17 Jesus is described in terms that clearly represent Isaiah's suffering servant whom God has chosen (cf. especially Isa 42:1). Related to this is the sonship typology metaphorically applied to Israel as a nation (Exod 4:22; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1) and to David as the ideal king who serves God (2 Sam 7:5-16; Ps 2:7; 89:3, 20, 26-27). The fulfillment of Old Testament covenantal promises to the nation and to the king is found in Jesus, who recapitulated Israel's history as he sojourned in Egypt and passed through the waters before being tested in the wilderness. Additionally, it is possible that the emphasis on Jesus as the Father's _beloved_ son is intended to recall Isaac's relationship to Abraham (Gen 22:2). More likely are the creation overtones found in the dove-like Spirit, who descends upon Jesus in a manner that calls Genesis 1:2 to mind. Thus, in Jesus God has begun nothing less than the renewal of all of creation (cf. 19:28). It remains for the rest of Matthew's narrative to develop the distinctive understanding of Jesus and the new people of God that has been begun here.
Matthew 3 has an important role in the Gospel narrative. Gardner (1991:68) is correct in pointing out that two main purposes are served by the story of John and Jesus' baptism. This account provides the basis for the transition between John and Jesus, and it attests Jesus' unique identity as the Servant-Son of God. John as the forerunner now passes from center stage so that the spotlight may shine on Jesus. While John will appear again in the story, there can be no doubt about his subservience to Jesus in redemptive history. Jesus will proclaim the same message as John (3:2; 4:17) and eventually suffer a similar fate as John's (17:12), but John's great redemptive historical significance pales in comparison with that of Jesus' (11:11). Davies and Allison (1988:343) also point out how John's ministry serves to initiate Matthew's definition of the genuine people of God and Matthew's dualism regarding those who respond correctly and incorrectly to the message of God's rule. The genuine people of God are not merely Abraham's descendants but those who show their repentance by their changed lifestyles. Those who show no repentance are in danger of imminent judgment.
In concluding the discussion of Matthew 3, first a brief word needs to be said on synoptic relationships. After his unique material on Jesus' genealogy and infancy in the first two chapters, Matthew's narrative of John's ministry and the baptism of Jesus in chapter 3 parallels the other Gospels to some extent. All three of the synoptics cite Isaiah 40:3 as speaking of John's ministry. Mark's account is briefest, though Mark 1:2 alludes to Malachi 3:1, along with Isaiah 40:3, as the basis of John's ministry. Luke's account is the most lengthy, detailing the rulers who were on the scene when John arrived (Luke 3:1-2), citing a lengthier section of Isaiah 40 than Matthew does (Luke 3:5-6) and giving a brief summary of dialogue between John and his audience (Luke 3:10-15). Luke and Matthew both speak of Jesus baptizing in the Spirit and fire (Matt 3:11; Luke 3:16), whereas Mark mentions only the Spirit (Mark 1:8).
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. Testing of the Son of God (4:1-11; cf. Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13)
1 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted there by the devil. 2 For forty days and forty nights he fasted and became very hungry.
3 During that time the devil[*] came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become loaves of bread."
4 But Jesus told him, "No! The Scriptures say,
'People do not live by bread alone,
but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'[*]"
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple, 6 and said, "If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say,
'He will order his angels to protect you.
And they will hold you up with their hands
so you won't even hurt your foot on a stone.'[*]"
7 Jesus responded, "The Scriptures also say, 'You must not test the LORD your God.'[*]"
8 Next the devil took him to the peak of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 "I will give it all to you," he said, "if you will kneel down and worship me."
10 "Get out of here, Satan," Jesus told him. "For the Scriptures say,
'You must worship the LORD your God
and serve only him.'[*]"
11 Then the devil went away, and angels came and took care of Jesus.
## NOTES
4:1 **Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness.** The testing of Jesus occurred immediately after he was endowed with the Spirit and heard the Father's words of approval as his beloved son (3:16-17). The same Spirit who equipped Jesus for his messianic vocation led Jesus to the wilderness, where his unique sonship and vocation would be challenged by Satan. Jesus' wilderness experience recapitulated the wilderness wandering of Israel. This seems clear from the similarities between the OT and NT accounts and from the repeated citations of Deut 6–8. Yet there is a crucial difference; unlike Israel, Jesus obeyed the Father, passed the test, and vanquished Satan.
**to be tempted there by the devil.** The devil or Satan appears several times in Matthew. Seven times he is described as "the devil" (4:1, 3, 5, 8, 11; 13:39; 25:41). He is also referred to as Satan in 4:10; 12:26 (cf. 16:23), as Beelzeboul (NLT "prince of demons") in 10:25; 12:24, parabolically as "the enemy" in 13:39, and probably as "the evil one" in 6:13.
4:2 **forty days and forty nights.** As a concordance study will show, the number forty is pregnant with theological implications throughout Scripture. Especially pertinent here are the forty-year wanderings of Israel in the wilderness (Deut 8:2-4) and the forty-day fast of Moses (Exod 34:28; cf. Elijah in 1 Kgs 19:8). As Israel hungered (Deut 8:3), so did Jesus. How would this need be met?
4:3 **the devil.** Gr., "the tempter" (so NLT mg). Perhaps the use of "tempter" here anticipates the similar activity of the unbelieving Jewish religious leaders as Matthew's story develops (Gundry 1994:55; cf. 12:38; 16:1; 19:3; 22:15, 18, 35). While the word "tempt" does not occur in 16:21ff, it is clear from 16:23 that Peter's unwitting attempt to deter Jesus from the cross was also a temptation. As the tempter, Satan referred to Jesus' divine sonship as the pretext to solicit Jesus to perform an act that would sever his filial relationship to the Father. It was not so much that Satan doubted Jesus' sonship but that he utilized it to deceive Jesus into exercising his filial prerogatives in a selfish manner. Jesus was not tempted to doubt his sonship but to exercise it in a manner that would not be approved by the Father. Jesus' baptism (3:17) evoked the Father's approving words concerning his sonship; now those approving words evoke Satan's command for Jesus to relieve his hunger by turning stones into loaves of bread. At issue here is the type of son Jesus will be. Will he utilize his endowment with the Spirit in a selfish fashion, or will he humbly depend on his Father to meet his needs? As God's servant, how will he fulfill his mission? It is noteworthy here that Satan's mention of rocks echoes John's words in 3:9. If God is able to make disciples out of stones, shouldn't God's Son have the right to make bread out of stones?
4:4 **The Scriptures say.** Lit., "it is written." Jesus' response simply cites the second half of Deut 8:3 with an introductory formula that stresses the abiding authority of the OT. This passage in context rehearses God's care for Israel during its forty-year wilderness experience. It is interesting to note that the first half of Deut 8:3 alludes to God's purpose in permitting Israel's hunger in the wilderness—it was so that they might learn that they needed not only bread but also God's word to survive. This purpose of God in Deut 8:3 is similar to the statement of purpose in Matt 4:1. Deut 8:5 likens the wilderness wandering to a father's discipline, and this terminology finds its full implications in the testing of Jesus. He was aware of the daily need to depend on the Father for bread (7:9), and he would not use his power as some sort of magician.
4:5 Matthew and Luke present the second and third temptations in opposite orders. The scene now shifts from the isolation of the desert to the political and religious center of Israel.
**the devil took him.** This most likely describes a visionary experience rather than physical movement, as does 4:8-9.
**the holy city, Jerusalem.** Jerusalem is also described as "the holy city" in 27:53.
**the highest point of the Temple.** Satan showed Jesus the perspective from "the highest point" (Gr., _pterugion_ [TG4419, ZG4762]) of the Temple. This word, related to the word for "wing," has a range of meanings including tip, end, peak, or turret. It could plausibly refer to the southeastern corner of the Temple complex, overlooking the Kidron Valley (cf. Josephus _Antiquities_ 15.411-412; Eusebius _Ecclesiastical History_ 2.23.11), but any elevated location could be in view.
4:6 **If you are the Son of God, jump off!** The second temptation again questoned Jesus' sonship but with a new twist: biblical support! Satan cited Ps 91:11-12 with the same introductory formula ("for the Scriptures say") Jesus had just uttered. Satan tempted Jesus to jump off a high pinnacle of the Temple and assured him that Scripture says that God would protect him. In the previous temptation, Jesus proclaimed his dependence on the Word of God, citing Deut 8:3, so Satan cited a word from God, Ps 91, which speaks beautifully of the security of those who depend on the Lord.
4:7 **You must not test the Lord your God.** Jesus countered Satan's use of Ps 91:11-12 with Deut 6:16, which refers to Israel's doubting God's provision of water in Exod 17:7 (cf. Ps 95:7-11; 1 Cor 10:9; Heb 3:7ff). It is not that Deut 6:16 contradicts the Psalm but that Satan misapplied it. Satan tempted Jesus to capitalize on his unique messianic status as a way out of self-induced mortal peril, perhaps as a stunt to appeal to the masses. But since Jesus received the Father's approval by serving as an obedient son, the proposed leap from the pinnacle of the Temple would have amounted not to trusting God but to testing God. Once again Jesus recapitulated an event from Israel's history but with better results. He would not use his status as the beloved son to satisfy his hunger, and he would not put God to the test as Israel did.
4:8-9 It is possible that this scene is intended to recall God's promise to Abraham (Gen 13:14-15) or Moses looking at the Promised Land from Mt. Pisgah (Deut 3:27; 34:1-4). The third temptation, like the second, probably involved a visionary experience. Jesus was taken to a high mountain, presented with the glory of all the world's kingdoms, and promised that he would receive it all if he would only worship Satan. This temptation was unlike the first two in at least two ways. First, it did not address Jesus as the Son of God because it did not involve a misuse of his messianic prerogatives. Second, it blatantly asked Jesus to break the first commandment. In keeping with the recapitulation theme in Matthew, Jesus' being asked to bow down and worship Satan recalled Israel's idolatrous worship in the desert (Exod 32).
4:10 **Get out of here, Satan.** Satan's opposition to the Father's first commandment received a blunt rejection by the beloved Son.
**You must worship the Lord your God and serve only him.** Jesus based his outright rejection of Satan on Deut 6:13, which is only three verses before the verse cited in the previous test. Deut 6, perhaps the greatest chapter in the Torah, proclaims the exclusivity of Israel's God and Israel's responsibility to love him exclusively (Deut 6:4-5). Israel is warned not to forget God when they come into their land, but to fear him and not to fear false gods (Deut 6:12-14). By not worshipping Satan, Jesus avoided repeating the sin of Israel when they worshipped the golden calf. If he was to rule the world, it would be by the path of obedience to the Father. Later in Matthew, it becomes clear that this path led to the cross, a difficult fact for Peter to grasp (16:21-26).
4:11 **the devil went away.** Satan had to depart in response to Jesus' authoritative rebuke. But Matthew does not imply by this that Satan's evil activity was finished (cf. 5:37; 6:13; 12:28-29; 13:19, 38). Luke 4:13 makes this clear—"he left him until the next opportunity came."
**angels came and took care of Jesus.** The ministry of angels to Jesus is referred to again in 26:53. Jesus mentioned other angelic ministries in 13:39, 41, 49; 16:27; 18:10; 22:30; 24:31, 36; 25:31. This mention of angelic ministry recalls Satan's previous use of Ps 91:11-12 in 4:6 to the effect that if Jesus were to jump off the pinnacle of the Temple, angels would protect him. Ironically, Jesus did receive angelic ministry, but only after he obeyed the Father.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 4 leads from the final preparatory episode (the temptation; 4:1-11) to the beginning of Jesus' ministry in Galilee (4:12-25). Thus, the chapter amounts to a transition from preparatory events to public ministry. The testing narrative itself (4:1-11) consists of three incidents wrapped in an introduction, where Satan arrives (4:1-2), and a conclusion, where Satan departs (4:11). Here Jesus authenticates the Father's baptismal endorsement in his victory over Satan's triple test. The things Satan offered him—physical sustenance, spectacular protection, and authority to rule the world—were already his by virtue of his unique status as the Father's beloved Son. But his testing recapitulates that of Israel in the wilderness and becomes a positive example for his people.
Matthew's account of the temptation differs significantly from both Mark's and Luke's. Mark's short summary of the temptation (Mark 1:12-13) does not mention Jesus' fasting or that there were three distinct episodes of temptation. Neither Mark nor Luke indicates that the Spirit's leading was for the express purpose of Jesus' temptation, as Matthew does in 4:1. Mark alone mentions the presence of wild animals in the wilderness, and his description of the angels' ministry does not specify, as Matthew's does, that this ministry began at Satan's departure. Luke does not mention the angels at all. Luke 4:1-13 agrees with Matthew in describing Jesus' fast and the three distinct episodes of temptation, but Luke's order differs. Matthew and Luke agree in placing the turning of stones into bread as the first temptation but differ in the order of the next two. Matthew puts jumping from the temple pinnacle second and worshipping the devil third, but Luke reverses this order. Luke alone ominously remarks that Satan's departure at the end of the pericope was only temporary.
Jesus, the Spirit, and Temptation. It is not surprising to read in 4:1 that the Spirit led Jesus, since the reader already knows that the Spirit is the agency behind Jesus' virginal conception (1:18, 20) and empowerment for ministry (3:16-17; cf. 12:18-28). Furthermore, John's prediction that Jesus would baptize in the Spirit (3:16) anticipated his exaltation following his death in Jerusalem (cf. 28:18-20). But it is striking that Jesus was led by the Spirit to the desert in order to be tempted by the devil. Matthew 4 clearly indicates that while the Spirit is the agent who led Jesus, the devil is the agent who tested Jesus. How should we understand this convergence of God's benevolent purpose with Satan's evil designs? The verb used here ( _peirazō_ [TG3985, ZG4279]) may express both the positive nuance of testing, which develops character and achieves approval (cf. John 6:6; LXX Gen 22:1; Exod 20:20), and the negative nuance of tempting, which solicits evil and achieves disapproval (cf. 1 Cor 7:5; 1 Thess 3:5). The positive or negative nuance depends upon the motive in each context. Here both nuances are pertinent, since the Father, through the Spirit, led Jesus to be tested in order to confirm him in his role as the messianic son and servant, yet the devil tempted Jesus to achieve messianic status by using his prerogatives selfishly in disobedience to the son/servant paradigm. The Father's aim was to accredit Jesus, the devil's to discredit Jesus (Calvin 1972:1.136). The convergence of the benevolent plan of God and the malevolent schemes of Satan may be difficult to explain fully, but it is found elsewhere in Scripture (Job 1:6-12; 2:1-6; Acts 2:23).
Jesus as a Model for Christians. In Matthew 4:1-11, Satan appears in a role that ought to be familiar to those who read the Scriptures. In challenging Jesus' unique sonship, so recently announced by the approving Father, it is as if Satan were saying again, "'Did God really say 'you are the Son of God?'" (cf. Gen 3:1). It is clear from the narrative parallels and from the Scriptures Jesus cites that his temptation recapitulates that of Israel in the wilderness. But from the widest scriptural perspective Jesus' temptation recapitulates that of Adam and Eve in the garden (so the theme of John Milton's epic poem, "Paradise Regained"). Through Jesus, God is calling into existence a new humanity (16:18), which will be characterized by the obedience modeled by Jesus, not the rebellion of its first parents. What can be learned from the example of the beloved son?
Concerning the avenues of temptation, it is clear that Satan tempted Jesus (and continues to tempt Jesus' people) in the area of daily sustenance. But instead of succumbing to the temptation to acquire one's "bread" by sinful means, Christians must remind themselves of the biblical truth that true life comes from hearing and obeying the word of God (Deut 8:3), and that the God of the word knows all about their daily needs (6:11). Another avenue of temptation could be a desire for spectacular manifestations of God's power or protection, but Christians must never leap disobediently away from the path God has revealed and ask God to catch them while in mid-air. This amounts to a selfish testing of God (Deut 6:16), not a serene reliance on his love and providence. Yet another avenue of temptation is the desire for glory and power. Satan continues to promote idolatrous ways of achieving status, but the Christian must rely on God for advancement and seek only that glory which is consistent with the way of the cross (Deut 6:13; cf. Matt 6:24, 33).
How did Jesus withstand temptation? His spontaneous citation of appropriate Scriptures when under temptation showed that he was conscious of the past failure of God's people and aware of the reasons for their failure. In short, he knew the Bible. But he also was conscious of the endowment and leading of the Spirit of God (3:16; 4:1; 12:18-21). Therefore, Christians today must likewise withstand temptation by knowing the Scripture and by being strengthened in the Spirit. Obedience and victory in the face of temptation come from knowing what God commands and having the capacity to perform it. Christians who regularly study the Bible and humbly depend on the Spirit for the strength to obey it can successfully resist the devil today.
Conclusion. This section of Matthew cannot be left without a reiteration of how Jesus is presented as the personification of Israel in Matthew 3–4. Jesus passed through the waters and entered the desert to be tested, just as Israel did. Remarkably, Scriptures from Deuteronomy 6–8, which remind Israel of its past failures in the wilderness and present obligations in the Promised Land, were on the tip of Jesus' tongue when Satan tested him. Once Satan was vanquished, Jesus moved on to begin his own ministry and to call his first disciples (4:12ff). Davies and Allison (1988:402-403) are certainly right when they say "this means that the baptism and temptation of Jesus inaugurated the renewal of the people of God." We should also note here that Matthew's Gospel uses the literary technique of inclusion—the mount of temptation (4:8) ultimately leads to the mount of commission (28:16). Jesus' obedience to the Father eventually led to his crucifixion, but he was raised from the dead and received all authority, not only on earth but also in heaven. Thus, by obedience to the way of the cross, he received infinitely more than Satan promised.
## TEXT [Commentary]
D. Ministry in Galilee (4:12-25; cf. Mark 1:14-20; Luke 3:19-20; 4:14-15, 44)
12 When Jesus heard that John had been arrested, he left Judea and returned to Galilee. 13 He went first to Nazareth, then left there and moved to Capernaum, beside the Sea of Galilee, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. 14 This fulfilled what God said through the prophet Isaiah:
15 "In the land of Zebulun and of Naphtali,
beside the sea, beyond the Jordan River,
in Galilee where so many Gentiles live,
16 the people who sat in darkness
have seen a great light.
And for those who lived in the land where death casts its shadow,
a light has shined."[*]
17 From then on Jesus began to preach, "Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.[*]"
18 One day as Jesus was walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers—Simon, also called Peter, and Andrew—throwing a net into the water, for they fished for a living. 19 Jesus called out to them, "Come, follow me, and I will show you how to fish for people!" 20 And they left their nets at once and followed him.
21 A little farther up the shore he saw two other brothers, James and John, sitting in a boat with their father, Zebedee, repairing their nets. And he called them to come, too. 22 They immediately followed him, leaving the boat and their father behind.
23 Jesus traveled throughout the region of Galilee, teaching in the synagogues and announcing the Good News about the Kingdom. And he healed every kind of disease and illness. 24 News about him spread as far as Syria, and people soon began bringing to him all who were sick. And whatever their sickness or disease, or if they were demon possessed or epileptic or paralyzed—he healed them all. 25 Large crowds followed him wherever he went—people from Galilee, the Ten Towns,[*] Jerusalem, from all over Judea, and from east of the Jordan River.
## NOTES
4:12-13 **he left Judea and returned to Galilee.** Jesus made this journey when he learned that John had been imprisoned. The NLT's "left and returned" translates a word ( _anachōreō_ [TG402, ZG432]) used several times in Matthew to describe a strategic withdrawal in the face of danger (2:12-14, 22; 10:23; 12:15; 14:13; 15:21). The arrest and imprisonment of John led to his grisly execution (14:1-12), which in turn led to another strategic withdrawal by Jesus (14:13). Perhaps these two withdrawals by Jesus anticipate the close connection made later between the fate of John and the fate of Jesus (17:12).
**He went first to Nazareth . . . and moved to Capernaum.** Jesus' first stop in Galilee was Nazareth, the village where he grew up (2:23). At the Triumphal Entry, Nazareth was still known as his hometown (21:11). But Matthew does not dwell on Nazareth (but cf. Luke 4:16-30), preferring to stress Capernaum because its location has prophetic significance. Capernaum (cf. 8:5; 11:23; 17:24) is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee, roughly two miles west of the Jordan River. Because Capernaum is not mentioned in the OT, Matthew stressed its location in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (cf. Josh 19:32-39); these two are mentioned in Isaiah 9:1-2.
4:14-16 For Matthew, Jesus' residence in Capernaum, located in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, has prophetic implications. With his characteristic fulfillment formula (see the notes on 1:23; 2:15, 17, 23 and the commentary on 1:18-25), Matthew introduces a quote from Isa 9:1-2. In its original context, Isaiah 7–9 promises deliverance from the threat of Assyria. Matthew has already connected the birth of Jesus with the sign promised to Ahaz (1:23; cf. Isa 7:14; 8:8, 10). Here he connects the political darkness facing Israel in the days of Isaiah to the spiritual problem that caused it. Israel's defection from the Mosaic covenant had led to her oppression by other kingdoms. But for Matthew, Israel's dark political prospects were symptomatic of her need for the redemption from sin that was now coming through Jesus the Messiah.
**in Galilee where so many Gentiles live.** This is the key to the use of the Isaiah passage. It stood out to Matthew since it resonated with his theme of mission to the Gentiles (see the discussion of this in the Major Themes section of the Introduction). Galilee was evidently looked down upon by the "enlightened" Jerusalem establishment and those who supported it. Its population was evidently a mixture of Jews and Gentiles (2 Kgs 15:29; 17:24-27; 1 Macc 5). It was to this darkened place (cf. Ps 107:10; Luke 1:79) that Jesus brought the light of the Kingdom of God. His mission was not to the Gentiles during these early days of the Galilean ministry (9:35; 10:5-6; 15:24), although he did occasionally minister to Gentiles (8:5-13; 15:21-28). Evidently, the Gentiles to whom Jesus ministered took the initiative to come to him, suggesting the applicability of Jesus' message for all the nations (24:14). The beginnings of Jesus' ministry in a remote, despised place, largely populated by Gentiles, foreshadows the expansion of mission to all the nations at the end of Jesus' ministry (28:19).
4:17 **From then on.** Many interpreters of Matthew think this phrase signals a transition to the second major section of Matthew. One may grant the role this phrase plays in Matthew's presentation of the stages of the life and ministry of Jesus. But this phrase is not nearly as prominent as Matthew's unique literary structure, which alternates discourse and narrative material by inserting the phrase "when Jesus had finished" (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1) at the end of each major discourse. Therefore a different view is favored in the discussion and outline found in the Literary Structure section of the Introduction.
**Jesus began to preach.** Jesus' early message is portrayed here with the same language used to portray John's message in 3:2. In this verse, an ethical imperative ( **repent of your sins and turn to God** ) is grounded in an eschatological reality ( **the Kingdom of Heaven is near** ). For discussion of repentance and the "Kingdom of Heaven," see the note on 3:2 and the Major Themes section of the Introduction. This linkage of the messages of John and Jesus seems to lay a foundation for the similar fates of the two messengers (14:2; 17:12-13).
4:18 **Simon, also called Peter, and Andrew.** The name Simon (cf. 10:2; 16:16-17; 17:25) appears much less often than the popular nickname Peter (23 times), which Jesus gave Simon in 16:17-18. In view of the prominence of Peter in Matthew, especially Matt 16:13ff, it is not merely coincidental that Peter is the first disciple who responds to the call of Jesus. Andrew, by contrast, is mentioned only once after this (10:2; but cf. John 1:35-42).
4:19 **Come, follow me.** The call to discipleship was an unconditional, unexplained demand, not a polite, reasoned invitation. Following Jesus involved both traveling with him and ethically obeying his teaching and modeling of God's will. It could and did lead to hardship and peril (8:19, 22; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21).
**fish for people.** This is an expression found elsewhere in the NT only in Mark 1:17. It is just possible that fishing here is an allusion to Jer 16:16, or that fishing for people implies eschatological judgment (13:47-50). In any event, this new "fishing" results in life for those "caught" by the message of Jesus.
4:20 **they left their nets at once and followed him.** In response to Jesus' call, Peter and Andrew—with immediate sacrificial obedience—walked away from their livelihood as commercial fishermen and followed Jesus in a life of homelessness (8:20). For the similar story of the call of Matthew, see 9:9.
4:21-22 **James and John.** The call of James and John follows the pattern just discussed. These brothers are mentioned later in the narrative, sometimes by name (10:2; 17:1) and sometimes as "the sons of Zebedee" (20:20; 26:37; 27:56). They too were commercial fishermen. They were mending their nets in preparation for another voyage on the lake. At the summons of Jesus, they too immediately walked away from their maritime career, but in this case it is added that they also left their father behind (cf. 8:21-22!). Their sacrifice entailed not only the loss of finances but also of family.
4:23 Matthew 4:23-25 encapsulates the ministry of Jesus (Hagner 1993:78). It may be viewed as a concluding summary of Jesus' early ministry in Galilee (so here), or as the introduction to the Sermon on the Mount (so Davies and Allison 1988:410). It is noteworthy that 4:23 is repeated almost verbatim in 9:35. Both 4:23 and 9:35 are located just before major discourses of Jesus, and they serve to summarize his deeds as the context for his words. But there is likely more to the repetition than that. Taken together, 4:23 and 9:35 form an _inclusio_ , a set of literary bookends, which summarize Jesus' words and deeds at the beginning and end of two sections that present his words (Matt 5–7) and deeds (Matt 8–9) in detail. Significantly, both the words (7:29) and deeds (8:9; 9:6) demonstrate Jesus' Kingdom authority, an authority he passed on to his disciples in 10:1. As his words and deeds proclaim and demonstrate the Kingdom, so will the words and deeds of his disciples (10:7-8; 24:14).
4:24-25 **News about him spread as far as Syria.** These verses describe the far-reaching results of Jesus' ministry. His reputation spread north from Galilee into Syria, and soon people from all over were coming to Jesus for healing. Matthew 4:24 describes the diseases healed in more detail than 4:23 and adds that Jesus also dealt with demonic possession (cf. 8:16, 28; 9:32-34; 10:8; 12:22, 24, 27-28; 15:22-28; 17:18). All who were brought to Jesus were healed, and this led to crowds of people following him. People not only from Galilee, but also from the regions surrounding Galilee, were "following" Jesus, which here does not have the strict ethical sense of 4:19, 21.
**Large crowds.** Matthew's use of the term "crowds" is noteworthy, since it often portrays those who are attracted to Jesus because of his sensational deeds (cf. 8:1, 18; 11:7; 12:46; 15:30; 17:14; 19:2). The crowds occupied a middle ground between Jesus' committed disciples on the one hand, and the hostile religious leaders on the other. At times, the crowd seemed favorable to Jesus (9:8; 12:23; 15:31), and he to the crowd (9:36; 14:14; 15:32). But as time went on, under the influence of the leaders, the crowd ultimately called for Jesus' death (26:47, 55; 27:20, 24). In this context, the presence of the crowds led Jesus away to the mountain where he delivered his first discourse (5:1).
**the Ten Towns.** Lit., "the Decapolis," a league of Hellenistic cities southeast of Galilee. Nearly all of them were east of the Jordan River (cf. Mark 5:20; 7:31).
**east of the Jordan River.** Lit., "beyond the Jordan." This refers to the region farther south, east of Jerusalem and the Jordan River. Matthew's geographical language covers the whole land of Israel, moving from northwest (Galilee) to northeast (Decapolis) to Jerusalem (probably to be understood as the center of the land) to southwest (Judea) to southeast ("beyond the Jordan").
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In the second part of the chapter (4:12-25), John's ministry ends, and Jesus withdraws from Judea to Galilee to begin his own ministry in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy (4:14-16; cf. Isa 9:1-2). The theme of his preaching is the Kingdom of Heaven, which is mentioned in a "hinge" verse (4:17), linking Jesus' message to that of his predecessor John (3:2). He began to call his core disciples (4:18-22), and his message was authenticated by powerful works (4:23-25). Geographically, Jesus moved from the wilderness of Judea (4:1) to Galilee (4:12), where he went first to Nazareth (4:13) and then lived in Capernaum, where he called his disciples (4:18-22). Then his ministry expanded into all Galilee, where he was followed by multitudes from all over the land (4:23-25). This Galilean ministry, which is the setting for the Sermon on the Mount, also features themes that are important throughout this Gospel, such as the Kingdom of Heaven, the fulfillment of Scripture, and the salvation of Gentiles.
The Mission of Jesus. Matthew 4:15-16 is a citation of Isaiah 9:1-2, a passage that presented a promise of hope to Israel in the midst of a time of judgment. The stress of Isaiah 9:6-7 upon a son who will rule David's kingdom fits nicely with the Matthean theme that Jesus is the son of David. But the mention in Isaiah 9:1-2 of the scorned area of Galilee and its association with despised Gentiles repeats the idea that God rejects the proud and receives the most unlikely sinners into fellowship with himself. Matthew repeatedly stresses mission to the Gentiles, either by implicit details (1:3, 5-6; 2:1; 15:22-28; 22:9) or by explicit teaching of Jesus (8:10-12; 21:43; 24:14). Jesus' Galilean ministry prepares the reader for his Galilean commission that his disciples should disciple all the nations (28:16-20).
It is also clear from Matthew 4:12-25 that Jesus' ministry was, to use a popular contemporary term, "holistic." He dealt with the people's physical needs as well as their spiritual needs—the former sometimes evidently preceding the latter. While he demanded repentance, he did not make repentance the prerequisite for healing. Jesus had compassion on the needy crowds and helped them, evidently in many cases before they heard him preach. Davies and Allison put it well: "The first act of the Messiah is not the imposition of his commandments but the giving of himself" (1988:427). In narrating the gracious ministry of Jesus, Matthew surely intended it to be a model for the ministry of the disciples. They, too, were not only to preach the Kingdom (4:17; 10:7), but also were to do works of compassion that demonstrated its power and grace (4:24; 10:1).
It was also Jesus' mission to defeat the devil. As soon as Jesus emerges victorious from his testing (4:1-11), he is presented at the outset of his ministry as one who heals not only physical diseases but also demonic possession. Jesus' power over the forces of darkness is made more clear after the Sermon on the Mount, when Matthew narrates Jesus' Galilean ministry (8:16, 28-34; 9:32-34; 12:22ff; 15:22-31; 17:18). One incident in particular (8:29) shows that the demons intuitively recognized Jesus' messianic identity and his ultimate eschatological authority over them. In another (12:22ff), Jesus countered the false accusation that he was in league with the devil (cf. 9:34) with the affirmation that his Spirit-empowered exorcism ministry amounts to the binding of a strong man and the removal of his property. Thus, in Matthew it is clear that the Kingdom had already encroached upon Satan's territory, and that Satan would ultimately be defeated. Additional New Testament teaching makes this even more clear (John 12:31; 16:11; Heb 2:14; 1 John 3:8; Rev 5:5; 12:7-10; 20:1-10).
Jesus' ministry is presented in a threefold fashion in 4:23-25, involving synagogue teaching, public preaching of the Kingdom, and powerful healings. Synagogues (cf. 9:35; 12:9; 13:54; 23:6, 34) evidently began to develop after the exile to Babylon. They were gatherings where prayer and the study of Scripture, primarily the Torah, took place (cf. Luke 4:16ff). They evidently also functioned as community courts, especially with the rise of the Rabbinic movement after the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. The central theme of the proclamation of the nearness of God's Kingdom rule through the Messiah was already stressed in 3:2 and 4:17 and continues to be featured in Matthew's narrative (cf. 9:35; 10:7, 27; 11:1; 13:19; 24:14; 26:13). In addition to the verbal aspect of Jesus' ministry, Matthew also shows that Jesus' powerful acts of mercy demonstrated the reality of the rule of God (cf. 8:7, 16; 9:35; 10:1, 8; 12:13, 15, 22; 14:14; 15:30; 17:18; 19:2; 21:14). Matthew's comment that Jesus healed every kind of sickness and disease stresses the extent of Jesus' kingly power.
The Call to Discipleship. Matthew 4:18-22 narrates for us the obedient response of Jesus' first disciples, who immediately left family and livelihood to follow him. The story of the call of Simon Peter and Andrew is very similar to the following story about the call of James and John. Both stories, perhaps in dependence on the story of Elijah's call of Elisha (1 Kgs 19:19-21), involve a fourfold structure (Davies and Allison 1988:392-393): (1) the appearance of Jesus (4:18, 21); (2) the comment on the work of the prospective disciples (4:18, 21); (3) the call to discipleship (4:19, 21); and (4) obedience to the call (4:20, 22). It should also be noted that in both narratives it is Jesus who sees the prospective disciples and takes the initiative in calling them to follow him. This is an important factor in distinguishing Jesus as a charismatic or prophetic figure, after the model of Elijah, from the late Rabbinic model in which the disciples took the initiative in attaching themselves to the Rabbi (cf. _m. Avot_ 1:6).
We should come away from this text understanding that Jesus' ministry is a model for our own ministries. Furthermore, we should view the obedience of the first disciples as examples that challenge us to similar obedience. The immediate, unquestioning, sacrificial response of the first disciples to Jesus' absolutely authoritative call to discipleship is a model for radical discipleship today. Discipleship is still incumbent upon Christians, whether or not they are called to "vocational" ministry. The unquestioning obedience of Peter and Andrew, James and John, condemns any delay or ambivalence in responding to Jesus. Their complete break with former loyalties shames any half-hearted attempt to serve two masters. This obedience of Jesus' first disciples is contrasted later in the narrative to the excuses of would-be disciples who will not make the requisite sacrifice (8:18-22; cf. 19:16-22). Even true disciples who have responded to the call need to have their faith strengthened (8:23-27). Their task is daunting (10:5-42), but their reward is great (19:27-30).
Conclusion. Matthew 4:12-25 has set the scene for Jesus' first discourse, the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7), where we will find the values and ethics that should characterize those who answer the call of the Kingdom. Following this discourse, Matthew provides us with a narrative of Jesus' powerful deeds (8:1–9:34) before the summary statement of 9:35 closes the circle begun in 4:23. Thus, Matthew 4:23–9:35 provides a clearly structured look at Jesus' proclamation and demonstration of the Kingdom of Heaven. Matthew 9:35-38 stresses the need for Jesus' disciples to take up this ministry, which is realistically portrayed in the next discourse, 10:5-42.
## TEXT [Commentary]
E. The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)
1. The Beatitudes (5:1-10; cf. Luke 6:20-26)
1 One day as he saw the crowds gathering, Jesus went up on the mountainside and sat down. His disciples gathered around him, 2 and he began to teach them.
3 "God blesses those who are poor and realize their need for him,[*]
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.
4 God blesses those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 God blesses those who are humble,
for they will inherit the whole earth.
6 God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice,[*]
for they will be satisfied.
7 God blesses those who are merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 God blesses those whose hearts are pure,
for they will see God.
9 God blesses those who work for peace,
for they will be called the children of God.
10 God blesses those who are persecuted for doing right,
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs."
## NOTES
5:1-2 These verses provide the narrative setting for the Sermon (cf. 7:28–8:1).
**Jesus went up on the mountainside.** Once again Matthew presents Jesus doing something significant on a mountain, which may reflect an intended typological relationship between Jesus and Moses (cf. 4:8 and note; 14:23; 15:29; 17:1; 24:3; 28:16 with Exod 19–20; 34; and Donaldson 1985).
**His disciples gathered around him.** Jesus evidently retired to the mountainside to teach his disciples more privately, but it is doubtful that we are to view the crowd as entirely absent from this discourse. More likely, Matthew presents the disciples as the inner circle closely listening to Jesus, while a throng of people gathered around the periphery of the scene, exhibiting varied levels of interest and comprehension.
**sat down.** Teaching while sitting was evidently customary (cf. 13:1-2; 24:3), but in other contexts, sitting is the posture of judgment (19:28; 20:21, 23; 22:44; 25:31; 26:64). Matthew often speaks of various people "gathering around" Jesus to hear him teach or to ask him for something.
5:3 The word "beatitude" is related to the Latin _beatus_ , which means "blessed." There is considerable similarity between 5:3-12 and Luke 6:20-26.
**God blesses those who . .** This makes the implicit divine agency of "blessed" explicit. Beatitudes are found elsewhere in the Bible (e.g., Ps 1:1; 32:1; Dan 12:12; Rom 14:22; Rev 1:3). To be blessed is to receive God's approval, favor, endorsement, congratulations. "Blessed" should not be understood merely in the sense of "happy," since happiness is a vague idea, often with a shallow, emotional ring to it. God initiates blessing by graciously condescending to save people. They respond to God's initiative by blessing God in thanks and praise for that grace and by living obediently. Structurally, each of the beatitudes is composed of a statement of _who_ is blessed ("blessed are the poor in spirit," etc.) followed by a statement of _why_ the person is blessed ("for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven"). First the character of the blessed person is highlighted, and then the promise of God to that person is explained.
**those who are poor and realize their need for him.** The first beatitude concerns authentic spirituality (5:3). Matthew's phrase is lit. "poor in spirit" (cf. Isa 57:15), but Luke's version of this beatitude has only "blesses you who are poor" (Luke 6:20). God's approval does not come to those who boast of their spiritual riches. Rather, his endorsement is for those who admit their spiritual poverty. In the OT there is repeated reference to the _'ani_ [TH6041, ZH6714], people whose economic distress left them with nothing to rely upon except God (Lev 19:9-15, 32-33; Deut 15:4, 7, 11; Ps 37:10-19; Prov 16:18-19; Isa 66:1-2; Jer 22:15-17; Amos 2:6-8; cf. Jas 2:5). Their distress was due to such problems as death in the family, physical handicap, advancing age, military defeat, social injustice, or alien status. This seems to be the OT background of Jesus' words, but spiritual poverty should be acknowledged by everyone, not just those who have adverse circumstances. Material prosperity should not deaden our sensitivity to our spiritual poverty. Those who realize they have nothing spiritually are the only ones who really have anything.
**the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.** It is noteworthy that 5:3 and 5:10 have identical promise statements ("for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs"), and thus frame the entire section. Also the promise statements of 5:3 and 5:10 both use the present tense, while the promise statements of the intervening verses (5:4-9) use the future tense. There is debate over the significance of the present tense in 5:3, 10. Some opt for the futuristic use of the present (e.g., Gundry 1994:68), and others stress the present realization of Kingdom blessing (e.g., Carson 1984:132). The latter view—that a presently inaugurated Kingdom will be consummated in the future—is highly preferable. The oppressed poor presently experience Kingdom blessing only partially.
5:4 **God blesses those who mourn, for they will be comforted.** Here Jesus indicates that those who mourn will receive God's approval. People mourn over many different misfortunes, but the most likely reason for mourning here is sin or persecution. Some interpreters argue that mourning over sinfulness, not merely one's own but also that of the world in general, is in view here (Bruner 1987:138-39; Carson 1984:133; Hendriksen 1973:270-271). This fits the Matthean theme of the necessity of repentance (3:2; 4:17) and the testimony of such great saints as Isaiah (Isa 6) and Job (Job 42). But perhaps the focus here is more on those who mourn over afflictions and persecution that arise due to their allegiance to the Kingdom (Hagner 1993:92; cf. 5:10-12, 38-48; 10:16-22; 23:34; 24:9). Matt 5:3-4 seems to be alluding to the themes of affliction and mourning found in Isa 61:1-2 (cf. Matt 11:5b). In reality, it is impossible to separate mourning over sin from mourning over affliction, since only those who mourn over sin turn away from it, and only those who turn away from sin face affliction from sinners. It is noteworthy that the grammar of 5:4 is mirrored by 5:9. See the commentary below for discussion.
5:5 **God blesses those who are humble, for they will inherit the whole earth.** Humble disciples, not arrogant tyrants, will inherit the earth. The language here clearly alludes to Ps 37:11, where the context stresses the oppression of the godly by the wicked. Such oppression is also implicit in Matthew's thought, so Hagner is likely correct that this beatitude does not speak of those who are humble in an abstract sense but of those who have been humbled, "bent over by the injustice of the ungodly" (1993:92). "Meekness is not weakness"—so goes the evangelical cliche. But true meekness is an unassuming humility that rests in God (Ps 37:7) and renounces self-effort to relieve oneself from oppression and to achieve one's wants and needs. This kind of person will inherit the earth (see also 19:28-29; 25:34). Once again Jesus went against the grain of human culture and experience by asserting that the meek, not the yuppies, the militarists, the financial tycoons, or the super-pious types, will inherit the earth. Matthew often mentions the earth, highlighting its theological significance (5:13, 18, 35; 6:10, 19; 9:6; 10:34; 11:25; 16:19; 18:18-19; 23:9; 24:30, 35; 28:18). Instead of longing for removal from earth to heaven, as some Christians do, Jesus' disciples are to be the salt of the earth, as they long for earth to be transformed by the values of the Kingdom—even as they long for God's will to be done on earth as it is in heaven.
5:6 **God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice, for they will be satisfied.** Those who are famished for righteousness will be satisfied. There is a probable allusion here to Ps 107:5, 9. The NLT's "justice" tends to reflect only the social nuance of righteousness, that of being treated justly by others. But in Matthew the term more often implies right behavior before God. The vocabulary of righteousness is often found in Matthew, including the noun "righteousness" ( _dikaiosunē_ [TG1343, ZG1466]; 3:15; 5:10, 20; 6:1, 33; 21:32), the verb "to justify" ( _dikaioō_ [TG1344, ZG1467]; 11:19; 12:37), and the adjective "righteous" ( _dikaios_ [TG1342, ZG1465]; 1:19; 5:45; 9:13; 10:41; 13:17, 43, 49; 23:28, 35; 25:37, 46). See Przybylski 1980 for a full discussion of this language. Protestant Christians who are used to reading Paul may think that Matthew is speaking of the imputed righteousness of Christ (cf., e.g., Rom 5:1-2), but this forensic sense is not a Matthean nuance. Here the emphasis is on the practical side, the upright lifestyle (see also 1:19; 3:15; 5:10, 20, 45; 6:1, 33). Those who realize their lack in attaining right behavior before God, rather than those who boast of their righteous accomplishments, will receive what they long for. Those who repent in view of the nearness of the Kingdom long not only for personal righteousness but also for righteous living to permeate society as a whole. Only then will social justice be achieved. The grammar of 5:6 is mirrored by that of 5:7. See the commentary below for discussion.
5:7 This verse begins the second set of beatitudes, which describe the pattern of divine approval in relating to people (5:7-10).
**God blesses those who are merciful, for they will be shown mercy.** It is first stated that God's approval comes to those who relate to others with mercy, which involves pity plus action. An allusion here to the language of Prov 14:21 and/or Prov 17:5 LXX seems likely. That the theme of mercy is important for the disciple of Jesus may be seen in 6:2; 9:27, 36; 15:22; 17:15; 20:30. In contrast, mercy is not present where Pharisaic isolationism (9:13), legalism (12:7), and trivialism (23:23) are the rule of life (see also Hos 6:6; Mic 6:8). Even if an oppressed disciple has not received mercy, that disciple must still extend mercy to others. Those who have experienced God's mercy will show it to others (see 18:21-35), and thus demonstrate their destiny as those who will receive mercy at the last day.
5:8 **God blesses those whose hearts are pure, for they will see God.** The promise that the pure in heart will see God is perhaps an echo of Ps 24:3-4 (cf. Ps 51:10; 73:1). Purity of heart amounts to internal integrity that transparently manifests itself in outward behavior. Matthew presents certain Pharisees as models of an external, rule-oriented purity that Jesus rejected and condemned because it masked inner corruption (cf. 15:1-20; 23:25-28). His disciples must possess an inner piety and purity that surpasses mere externally acceptable behavior (5:20-22, 27-28). They have experienced the power of the Kingdom, which purifies from the inside out. Thus, they must cultivate integrity in their private intellectual, emotional, and volitional lives (cf. 5:28; 6:21; 9:4; 12:34; 15:8, 18, 19; 18:35; 22:37). Seeing God is impossible in this life (Exod 33:20), but prophetic visions describe seeing God as a part of the blessings of the world to come (1 John 3:2; Rev 22:4).
5:9 **those who work for peace.** This correctly stresses that this beatitude is not about being a passively peaceful person but an active reconciler of people (cf. Luke 2:14; 19:38; Acts 10:36; Eph 2:14-18; Jas 3:18; _m. Avot_ 1:12). Those who would be called God's children will bear a filial likeness to their heavenly Father who treats enemies well (5:43-48). The experience of peace with God enables Jesus' disciples to seek the cessation of their hostilities with people. While the gospel itself may offend some people and lead to hostility (10:34), Jesus' disciples actively seek harmonious relationships with others. In this age of individual, ethnic, and national aggression, Jesus' reminder that peacemakers, not warmongers, have God's approval, is sorely needed. Ultimately, peacemakers will be recognized as members of God's family.
5:10 **the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.** With the repetition of this phrase (see 5:3), the beatitudes have come full circle. The chief marks of those who already live under God's rule are humility toward God and mercy toward people. One might expect such humble, merciful people to be valued highly by their fellow humans, but such is not the case. Jesus preeminently displayed these righteous characteristics, and he was persecuted to the point of death (23:31-32). He warned his disciples that their upright behavior would receive similar treatment (cf. esp. 21:42; also 10:16-42; 24:9-14). Their persecution is analogous to that of the OT prophets. (See also 5:44; 10:23; 1 Pet 3:14; and Hare 1967.) This beatitude is expanded in 5:11-12.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Introduction to the Sermon on the Mount. The Sermon on the Mount does not appear as such in Mark and appears only partially in Luke (6:17–7:1). Several theories exist to explain this variation among the synoptic Gospels. Some think Matthew created the sermon from traditions, documentary sources, and his own ingenuity, so that the sermon should not be attributed to the historical Jesus. This view is not accepted by evangelical Christians, since it tends to take the Gospels as unhistorical fabrications, concocted for strictly theological reasons. A second view is that Matthew created the structure of the sermon by collating various teachings of the historical Jesus that were originally uttered at different times in different locations. There are many evangelicals who hold this view (e.g., Hagner 1993:83), but it will not be followed here because Matthew's narrative plainly brackets the sermon with indicators of a specific time and place in which the sermon occurred (5:1-2; 7:28–8:1). These historical markers must be ignored or viewed as fictional for the second view to be adopted. The third view is that Matthew accurately records "the very voice" of Jesus ( _ipsissima vox_ ), giving the gist of a historical sermon that Jesus actually uttered. The last view is that Matthew gives an exact and complete word for word ( _ipsissima verba_ , "the very words") transcription of the sermon Jesus uttered. These last two views are both held by conservative evangelicals, but the third view is highly preferable for reasons pertaining to the genre of the Gospels and the historical transmission of the teachings of Jesus. An authentic report of a historical event need not involve a word-for-word transcription, and it is difficult to conceive how such a transcription could have been compiled in the first place, let alone transmitted to the likely author, Matthew, who was not yet a disciple of Jesus (9:9). Rather, in the sermon we have a reliable summary of what Jesus said, an account that bears the marks of an editor. The fact that certain sayings of Matthew's Sermon occur in other contexts in Mark and Luke is evidently due to Jesus' repeating key themes in his itinerant ministry.
Literary Structure. After his unique story of Jesus' infancy (chs 1–2), Matthew develops the body of his gospel as five blocks of narrative material (chs 3–7, 8–10, 11–13, 14–18, 19–25), and concludes with Jesus' death, resurrection, and mission mandate (26–28). The body's five sections of Jesus' works and words are divided by the key phrase "when Jesus had finished" (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). This has been discussed more fully in the Introduction. The discourse we call the Sermon on the Mount (chs 5–7) should be seen as the representative ethical teachings of Jesus, developing the summary statement of 4:23, which presents a word/deed complex. Thus 4:23 and the similar summary in 9:35 provide a "frame" or "bookends" for Jesus' ministry of teaching and doing miracles. His teaching is represented in chapters 5–7 and his miracles in chapters 8–9. Both the words and the works demonstrate the authority of the Kingdom of Heaven (7:28-29; 9:6-8).
Major Interpretive Approaches. For the plethora of interpretive approaches to the Sermon, see Kissinger 1975. Here only a few approaches can be mentioned. Dispensational interpreters traditionally view the Sermon as Jewish law for the Kingdom, not gracious teaching that is directly relevant for the church. This Kingdom teaching may relate to the time of Jesus' earthly ministry, or to the future tribulation or millennium. This view mistakenly assumes that Matthew was written to Jews. Lutheran interpreters similarly view the Sermon as law, not gospel, but think that its high legal standards will show people their sinfulness and draw them to the cross for forgiveness. Schweitzer viewed the Sermon as an ethic for the supposedly short interim Matthew conceived between the advents of Jesus. Other interpreters, across the spectrum of denominations and views of eschatology, take the Sermon as an ethic for today, but differ on whether the Sermon is merely personal ethics or an agenda to be implemented through political processes. The view I take is that the Sermon amounts to personal ethics for followers of Jesus. This does not amount to privatism inasmuch as followers of Jesus are to be salt and light in this world.
The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus' authoritative teaching about the way believers should live today. Those who repented when they heard the gospel preached by John and Jesus (3:2; 4:17) needed to know how to live under God's saving rule, "the Kingdom of Heaven." As Jewish Christians, they especially needed to know how Jesus' teaching related to the Old Testament, and that their righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees. They needed to practice their religion for God's reward, not for human approval. They needed to put physical needs and material possessions into proper perspective. Spiritual discernment and prayer were also priority matters. In case anyone was listening carelessly without a desire for obedience, they were warned to enter the narrow gate, to avoid fruitless trees, and to build on the rock. In all this, they would realize that full obedience to these high standards would be attained at the future coming of the Kingdom (6:10).
The Structure of the Beatitudes: Divine Approval in Relating to God and People. Altogether there are nine beatitudes in 5:3-12, but the ninth (5:11-12) is really an expansion of the eighth (5:10). Although some (e.g., Davies and Allison 1988:430-431) opt for a structure with three sets of three, the first eight exhibit such a tightly knit parallel structure that it is more likely that we should understand them as two sets of four (Gundry 1994:73; Turner 1992b). The first set emphasizes the disciple's vertical relationship to God; the second emphasizes the disciple's horizontal relationship to people. Both relationships occur in the midst of oppression. The flow of these verses may be shown as follows:
5:3 Poor in spirit blessed because theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven (Present tense in promise identical to 5:10)
5:4 Mourners blessed because they will be comforted (Future passive promise as in 5:9)
5:5 Meek blessed because they will inherit the earth (Future transitive verb with direct object as in 5:8)
5:6 Hungry blessed because they will be filled (Future passive promise as in 5:7)
5:7 Merciful blessed because they will receive mercy (Future passive promise as in 5:6)
5:8 Pure blessed because they will see God (Future transitive verb with direct object as in 5:5)
5:9 Peacemakers blessed because they will be called sons of God (Future passive promise as in 5:4)
5:10 Persecuted blessed because theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven (Present tense in promise identical to 5:3)
The Meaning of the Beatitudes. There are two contrasting views of the meaning of the beatitudes, centering on whether they should be understood as gracious Kingdom blessings or as ethical entrance requirements (Guelich 1976). If the latter, one should try to work up the characteristics mentioned here so that one might earn God's approval. If the former, one should thankfully acknowledge these characteristics as evidence of God's gracious work in his or her life and cultivate them as one lives as a disciple of Christ. Certainly this second view is correct. Those who repent at the message of the Kingdom (3:2; 4:17) acknowledge their own spiritual bankruptcy and rejoice in God's blessings of salvation. The NLT translation ("God blesses those who . . .") could be taken to imply the entrance requirement view. It would be better to say "God _has_ blessed those who . . ." since these are unmerited blessings.
The beatitudes reveal key character traits that God approves in his people. These traits are gracious gifts indicating God's approval, not requirements for works that merit God's approval. However, those who have repented should cultivate these characteristics. Each beatitude contains a pronouncement (who are blessed) backed up by a promise (why they are blessed). God does not necessarily endorse popularity, keeping the rules, possessions, spectacular displays, or knowledge. The qualities God approves are explained in two sets of four, describing respectively one's relationship to God and one's relationship to other people (see also 22:37-40). He approves those who relate to him by admitting their spiritual poverty and mourning over their sin, humbly seeking spiritual fullness (5:3-6). He approves those who relate to others mercifully and purely as peacemakers, even though such people may be persecuted for their righteous behavior (5:7-12). At first, this may sound like some sort of cruel, sadistic joke, appealing only to masochistic types. It is as if Jesus was saying that those who are unhappy are happy. But in reality Jesus was showing the error of superficial, self-centered living. Genuine realism, not false optimism, is true bliss for the followers of Jesus, for it will lead to ultimate comfort.
The radical spirituality of the beatitudes directly confronts several cultural views of God's approval. One of these is that popularity with one's peers indicates divine approval, but this is plainly contradicted by the statement that those who are persecuted by their peers on account of Jesus have God's approval (5:10-12; 7:13-14). Another mistaken viewpoint is that one may have divine approval if one simply keeps a prescribed set of rules, but Jesus states that only a righteousness that surpasses mere rule-keeping will suffice for his Kingdom (5:20). Some would say that an abundance of material possessions is an indication of divine favor, but according to Jesus, preoccupation with such possessions is antithetical to the values of the Kingdom (6:19-21, 33). Ability to perform miraculous displays is commonly associated with divine approval, but some miracle workers will learn on the last day that Jesus will not acknowledge them as his people (7:22-23). In the civilized world, there is a premium on education, and this has influenced Christianity in many ways, including its view of its clergy. But according to Jesus, one must obey his words, not simply know what they are (7:26).
Conclusion. The first four beatitudes show that divine approval means that one has been humbled under God's mighty hand through the preaching of the Kingdom so that one admits one's spiritual poverty, mourns over sin and the oppression of God's people, rests in God's care in the face of oppression, and hungers for greater righteousness on earth (5:3-6). Thus humility is the basic trait of authentic spirituality (see also Mic 6:6-8; Matt 11:25-30; 18:1-5; 19:13-15). A humble person who acknowledges sin, not a smug one who congratulates himself on his goodness, receives God's endorsement (see also 9:12-13).
The character traits of Kingdom rule are chiefly humility toward God and mercy toward people. By God's grace, these traits are present in principle in the lives of his people. Yet God's people must cultivate these traits so they are present in reality. In a world that values pride over humility and aggression over mercy, Jesus' disciples are, in the words of J.R.W. Stott (1978), "Christian Counter-Culture." As disciples cultivate the counter-cultural graces of the beatitudes, they are in reality cultivating likeness to their master, who perfectly exemplified the character traits of the beatitudes. Jesus was meek (11:29). He mourned (26:36-46). He "fulfilled all righteousness" (3:15; 27:4, 19). He was merciful (9:27; 15:22; 17:15; 20:30-31). And above all, he was oppressed and persecuted for doing what was right.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Persecution and witness (5:11-16)
11 "God blesses you when people mock you and persecute you and lie about you and say all sorts of evil things against you because you are my followers. 12 Be happy about it! Be very glad! For a great reward awaits you in heaven. And remember, the ancient prophets were persecuted in the same way.
13 "You are the salt of the earth. But what good is salt if it has lost its flavor? Can you make it salty again? It will be thrown out and trampled underfoot as worthless.
14 "You are the light of the world—like a city on a hilltop that cannot be hidden. 15 No one lights a lamp and then puts it under a basket. Instead, a lamp is placed on a stand, where it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your good deeds shine out for all to see, so that everyone will praise your heavenly Father."
## NOTES
5:11-12 Davies and Allison (1988:430) make a strong case against the approach followed here, which construes 5:11-12 with 5:13-16 instead of with 5:3-10. It is clear that 5:11-12 is related to 5:3-10, since 5:11-12 contains another beatitude and relates to persecution (cf. 5:10). But there are differences that justify viewing 5:11-12 as literarily distinct from 5:3-10. These differences chiefly relate to the departure from the tightly knit pattern of 5:3-10 (explained in the commentary on 5:3-10). The beatitude of 5:11-12 uses the second person, while those in 5:3-10 all use the third person. Also, the beatitude of 5:11-12 is considerably longer than those in 5:3-10, with a lengthened description of the oppression ( **when people mock you and persecute you and lie about you and say all sorts of evil things against you** ), its reason ( **because you are my followers** ), and commands on dealing with it ( **Be happy about it! Be very glad!** ), all of which intervene before the promise of reward occurs. And an additional command occurs after the promise ( **remember, the ancient prophets were persecuted in the same way** ). Thus, there is reason to take this expanded beatitude with 5:13-16 as a distinct description of the life of a disciple in the world.
In 5:11-12 followers of Jesus are told that they must not simply endure persecution with a stoic disposition. Rather, they are to endure it with deep joy, since in it they are identified with their Messiah Jesus (cf. 10:22, 25; 24:9) and continue in the train of the prophets who have been previously persecuted (cf. 23:29-36 in light of 2 Chr 36:16, along with Acts 7:52; 1 Thess 2:15; Jas 5:10). What is more, they will experience great future reward (cf. 6:1-18; 10:41-42; 19:29).
5:13 **You are the salt of the earth.** The image of salt (cf. Mark 9:50; Luke 14:35) is not an easy one to interpret because of its several uses in the ancient world. In the OT, salt was added to sacrifices (Lev 2:13), connected with purity (Exod 30:35; 2 Kgs 2:19-22), symbolic of loyalty (Num 18:19 NLT mg; Ezra 4:14 NLT mg), and used as a seasoning for food (Job 6:6). In the Mishnah salt is associated with wisdom ( _m. Sotah_ 9:15). The Roman historian Pliny described uses for salt in his _Natural History_ (31.73-92). One would think that the purifying use of salt could be intended here, given 5:8, but perhaps the multiple ways in which salt benefits the world is the point of the metaphor. In context, salt is viewed as a metaphor of beneficial influence upon the world, in a manner analogous to the way light (5:14) is beneficial in illumining darkness. However, salt that has lost its saltiness is good for nothing. The presence of other minerals in it—impurities—could result in the loss of its distinctive flavor and its preservative effects.
5:14 **You are the light of the world.** Light is a much more prominent and univocal image in the Bible than salt. Matthew 4:16 (citing Isa 9:2) has already associated light with Jesus and the Kingdom ministry in dark Galilee. Isaiah 42:6 speaks of Israel's role in the world as a "light to the Gentiles" (cf. Isa 49:6; 51:4-5; Dan 12:3; Rom 2:19).
**city on a hilltop.** The image of the city on the hill makes sense even if no particular city is in mind, but it is plausible, in view of OT prophecy, that Jerusalem is intended (Isa 2:2-5; 49:8-26; 54; 60; cf. Heb 11:16; 12:22; Rev 3:12; 21:2ff; Campbell 1978; Turner 1992a). Jesus' statement that it is his disciples who illumine the world for God is implicitly polemical since it assumes that the nation of Israel is not living up to this lofty role. The polemic is stronger if the city is an allusion to Jerusalem, since it would imply that God's illumining presence in the world flows from Jesus' disciples, not a place. The image of Jesus and the church as light in a dark world is prominent elsewhere in the NT, especially in the Johannine and Pauline writings.
5:15-16 **a lamp is placed on a stand.** The second image that develops the metaphor of light is an oil lamp, which would obviously be placed up high on a stand, not covered up with a basket. Jesus argues from common sense to show that it would be ridiculous for his disciples to hide their good deeds from the world. Matthew frequently stresses that good deeds are the mark of discipleship. The grace-induced character traits just highlighted in the beatitudes are good deeds. Previously, John had demanded "fruit" (NLT: "the way you live") in connection with his baptism (3:8, 10), and Jesus returns to this metaphor for good deeds later in the Sermon (7:16-20). Indeed, without good works one simply is not a disciple of Jesus (7:24-27; 13:23, 38). A so-called "disciple" without good works is of no more value than flavorless salt or a concealed lamp, but a true disciple impacts people and thereby brings glory to the heavenly Father (cf. 1 Pet 2:12).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The structure of this short section is relatively simple. Its first part (5:11-12) is a beatitude that expands the implications of the beatitude on persecution in 5:10. Four aspects of the expansion may be noted: (1) the beatitude is made more personal by the switch to the second person; (2) the beatitude is made more challenging by the commands to rejoice during persecution; (3) the beatitude is made more rationally satisfying by the mention of the reason for persecution and of others who have been persecuted; and (4) the beatitude is made more specific in terms of its promised reward.
The second part of this section (5:13-16) speaks to the matter of Kingdom testimony in the midst of an oppressive world. This testimony is described metaphorically as salt (5:13) and light (5:14-16). The metaphor of light is further pictured as a prominent hilltop city (5:14) and an oil lamp set upon a high stand, not under a basket (5:15). These pictures aid the disciples in their task of illuminating the world (5:16).
Those who repent and submit to God's rule in Christ are approved by him as humble, merciful people as they relate to God (5:3-6) and to other people (5:7-10). Now Jesus explains, in 5:11-16, that such people will influence the world in tangible ways. This should put to rest any notion that discipleship is merely a private matter between a person and God. First, in 5:11-12, Jesus expands his beatitude on persecution (5:10) by pointing out that insults and slander may occur because of his disciples' connection with him. When this occurs, the disciples are in good company with the prophets and may expect a great reward. Thus the disciples' influence on the world will often be unappreciated and opposed. Second, in 5:13-16 Jesus uses two vivid pictures to speak of his disciples' influence. They are salt (5:13) and light (5:14-16). As salt, they will purify and preserve their society if only they retain their saltiness. As light, their good deeds will result in praise going to their Father if only they display that light prominently for all to see.
Jesus' disciples are to be influential for the Kingdom even in the midst of an oppressive world. Salt and light can be understood to imply two aspects of witness in the world. Disciples, like salt, must mingle with the world in order to give it good flavor, or to purify or preserve it. But disciples, like lamps, must remain distinct from the world in order to illumine it. Salt is of no value if it loses its flavor, but its flavor is not meant to be kept in a salt shaker. There is a tension here that each disciple must reckon with.
The terminology of 5:13-16 underlines Matthew's stress on the church's universal mission. Jesus' disciples have a role to perform in the world, and they have been graciously equipped to perform that role (5:3-10). The church Jesus will build (16:18) is the agency by which the Kingdom influences mankind. The entire earth (cf. 6:10; 16:19; 18:18-19; 28:18) must be salted, and the whole world (13:38; 24:14; 26:13) must be illumined. The disciples' light must shine upon people. This means that the isolationism of some Christians and local churches, even though it may ostensibly spring from sincere motives related to maintaining the church's purity or orthodoxy, cannot be sustained. Matthew tells us that Jesus was not an ascetic, that he associated with "disreputable sinners" (9:10), and "feasted and drank" (11:19). Yet in these relationships Jesus did not lose his saltiness or conceal his light. No doubt disciples must not take lightly the wiles of "the world, the flesh, and the devil," but the answer to this danger is not isolation. It is active engagement that leads to the conversion of individuals and the transformation of culture. Anything less is an inexcusable truncation of the gospel of the Kingdom.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Jesus' teachings about the law (5:17-20)
17 "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God's law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. 19 So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God's laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
20 "But I warn you—unless your righteousness is better than the righteousness of the teachers of religious law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven!"
## NOTES
5:17 **I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose.** To Matthew's Christian Jewish audience, "good deeds" (5:16) would imply performance of the commands ( _mitswoth_ [TH4687, ZH5184]) enjoined by the law and the prophets. But this is not a full picture of Jesus' ethics or relationship to the Hebrew Bible, so he elaborates. The relationship of Jesus' coming to the law and to the prophets is a watershed issue for the interpretation of Matthew and for biblical theology. The contrasting terms "abolish" and "accomplish their purpose" (lit. "fulfill") set the agenda for a general statement (5:17-20) that is expanded in the six so-called "antitheses" (5:21-48) that take up the rest of the chapter. The mention of the law and the prophets here and in the summary statement of 7:12 is an _inclusio_ , which brings the main body of the Sermon full circle. The metaphorical use of "abolish" (lit. "destroy") may be illustrated by its literal use in 24:2; 26:61; 27:40. The meaning of "accomplish" (lit. "fulfill") must be examined in light of its frequent usage in OT introductory formulas: 1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; 26:54, 56; 27:9. Other significant uses are 3:15 and 23:32. Jesus does not contradict or abrogate the law and the prophets, but neither does he merely reaffirm them. He fulfills them or brings them to their divinely intended goal because they point to him. See the previous discussion of this topic in the commentary on 1:18-25. Additional discussion of this text occurs in the commentary below. Davies and Allison (1988:485-487) have a convenient summary and discussion of the several views of this matter.
5:18-19 **until heaven and earth disappear.** Matthew 5:18 serves to explain 5:17. Jesus, far from abolishing the law, brings it to its desired goal because not the slightest detail of it will go unaccomplished. The phrases "until heaven and earth disappear" and "until its purpose is achieved" (cf. 24:34-35) refer to the end of the present world and the beginning of the eschaton. Until that time the law is valid. Matthew 5:19 goes on to infer from 5:18's statement of the perpetual authority of the law that it had better be obeyed and taught by disciples of the Kingdom. It would be hard to make a stronger statement of the ongoing authority of the Torah than is made in 5:18.
**the smallest detail.** Jesus claims that not even the "smallest detail" of the Torah would disappear from it before its purpose was accomplished. The NLT's "smallest detail" translates a phrase that refers to the smallest letter of the Heb. alphabet ( _yod_ ; translated in Gr. as _iōta_ [TG2503, ZG2740]) and the smallest stroke of the pen (cf. Luke 16:17). In other words, in an implicit argument from lesser to greater, Jesus affirms that God will bring to pass even the most trivial parts of the law, implying that its weightier matters are absolutely certain to be accomplished. Therefore, Jesus' disciples must not make the mistake of ignoring any part of the law, however trivial it may seem.
5:20 The inference of 5:19 on the necessity of obeying and teaching the law is followed here by a further inference—if Jesus fulfills the law and declares it to be perpetually authoritative for his disciples, then he, as its only fully authoritative interpreter, demands a higher righteousness than that taught and followed by his contemporary religious leaders. Their understanding and practice of the law is deficient because it does not reckon with him as its fulfillment. Here Christology is the foundation of ethics. Jesus, the one to whom the law points, identifies the true ethical intent of the law. The higher righteousness spoken of here is developed in the following "antitheses" of 5:21-28. As these verses are examined, it is crucial to determine whether Jesus is primarily replacing, intensifying, or simply expounding the OT.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 5:17-48 involves a general introduction (vv. 17-20) followed by two sets (vv. 21-32 and 33-48) of three specific contrasts between traditional understandings of the Old Testament and Jesus' understanding of the Old Testament. Both sets of contrasts confront those who would aggressively dominate others by anger, lust, divorce, oaths, retaliation, or hatred.
The basic point of 5:17-20 is that if Jesus has come not to destroy but to fulfill the law (5:17), then the entire law is eternally valid (5:18), and the disciples must obey him as its ultimate interpreter and teach his interpretations of it (5:19) in order to have a moral uprightness that exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees and that is fitting for the Kingdom (5:20).
Jesus and the Law: Continuity and Discontinuity. What does it mean when Jesus affirms that he has come to fulfill the law and the prophets? The NLT's "I came to accomplish their purpose" is an interpretive translation that stresses the continuity of the mission of Jesus with the ethical intent of the Hebrew Bible. But accomplishing the purpose of the law (lit. "fulfilling" it) should not be taken to mean that Jesus came only to reaffirm, establish, or confirm the law. Such a viewpoint overstates the continuity of Jesus' teaching and that of the law and would render the six specific examples of 5:21-48 superfluous. Jesus was not simply saying "Ditto, what Moses said, I say." On the other hand, the discontinuity of Jesus and Moses should not be taken too far because Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the law and the prophets. His teaching is therefore not contradictory to anything in the Hebrew Bible, although it must in some sense transcend it. So two extremes must be ruled out—to say that Jesus came to abolish the law drastically overstates the discontinuity between Jesus and Moses, and to say that Jesus came only to reaffirm Moses understates the discontinuity between Jesus and Moses.
So how do we avoid saying too much or saying too little about the relationship of Jesus to the law? First we must allow Matthew himself to define the term "fulfill" by paying close attention to how he uses the term throughout his Gospel and by carefully noting the relationship between Jesus' teaching and the law of Moses in the six specific examples that occur in 5:21-48. For Matthew, Jesus is the ultimate goal of the law and the prophets, the one to whom they point. His mission of Kingdom words and deeds fulfills the ethical standards and eschatological promises of the law and prophets. Thus he becomes the sole authoritative teacher of the law, and his interpretations take on the character of new law for his disciples. His teachings are not new in the sense of having no root in the Hebrew Bible but in the sense of transcending the traditional understanding of the law promulgated by the religious leaders. It is not Moses, much less the religious leaders, who authoritatively teach Jesus' disciples. Jesus alone fills that role. The six examples of 5:21-48 do not amount to Jesus contradicting Moses but to Jesus unfolding implications that were in Moses all along, although undetected by the contemporary religious leaders of Israel. In this respect, Jesus' "fulfillment" of the Hebrew Bible is not unlike the interpretations of the Bible found in the later rabbinic literature. Those rabbis maintained that their seemingly innovative rulings were all along implied in the Torah revealed to Moses at Sinai. But Jesus claims far more than this, as we shall see in the next section of this commentary.
Law and Grace. Jesus' statements in 5:19-20 about his disciples' obligation to the law may be nothing less than astonishing to Christians who believe themselves to be under grace, not law. Those who are accustomed to reading certain sections of Paul's epistles in which the law seems to be deprecated may be amazed to read of its perpetual, binding authority on Jesus' disciples (Overman 1996:77). After all, didn't Paul say that Jesus was the end of the law and that his followers are not under law but under grace (e.g., Rom 6:14; 7:1-6; 10:4)? But Paul's situations, audiences, and problems were very different from Matthew's. Paul labored to extend the gospel from Christian Jewish communities like Matthew's to Gentiles. In so doing, Paul taught that the Gentiles who believed in Jesus were not obligated to follow the law. This of course resulted in no little tension with Christian Jews (Acts 15:1-5; 21:20-21), not to mention non-Christian Jews (Acts 21:27-28).
According to the narrative in Acts, Paul himself continued in synagogue worship and other Jewish practices throughout the span of his ministry (Acts 18:18; 20:17-26; 22:3, 17; 23:1-6; 24:11-21; 25:8; 26:20-23). As an evangelist to Gentiles, however, his strategy involved flexibility in areas he deemed expedient (1 Cor 9:19-23). Much of his seemingly negative teaching on the law was not directed against the law per se, but against teachers who erroneously wished to bring his Gentile converts under the law. While insisting that such converts were not obligated to the law as a rule of life, he also stated that their obedience to Jesus through the Spirit would "fulfill" the law's righteous requirements (Rom 8:1-4). Paul's identification of the "weightier matters" of the law with love (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 3:14) seems to follow Jesus' teaching (Matt 22:34-40).
Conclusion. Matthew's Christian Jewish community must not think that Jesus has come to abolish Mosaic law. Rather Jesus fulfills it by upholding its perpetual authority and interpreting it in an ultimately definitive manner, which leads his disciples to a righteousness surpassing that of the religious leaders. This general notion of a surpassing righteousness will now be explained by six concrete examples in which Jesus' teaching brings out the true meaning of the law of Moses and transcends the way it has been traditionally understood. As his disciples live by this teaching, their righteousness will surpass that of the Jewish religious leaders, and their good deeds will be like a shining light that causes people to glorify their heavenly Father (5:16).
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus' teaching about anger, adultery, and divorce (5:21-32)
21 "You have heard that our ancestors were told, 'You must not murder. If you commit murder, you are subject to judgment.'[*] 22 But I say, if you are even angry with someone,[*] you are subject to judgment! If you call someone an idiot,[*] you are in danger of being brought before the court. And if you curse someone,[*] you are in danger of the fires of hell.[*]
23 "So if you are presenting a sacrifice[*] at the altar in the Temple and you suddenly remember that someone has something against you, 24 leave your sacrifice there at the altar. Go and be reconciled to that person. Then come and offer your sacrifice to God.
25 "When you are on the way to court with your adversary, settle your differences quickly. Otherwise, your accuser may hand you over to the judge, who will hand you over to an officer, and you will be thrown into prison. 26 And if that happens, you surely won't be free again until you have paid the last penny.[*]
27 "You have heard the commandment that says, 'You must not commit adultery.'[*] 28 But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 So if your eye—even your good eye[*]—causes you to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your hand—even your stronger hand[*]—causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
31 "You have heard the law that says, 'A man can divorce his wife by merely giving her a written notice of divorce.'[*] 32 But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced woman also commits adultery."
## NOTES
5:21-22 **You have heard that our ancestors were told.** This appears again in the fourth example (5:33) with the added word "also" (lit. "again"). This implies that the six examples are intended to be viewed as two groups of three. This first example of how Jesus definitively interprets the law (5:21-26) develops the OT teaching on murder. Matt 5:21 refers to Exod 20:13 and Deut 5:17, but only the words "you must not murder" are taken verbatim from the OT.
**If you commit murder, you are subject to judgment.** This is probably a summary of texts like Exod 21:12 and Deut 17:8-13. In contrast, Jesus lists three hypothetical instances in 5:22 in which anger or angry speech will lead to judgment just as surely as murder will. It is likely that the three descriptions of judgment (judgment, court, hell) are not ascending in severity but are progressively more vivid descriptions of the consequences of anger and abusive speech.
**if you are even angry with someone.** This calls attention to Jesus' shocking elevation of anger to a capital crime. "Someone" is lit. "brother," which likely means another person in one's religious community rather than another human being in general (5:47; 7:3-5; 18:15; 25:40). The second and third instances both move from a furious attitude to abusive speech, calling a brother an idiot or a fool (see NLT mg).
5:23-24 **be reconciled to that person.** In keeping with the teaching of 5:22 on the consequences of anger and abusive speech within the community, Jesus poses a concrete situation in which personal reconciliation takes precedence over religious duty. Significantly the situation here does not pertain to one's own anger but to the anger or grudge of another. Disciples are thus responsible not only to reign in their own anger but to take steps to reconcile with others who are angry at them. It is not a question of arguing about who offended whom but of both offender and injured party taking responsibility for reconciliation. Such reconciliation to a fellow disciple (NLT's "someone" and "that person" both translate the word "brother") must be addressed before one offers a sacrifice in the Temple. Jesus' stress on the priority of reconciliation and justice over sacrificial worship is in keeping with such OT texts as 1 Sam 15:22; Isa 1:10-18; Hos 6:6, and Mic 6:6-8. As in the model prayer (6:12, 14-15; cf. 18:15-17), divine forgiveness is linked with human forgiveness. The Temple imagery is interesting in light of the likelihood that Matthew is addressing a Christian Jewish community. According to Acts, the Christian Jews in Jerusalem continued to observe the Temple rituals (2:46; 3:1; 5:12, 42; 21:26; 22:17; 24:12, 18; 25:8; 26:21).
5:25-26 **settle your differences quickly.** Here another concrete situation is posed. The obligation to seek reconciliation applies not only to relations within the community of disciples (5:23-24) but also to relationships outside that community. Adversarial legal situations should be settled out of court, or else serious judicial consequences will result. Debtors were evidently incarcerated until payment was made in the judicial system assumed here. Perhaps these verses are primarily metaphorical and speak to the matter of averting the wrath of God, but this is not so obvious as some think (e.g., Blomberg 1992:108). Compare the last contrast in 5:38-48, where disciples are enjoined to love their enemies. See also Luke 12:57-59 for this saying in a different context. Evangelical Protestant commentators frequently point out that these verses do not support the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory.
5:27-28 **anyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery.** The second example of how Jesus definitively interprets the law moves from the sixth to the seventh commandment, developing the OT teaching on adultery (Exod 20:14; Deut 5:18; cf. Matt 5:32; 19:9, 18). By way of contrast to this command against adulterous behavior, Matt 5:28 likewise condemns adulterous thoughts, viewing them as tantamount to the act. By condemning the internal seed of the outward sin, Jesus obviously condemns the act itself. While the OT certainly does not condone lust, Jesus' direct linkage of lust to adultery is a more stringent standard of sexual ethics. By stressing the lustful intention over the act itself, Jesus seems to be interpreting the seventh commandment by the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17; "You must not covet your neighbor's wife"). But Matt 5:28 is speaking of women in general, not just married women. And it is possible that 5:28 is not simply about looking with lust at a woman but about looking at a woman in such a way as to entice her to lust (Carson 1984:151).
5:29-30 Both of these verses speak hyperbolically in parallel fashion to underline the gravity of Jesus' teaching on lust in 5:28 (cf. 18:7-9 for similar language). Sin must be avoided even if radical sacrifice is required. Lust must be treated with the utmost seriousness because it can cause a person to be thrown into hell. The "good" (lit. "right") eye (5:29; cf. 1 Sam 11:2; Zech 11:17; 2 Pet 2:14) and the "stronger" (lit. "right") hand (5:30; cf. Gen 48:14; Ps 137:5) are respectively the means by which lustful thoughts are initially engendered and subsequently carried out (Josh 7:21; 2 Sam 11:2; Ezek 6:9). If these bring one into an occasion of sin, they must be dealt with by radical surgery (cf. Col 3:5). The mention of the right eye reminds the reader of the verb of seeing in 5:28. It should go without saying that the two commands here are hyperbolic. Since evil arises in the heart (15:19), amputation cannot cure it. But the hyperbole shocks the reader with the real point: it is better to deal decisively with lust than to be thrown into hell because of it.
5:31-32 The third example of how Jesus definitively interprets the law develops the OT teaching on divorce. Matt 5:31 (cf. Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18) refers to Deut 24:1-4 (cf. 19:7), which in its original context prohibits a man from remarrying a woman he has previously married and divorced if she has in the interim been married to and divorced by another man. The part of the Deuteronomy passage most relevant to Matthew 5 is the mention of the written divorce document in 24:1, 3. Evidently many teachers of Jesus' day had taken this passage as _carte blanche_ for divorce. Hillel is cited by the Mishnah (compiled from earlier oral tradition around AD 200) as permitting divorce for _any_ indecency (Deut 24:1; _m. Gittin_ 9:10).
Jesus' strict view of divorce is evidently much like that of Rabbi Shammai, who is also cited by the above text from the Mishnah. According to Jesus, a man who divorces his wife ( **unless she has been unfaithful** ) causes her and her potential future spouse to commit adultery. If there has been no sexual infidelity, there can be no real divorce. If there has been no real divorce, there can be no remarriage, and any additional sexual unions are adulterous. There is much debate on the word _porneia_ [TG4202, ZG4518], (the Gr. word represented by the NLT's "unless she has been unfaithful") but it seems most likely that Jesus has in mind any sort of sexual activity not involving one's spouse (Davies and Allison 1988:529ff). It is plausible that the phrase "unless she has been unfaithful" is an allusion to the phrase "something about her that is shameful" in Deut 24:1 (lit. "something indecent" or "a matter of indecency").
Jesus prohibits what the OT was understood to permit regarding divorce. As the definitive eschatological teacher of the law, his interpretation is evidently (cf. 19:3-9) based on the original divine intent for marriage, not the expediency of the moment. The Pharisaic misinterpretation of the OT capitalized on a concession to human sinfulness (cf. 19:8). See further discussion at 19:3-9.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In 5:21-32 Jesus begins to unpack what he meant when he said that he had come not to destroy but to fulfill the law and the prophets, and that his disciples' uprightness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees. He gives three concrete interpretations: (1) anger is tantamount to murder (5:21-26), (2) lust is tantamount to adultery (5:27-30), and (3) divorce and remarriage are tantamount to adultery (except when infidelity has occurred; 5:31-32). In each of the three examples the traditional understanding of the Torah is contrasted with Jesus' understanding of it, and in the first two interpretations, there are examples that apply the teaching to concrete situations. The structure of each interpretation is very similar:
1. Traditional teaching (5:21, 27, 31)
2. Jesus' contrasting teaching (5:22, 28, 32)
3. Concrete applications of Jesus' teaching (5:23-26, 29-30)
The Question of Antithesis or Contrast. Although it is common for commentators to speak of Jesus' six teachings in Matthew 5:21-48 as antitheses (see Harrington 1991:90), this is certainly a mistake. An antithesis is not merely a contrasting statement, it is a contradictory statement. If Jesus had intended to teach antithetically to the law and the prophets, he would have needed to say what amounts to an antithesis to Matthew 5:17 because he would have come to abolish the law and the prophets. If Jesus had been speaking antithetically, he would have said, "You have heard that it has been said, 'you shall not murder,' but I say unto you, 'you shall murder.'" This is, of course, unthinkable. No doubt the transcendent teaching of Jesus here is in contrast to that of the traditional teachers of the law, but it does not formally contradict the law.
In all six of the contrasts there are two crucial matters to keep in mind. First there is the contrasting parallel in audiences: the ancestors (national Israel) versus "you" (Jesus' disciples), implying that the disciples, not the Jews as a nation, are the locus of Jesus' revelatory ministry. Second and even more noteworthy is the contrast between the agency of what has been said and what is now being said. The Greek text emphasizes that Jesus himself was speaking with an authority transcending that of the previous divine revelation through Moses. Jesus did not deny that God had spoken through Moses (cf. 15:4), but he affirmed his own transcendent revelatory agency in strong language. This authoritative way of speaking was not lost on those who heard him (7:29; 8:8-9; 9:8; 10:1; 28:18).
The Greater Righteousness Taught by Jesus. It is clear in each of the first three examples of Jesus' teaching that his standards were higher than those of the traditional interpreters of the law. In the first two examples, Jesus goes to the heart of the matters of murder and adultery—anger and lust. It is not that the Old Testament does not condemn anger and lust, but that Jesus' definitive teaching connects the outward behavioral symptoms with the inner attitudinal causes. Jesus means to nip the buds of anger and lust in order to avoid the blooms of murder and adultery. On the matter of divorce, Jesus seems to stand with Shammai over Hillel on the interpretation of the "indecency" of Deuteronomy 24:1 (see note on 5:31-32). Only infidelity is a permissible reason for divorce. In all other cases, adultery results. Jesus' standard was much higher than was customary as can be seen from Matthew 19:9 and from the Mishnah passage cited in the notes.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Jesus' teaching about vows, revenge, and love (5:33-48)
33 "You have also heard that our ancestors were told, 'You must not break your vows; you must carry out the vows you make to the LORD.'[*] 34 But I say, do not make any vows! Do not say, 'By heaven!' because heaven is God's throne. 35 And do not say, 'By the earth!' because the earth is his footstool. And do not say, 'By Jerusalem!' for Jerusalem is the city of the great King. 36 Do not even say, 'By my head!' for you can't turn one hair white or black. 37 Just say a simple, 'Yes, I will,' or 'No, I won't.' Anything beyond this is from the evil one.
38 "You have heard the law that says the punishment must match the injury: 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.'[*] 39 But I say, do not resist an evil person! If someone slaps you on the right cheek, offer the other cheek also. 40 If you are sued in court and your shirt is taken from you, give your coat, too. 41 If a soldier demands that you carry his gear for a mile,[*] carry it two miles. 42 Give to those who ask, and don't turn away from those who want to borrow.
43 "You have heard the law that says, 'Love your neighbor'[*] and hate your enemy. 44 But I say, love your enemies Pray for those who persecute you! 45 In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. 46 If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. 47 If you are kind only to your friends,[*] how are you different from anyone else? Even pagans do that. 48 But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect."
## NOTES
5:33-34a **do not make any vows!** Matthew 5:33-48 comprises the second set of three examples of Jesus' definitive interpretation of the OT. The matter of vows or oaths is addressed in 5:33-37, which begins in the familiar pattern of first alluding to the OT (5:33; cf. Lev 19:12; Num 30:3-16; Deut 23:21-23; Ps 50:14; see also Jas 5:12) and then giving the contrasting teaching of Jesus (5:34a). Jesus forbids four specific vows, because the one who takes them assumes prerogatives that belong solely to God (5:34b-36). One's word ought to be trustworthy apart from a vow (5:37). This section on vows has no synoptic parallels, although 23:16-22 takes up oaths from a negative perspective again.
Matthew 5:33 is not a direct quote of an OT passage but a summary of the gist of relevant passages, much like the statement about murderers being liable to judgment in 5:21. In the OT one was permitted to take a vow or an oath as long as irreverence and falsehood were not involved. Vows were intended to ensure one's resolve to follow through on an obligation. But ironically, vows resulted in there being two classes of utterances, the one with the vow committing the speaker to veracity, and the one without the vow implying no such commitment. By Jesus' time, certain Pharisees had perverted the practice of vows by subtle casuistic distinctions (cf. 23:16-22). Jesus' response is to forbid what the OT permits, but truth is the goal of both the OT permission and Jesus' prohibition. So while Jesus may be said to have contradicted the letter of the law here, he did so in order to uphold its spirit, and he thereby upheld the commandment against false witness (Exod 20:7). Vows are superfluous if truth invariably characterizes one's speech (Eccl 5:4-5). Josephus ( _War_ 2.135) indicates that the Essenes, the group likely behind the Dead Sea Scrolls, were reluctant to make vows. Jesus did not take a vow when he was charged to do so by the high priest (26:63).
5:34b-36 **Do not say.** Here Jesus develops the general prohibition of oaths in 5:34a by forbidding four specific oaths and explaining why each is forbidden. The first two prohibited oaths call respectively upon heaven and earth, and both are inappropriate because heaven and earth are under the control of God, not humans (cf. Isa 66:1) The third oath calls upon Jerusalem, which is also inappropriate because it is the city of the great King (cf. Ps 48:2), the place where the Creator chooses to make his presence visible on earth. The fourth oath, swearing by one's head, is similarly out of place because it ascribes to a human power that belongs only to God. According to Deut 6:13; 10:20, vows were to be taken in the name of God, but by Jesus' time, pious Jews would not utter that name. This implies that heaven, earth, and Jerusalem were metonymies, circumlocutions associated with God. Such vows are mentioned in the Mishnah (e.g., _m. Shevu'ot_ 4:13; _m. Nedarim_ 1:3; _m. Sanhedrin_ 3:2).
5:37 **"Yes, I will" . . . "No, I won't."** Lit., "yes, yes" and "no, no." A positive command concludes the section previously characterized by negatives: Jesus teaches that one's word should be reliable at all times, rendering oaths unnecessary. If one's heart is right with God, uprightness will characterize one's speech because one's speech will transparently represent what is in one's heart. There will be no such thing as perjury or false witness. Taking oaths tends to be a concession to potential prevarication, and is therefore from the evil one (cf. 6:13; 13:19, 38), Satan, the originator of deception (John 8:12).
Again Jesus prohibits what the OT permits in the area of oaths. Here he comes the closest to actual contradiction of the OT because he views the traditional interpretation as thoroughly abusing the spirit of the law. According to Deut 23:21-23 one may or may not vow, but one must perform what one vows. If Paul was familiar with this word from Jesus, it did not keep him from taking a vow (Acts 18:18; cf. 21:23-26.)
5:38-39a **An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.** The fifth example (5:38-42; cf. Isa 50:4-9; Luke 6:29-30) refers to Exod 21:24; Lev 24:20; and Deut 19:21. Jesus qualifies the application of the OT principle of retribution in kind ( _lex talionis_ ). Matthew 5:38 contains the allusion to the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" legislation and 5:39a contrasts Jesus' own teaching. The NLT's words "the punishment must match the injury" have no basis in the Gr. text, although they are a correct description of the relevant legal principle. Jesus' own contrasting teaching in 5:39 is that disciples should forsake the idea of retribution altogether by not resisting an evil person. The OT insistence on punishment matching the crime might seem harsh at first glance, but as it mandates matching punishment, it thereby forbids excessive punishment. Granted, an eye must be taken for an eye, but two eyes or a life may not be taken for an eye. The OT concern for justice leads to this prohibition of overly severe retribution. Personal revenge is contrary to Lev 19:18, but Jesus goes further and teaches that godly kindness should transcend retaliation in personal disputes. As in the case of divorce (5:31-32; 19:3-12), Jesus' teaching transcends an OT regulation that arose as a concession to the hardness of the human heart. Yet Jesus' teaching is not altogether unanticipated in the OT (cf. Deut 32:35-36; Prov 20:22; 25:21-22; Isa 50:6; Lam 3:30).
This teaching would obviously be at odds with the cause of the Jewish zealots who favored armed rebellion against Rome, but it is primarily a personal ethic that does not contradict the legitimate role of the state in protecting its citizens from lawlessness and aggression.
5:39b-42 These verses list four concrete situations in which Jesus' general teaching on non-retaliation applies (cf. Luke 6:29; _Didache_ 1:4-5). The first (5:39b) seems to picture a personal dispute that leads to an insulting back-hand slap by a right-handed person to the right cheek of another person (cf. Ps 3:7; Isa 50:6; Lam 3:30; Matt 26:67; Acts 23:2-3; _m. Bava Qamma_ 8:6). The second (5:40) speaks of a legal dispute in which one is ordered to forfeit one's shirt to supply collateral for a debt or satisfy a claim for damages. The third situation (5:41) envisions an occupying Roman soldier conscripting a Jewish person to carry his equipment (cf. 27:32). In each situation Jesus commands his disciples to go beyond the expected response. Instead of angrily slapping the aggressor back, the disciple is to allow himself to be slapped again on the other cheek. Instead of standing up for his rights with further litigation, the disciple is to give up his coat (cf. the reverse in Luke 6:29), which, according to the OT, may not be legally required (Exod 22:25-27; Deut 24:12-13), as well as his shirt. Instead of resisting occupying military forces, the disciple is to help them by carrying their equipment two miles instead of one. The point of the first three situations is that the disciple is not to be a part of furthering the usual chain of evil action and reaction in this fallen world (Blomberg 1992:113).
The fourth example (5:42) takes the teaching of Jesus one step further. Not only is a disciple to be non-retaliatory when injured, he or she is to be generous to those who are in need (cf. Luke 6:34-35). Not only must disciples not further evil by retaliation, they must further good in the world by benevolence. This teaching is in keeping with OT law (cf. esp. Deut 15:7-11; also Lev 25:35-55). At his own arrest and trials Jesus exemplified the essence of what is taught here (26:67; 27:11-13, 35; cf. Mark 14:65; John 18:22-23; 19:3; 1 Pet 2:23). But these four examples should not be taken in a pedantic fashion that would limit their intended application. One may never need to physically turn the other cheek, give up one's coat, or go an extra mile, but one must be willing to unselfishly suffer personal loss with faith that the heavenly Father will meet one's needs and deal with the injustice in his own time. Paul was evidently familiar with this tradition (Rom 12:14-21, which cites Deut 32:35-36 and Prov 25:21-22; 1 Cor 6:7-8; 1 Thess 5:15).
5:43-44 **But I say, love your enemies!** The sixth and final example of Jesus' transcendent teaching refers to Lev 19:18. Jesus states that one should love and pray for even one's enemies and persecutors (cf. Luke 6:27-28). Such behavior will emulate the actions of the heavenly Father (5:45) and go beyond the typical human practice (5:46-47). A concluding word commands that the disciple compare his or her behavior not to cultural norms but Kingdom norms—he or she is to be perfect, like the heavenly Father is perfect (5:48). Evidently, the traditional view of the OT mistakenly restricted the scope of the word "neighbor" in order to legitimize hatred of enemies. Jesus rejected this approach and insisted that disciples of the Kingdom emulate the King.
As a careful reading shows, Lev 19:18 commands love for neighbors, not hatred for enemies. Perhaps hating enemies was taken as a logical corollary of loving neighbors, or as a legitimate conclusion from such texts as Deut 7:2; 23:3-6; Ps 26:4-5; 137:7-9; 139:19-22 (cf. _Mekilta Exodus_ 21:35; _Sifra_ on Lev 19:18; 1QS 1:10-11; Josephus _War_ 2.139). In Lev 19:18, one's neighbor is evidently a fellow-Jew, and perhaps the traditional teaching in Jesus' day read the text restrictively as applying only to Jews. But certain OT texts also speak of humane treatment for non-Israelites (esp. Lev 19:33-34; Deut 10:18-19; cf. Exod 22:21-22; 23:9; Deut 1:16; 27:19; Ps 146:9; Jer 7:5-6; 22:3; Ezek 22:7, 29; 47:22-23; Zech 7:9-10; Mal 3:5). And some of these texts include non-Israelites under the general heading of "neighbor" (Jer 7:5-6; Zech 7:9-10). As the parable of the good Samaritan shows (Luke 10:25-37), Jesus would not have accepted a restrictive reading of the word "neighbor."
**Pray for those who persecute you!** Praying for one's persecutors is a striking demonstration of one's love for them (cf. Luke 23:34; Acts 7:59-60). This, too, is anticipated in the OT (Gen 20:17-18; Exod 23:4-5; Num 12:13; 21:7; 1 Sam 24:17-19; Job 31:29; Ps 7:3-5; Prov 24:17-18; 25:21-22; Jer 29:7; Jonah 4:10-11).
5:45-47 These verses develop the idea of loving one's enemies by first comparing such love to God's love for people (5:45) and then by asking two rhetorical questions that call on disciples to practice a higher righteousness than tax collectors and pagans do (5:46-47).
**corrupt tax collectors.** "Corrupt" refers to the practices of "tax farmers," who paid the Romans for the right to collect taxes and then collected more than was due, keeping the overage for themselves. When Jews sometimes became "tax farmers," they were regarded as thieves and traitors, which may explain Jesus' pairing of tax collectors (5:46) with pagans (5:47; cf. 18:17). For Jesus' association with tax collectors, see 9:9-11; 11:19; 21:31-32; Luke 18:9-14; 19:1-10.
It is clear that action, not emotion, is called for here, since disciples are not only to pray for enemies (5:44) but also to do them good, as God does (5:45; cf. Ps 145:9; Luke 6:35; Acts 14:17), and to greet them respectfully (5:47). This last action may imply a wish for their welfare (Gen 43:27; Exod 18:7 LXX).
Once again Jesus' words contradict a zealot mentality, since the "enemies" of Jewish disciples would certainly include the Romans. Matthew 5:9 has already spoken of how the disciples' role as reconcilers in the world manifests their filial resemblance to the heavenly Father. Other NT texts stress how a Christian's love for people, especially enemies, marks him or her as a member of God's family (Eph 4:31-5:2; 1 Pet 1:14-25; 1 John 4:7-12). Loving one's enemies is imitating God.
5:48 **But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.** The NLT begins this verse with "but," highlighting the contrast between the practice of the pagans and that of the disciples. However, it would be more accurate to translate the Gr. conjunction _oun_ [TG3767, ZG4036] as "therefore," and understand the verse as drawing a conclusion based on 5:45-47. Disciples are to model their lives after the universal benevolence of their heavenly Father, not after the mutual-admiration-society piety of the tax collectors and pagans. The language of this verse seems to be modeled on that of Lev 19:2, "You must be holy because I, the LORD your God, am holy." But the language and emphasis of Deut 18:13 on blamelessness is probably echoed here as well. To be "perfect" is to be complete, mature, grown up in one's likeness to God's benevolence (cf. 19:21 and the word _tamim_ [TH8549, ZH9459] "blameless," in the OT, e.g., Gen 6:9; 17:1; Job 1:1, 8; 2:3). What is involved in becoming perfect is uprightness and blamelessness in consistently obeying God's laws. The idea of perfection as sinlessness, held by relatively few Christians, would not be acceptable to the one who taught his disciples to pray for forgiveness (6:12; cf. 1 John 1:8). The surpassing righteousness of which Jesus speaks is summarized as mirroring the Father's characteristic of universal benevolence, not sinlessness.
Matthew 5:48 forms the conclusion of the sixth and final example of Jesus' teaching and of 5:21-48 as a whole. All six of the areas addressed by Jesus call for perfection or modeling of the Father's benevolence. One can do no better than to imitate the Father. This is the surpassing righteousness of which Jesus spoke in 5:20.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this section of Matthew 5, the second set of three examples (5:33-48), much like the first set (5:21-32), follows a clear pattern:
1. Traditional teaching (5:33, 38, 43)
2. Jesus' contrasting teaching (5:34a, 39a, 44)
3. Concrete application or further explanation (5:34b-37, 39b-42, 45-47)
In the application sections (#3 above), there is frequent use of parallel statements and repeated sentence structure. Overall, the second set of contrasting teachings is a bit longer than the first set, mainly due to the lack of any concrete applications in the third example (5:31-32). The final verse, 5:48, serves just as much as the conclusion to the whole (5:21-48) as it does to the sixth contrasting teaching (5:43-47).
The Contrast: Jesus versus Moses or Jesus versus the Pharisees? It must be asked whether, in 5:21-48, Matthew intends to set Jesus against Moses or against the ostensible contemporary experts on Moses, the Pharisees. Is Jesus presented as contesting Moses or as officially speaking for Moses (cf. 23:2ff)? The question is perhaps impossible to answer because the issue is too complex to be put in such reductionistic terms. It seems that in some instances, Jesus dealt with contemporary paraphrases of the implications of the law and in others more directly with the law itself. In the former category would be contrasts one, three, four, and six (5:21, 31, 33, 43), in which the Old Testament text is cited with additional material appended (5:21, 43) or in a modified manner (5:31), or in which a summary of several texts is given (5:33). In the latter category, contrasts two and five, the Old Testament is quoted directly without any additions (5:27, 38). Thus, in most of the contrasts, there is evidence that contemporary construals of Moses were involved in the contrast. This is natural since by the time of Christ the ancient text of Moses had been subject to hundreds of years of interpretation and developing oral tradition.
Since Matthew presents Jesus as coming to accomplish the purpose of the law and the prophets and not to abolish them (5:17), one would expect Jesus' teaching to transcend the Old Testament in a manner that does not violate its ethical authority. Because Jesus warned his disciples that their righteousness must exceed that of the Jewish teachers (5:20), one would also expect his teaching to expose the errors of those teachers. In other texts (e.g., 9:10-13; 15:1-9; 19:1-9), Jesus explicitly rebukes the Jewish religious leaders for their mistaken views of the law and prophets, so it is not surprising to find a similar confrontation occurring implicitly here. This model of exposition plus exposure is most clear in examples three and six (5:31, 43), but it is present to some extent in each contrast. For example, in 5:33-37, Jesus first alludes to Old Testament texts on vows as revealed to the ancestors and then proceeds to refute accepted abuses of vows. As he illumines the ultimate goal of Moses and the prophets, Jesus shows that the religious leaders are in the dark regarding these issues.
The Hermeneutic of Jesus. The relationship of Jesus to the Old Testament is a theological watershed. Jesus' general statement about accomplishing the Old Testament's purpose, not abolishing it, and the six contrasting teachings he presents have been variously understood. Some have held that this means that Jesus' life and teaching established or confirmed the law. But this understates the legitimate discontinuity between Jesus and the Old Testament. Others have stressed that Jesus' own obedience to the law completed its role in redemptive history. This idea is valid in its understanding of Jesus' obedience to the law but dubious in its estimation of the implications of that obedience. Others have argued that Jesus, as a new Moses, brought a new law that superseded the Old Testament, but this errs on the side of excessive discontinuity. Certain systematic theologians have thought that Jesus stressed the "moral law," not the law's civil or ceremonial aspects. But whatever the relation of Jesus to the law, it is a relation to the whole law—one cannot partition the law into anachronistic categories that suit only its modern readers. Others conclude that Jesus revealed or intensified the true inner meaning of the law. This has some merit, but at best it is only a partial answer.
It is most likely that we should think Jesus is the end or goal of the law, and thus he is its ultimate, definitive interpreter. He alone is the authoritative eschatological teacher of the law and the prophets. The life and teaching of Jesus fulfill the law just as New Testament events fulfill Old Testament predictions and patterns. On the one hand, Jesus did not contradict the law, but on the other hand he did not preserve it unchanged. He revealed the ultimate meaning of the law of God for those whose righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and the Pharisees (5:20; cf. 22:34-40; 23:23-24). He brought the law to its intended goal by:
1. Teaching that the prohibition of murder implicitly prohibits the anger and abusive speech which lead to murder. While the Old Testament does not condone anger, Jesus' transcendent teaching links it to a capital crime. Anger and angry words are tantamount to murder (5:21-26).
2. Teaching that the prohibition of adultery implicitly prohibits the lust that leads to adultery. While the Old Testament does not condone lust, Jesus' direct linkage of lust to adultery is a more stringent standard of sexual ethics, which interprets the seventh commandment by the tenth commandment (Exod 20:17). Lust is tantamount to adultery (5:27-30).
3. Teaching that marriage is a sacred union, inviolable except when infidelity occurs. While the Old Testament does not condone divorce (Mal 2:14-16), there is reason to believe that it was condoned by many of Jesus' contemporaries. But he taught that divorce and remarriage (except in the case of infidelity) are tantamount to adultery (5:31-32). Divorce is merely a temporal concession to human sinfulness, but permanent marriage is the original model for humans (19:8).
4. Teaching that the use of vows would be unnecessary if disciples consistently took to heart the biblical admonitions to tell the truth. While the Old Testament does not condone the misuse of vows, Jesus criticized their use. He forbade (although the prohibition may not be absolute; cf. Blomberg 1992:112; Davies and Allison 1988:536; Hagner 1993:129) what the letter of the Old Testament permits, but he did so to uphold the spirit of the Old Testament against the bearing of false witness. For Jesus, casuistry in the taking of vows is tantamount to bearing false witness (5:33-37; cf. 23:16-22).
5. Teaching that the law on retaliation was designed primarily to limit conflict, and only secondarily to endorse it. The Old Testament does not condone unjust punishment for crimes and damages, but Jesus teaches that instead of responding to wrongdoing in kind, his disciples should respond with grace. Insistence on taking one's own vengeance is tantamount to denying that God will avenge his people (5:38-42).
6. Teaching that all humans, not only one's friends, are to be loved. While the Old Testament does not condone hatred of one's enemies, Jesus makes love of enemies the preeminent evidence of one's filial relationship to the heavenly Father. Hating one's enemies is tantamount to paganism (5:43-48).
Contemporary Application. It has been argued here that Matthew 5:21-48 is in continuity with the law and the prophets to an extent greater than is commonly held. Be that as it may, there is no doubt that there is much in Matthew 5:21-48 that is antithetical to the individualism of American culture. Jesus' ethic contradicts the anger and aggression that seek to dominate other people. However, his words against the misuse of women by adultery and divorce sound a note that resonates with contemporary sensibilities. The stress on integrity in speech is much needed in the Christian community, where it is not uncommon for prominent believers to be caught in lies. The words against retaliation are important but difficult to apply in a society where Christians have religious liberty. Finally, there is no doubt that evangelicals have a lot to learn about loving their enemies.
The six examples that contrast Jesus' transcendent teaching of the Old Testament with the traditional understandings of it amount to pointers in the direction of the righteousness that is greater than that of the religious leaders (5:20). Now Jesus will turn from relationships with people to religious activities (6:1-18) and attitudes toward material things (6:19-34). The message of the Kingdom dynamically transforms the disciple's conduct in this area also.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Religious practices (6:1-18)
1 "Watch out! Don't do your good deeds publicly, to be admired by others, for you will lose the reward from your Father in heaven. 2 When you give to someone in need, don't do as the hypocrites do—blowing trumpets in the synagogues and streets to call attention to their acts of charity! I tell you the truth, they have received all the reward they will ever get. 3 But when you give to someone in need, don't let your left hand know what your right hand is doing. 4 Give your gifts in private, and your Father, who sees everything, will reward you.
5 "When you pray, don't be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get. 6 But when you pray, go away by yourself, shut the door behind you, and pray to your Father in private. Then your Father, who sees everything, will reward you.
7 "When you pray, don't babble on and on as the Gentiles do. They think their prayers are answered merely by repeating their words again and again. 8 Don't be like them, for your Father knows exactly what you need even before you ask him! 9 Pray like this:
Our Father in heaven,
may your name be kept holy.
10 May your Kingdom come soon.
May your will be done on earth,
as it is in heaven.
11 Give us today the food we need,[*]
12 and forgive us our sins,
as we have forgiven those who sin against us.
13 And don't let us yield to temptation,[*]
but rescue us from the evil one.[*]
14 "If you forgive those who sin against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you. 15 But if you refuse to forgive others, your Father will not forgive your sins.
16 "And when you fast, don't make it obvious, as the hypocrites do, for they try to look miserable and disheveled so people will admire them for their fasting. I tell you the truth, that is the only reward they will ever get. 17 But when you fast, comb your hair[*] and wash your face. 18 Then no one will notice that you are fasting, except your Father, who knows what you do in private. And your Father, who sees everything, will reward you."
## NOTES
6:1 **Don't do your good deeds publicly.** This verse enunciates the general principle that is unpacked in the three specific areas treated by Jesus in this section: giving (6:2-4), praying (6:5-15), and fasting (6:16-18). This principle relates to the disciple's intention in prayer—disciples must watch out for a perverse tendency to do good deeds in order to receive human admiration. When this occurs, the disciple forfeits divine reward (cf. 10:41-42; 19:27-29). The NLT's "good deeds" is lit. "righteousness," which refers to practical or functional godliness—that is, obedience to God's laws. Jesus had just taught that his standard of righteousness was higher than that of the religious leaders (5:20; cf. 1:19; 3:15; 5:6, 10; 6:33; 25:37-39). All in all, this verse constitutes a sort of "flip side" to 5:16. There disciples are enjoined to do good deeds to the Father's glory; here they are enjoined not to do them for their own glory.
6:2 The first concrete application of the principle enunciated in 6:1 is giving to the needy. See the commentary below for discussion of the literary pattern that begins here and is followed in the sections on prayer (6:5-15) and fasting (6:16-18).
**hypocrites.** This word occurs here for the first time in Matthew (see also 6:5, 16; 7:5; 15:7; 22:18; 23:13-15, 27; 24:51.).
**blowing trumpets in the synagogues.** This may be metaphorical (like the modern expression "blowing your own horn") or a hyperbolic reference to drawing attention to oneself. Or it might refer to a trumpet-shaped collection box that resounded when coins were thrown into it.
**to call attention to their acts of charity!** This refers to the sinful motive of seeking the praise and glory of humans rather than the reward of the heavenly Father. Instead of giving in a flashy public manner to attain self-aggrandizement, disciples are to give secretly so that the Father, who is aware of secret actions, will reward them (cf. 16:27).
6:3 **don't let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.** The emphasis on secrecy is underlined by this hyperbole. Disciples are to seek eternal reward from God rather than present human fleeting praise.
6:5-6 **When you pray, don't be like the hypocrites . . . [but] pray to your Father in private.** The section on prayer (6:5-15) is more extensive than the sections on giving and fasting. It consists of two warnings on how not to pray, each balanced by positive teaching (6:5-6; 6:7-8), followed by the model prayer (6:9-13). Jesus first forbids his disciples to pray hypocritically on the street or in the synagogue (cf. 23:5-7), commanding them instead to pray privately in an inner room (6:5-6). There is an allusion here to Isa 26:20, which in its original context speaks of Israel's hiding from temporary judgment in anticipation of blessing. Jesus forbids hypocrisy here, not sincere prayer in public or in religious services. This critique addresses hypocritical Jewish practice, and may have in mind hypocrisy in the praying of the _'Amidah_ or Eighteen Benedictions (to be uttered three times a day), the recitation of the _Shema_ (to be done twice daily), and various other blessings.
6:7-8 **don't babble on and on as the Gentiles do.** In 6:7-8 Jesus critiques the prayers of the Gentiles (or "pagans"). These prayers of the Gentiles evidently involved long-winded babbling in order to get the attention of a god, or the utterance of repeated magical incantations. But Jesus reminded his disciples that their Father already knows what they need before they ask (cf. 6:32).
6:9-10 As form-critical scholars note, the model prayer of 6:9-13 (cf. a shorter version in Luke 11:1-4) seems to interrupt the repeated pattern of 6:2-4, 6:5-8, and 6:16-18. But this does not necessarily bring the prayer's authenticity or the literary unity of 6:1-18 into doubt. The model prayer gives a positive example that nicely balances the preceding critique of hypocritical prayer, and it exemplifies the Kingdom values Jesus has inculcated since the beatitudes. If one takes the two requests of 6:13 as two aspects of one petition, the model prayer is composed of six requests. Assuming this, the six seem to be arranged in two sets of three.
The first set is directed toward the glory and praise of God (6:9-10), the second toward the daily needs of the disciples (6:11-13). The similarity of this prayer to the Kaddish, a synagogue prayer, is noted by many (e.g., Davies and Allison, 1988:595-597; Hagner 1993:147). It also appears in _Didache_ 8, where it is to be said three times a day. More on the structure, theology, and practical implications of the prayer will be found in the commentary below.
**Pray like this.** It is important to note (with respect to _Didache_ 8 and much later Christian tradition) that Jesus did not enjoin his disciples to pray this prayer by rote. He says, "Pray _like_ this," not "pray this." The prayer puts the interests of the Father and his Kingdom ahead of the daily needs of the disciple. This is the kind of prayer one should pray, one in which doxology (exemplified by the first three "your" requests) precedes and permeates requests for human needs (exemplified by the last three "us" requests).
**Our Father in heaven.** Prayer is to be addressed to "our Father in heaven" (cf. 3:17; 5:9, 16, 45, 48; 6:1, 4, 6, 8, 14-15, 18, 26; 7:11, 21). The family imagery speaks of the intimacy of the disciples' relationship to God, but the qualifier "in heaven" reminds one that God is not a chum or a pal. Rather, one is to remember that the awesome God of heaven has come near in the person of his beloved Son and counts disciples of the Kingdom as his dear family (cf. Isa 57:15). The view of Jeremias (1967:29, 57), that Jesus' injunction to address God as Father (Aramaic, _abba_ ) is unique, is overstated if not mistaken. God was understood as Father by the Jews in Jesus' day (Isa 63:16; 64:8; Tob 13:4; _m. Berachot_ 5:1; _Sota_ 9:15; _Yoma_ 8:9). Yet Jesus' model prayer is remarkably simple and intimate in the way it addresses God (cf. Rom. 8:15-16; Gal. 4:6-7).
**may your name be kept holy. May your kingdom come soon. May your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.** The three "your" requests should be seen as three ways of asking for essentially the same thing. That God's name (his character or reputation) be "kept holy" or revered, that his Kingdom would come, and that his will would be done are the requests of one who is famished for righteousness on earth (5:6). The final phrase of 6:10, "on earth as it is in heaven," describes all three requests, not just the third one. Disciples long for the realities of heaven to be realized on earth. All three requests imply that certain aspects of the Kingdom are yet future, involving the progressive actualization of God's character, reign, and will on earth, that is, universally. The Father is the Lord of heaven and earth (11:25), and after the resurrection he gave Jesus universal authority in heaven and on earth (28:18). In the meantime, as disciples are involved in the gradual extension of the Kingdom by their words and deeds, their utmost desire is for the ultimate realization of God's reign on earth.
6:11-13a Three petitions for the needs of the disciple now balance the three previous theocentric petitions. Whatever else people may want, the deepest human needs are found in these requests: daily sustenance (6:11), forgiveness (6:12), and avoidance of sin (6:13).
**Give us today the food we need.** The word translated "today" is the obscure Gr. word _epiousios_ [TG1967, ZG2157], whose etymology is translated in various ways, including "daily," "necessary," and "for tomorrow" (sometimes taken as a reference to the eschatological "tomorrow" that follows this age, which is "today")—see NLT mg. The point seems to be that the disciple prays for immediate day-to-day necessities rather than for long-term luxuries.
**forgive us our sins.** Prayer for ongoing forgiveness (6:12) assumes that the disciple has made the decisive turn from sin to God demanded by the message of the Kingdom (3:2; 4:17). This request shows that authentic disciples still have their faults, which need to be dealt with on a daily basis.
**don't let us yield to temptation, but rescue us from the evil one.** The third request (6:13) is stated in two contrasting ways, negatively ("don't let us yield to temptation") and positively ("but rescue us from the evil one"). Since the Spirit led Jesus into a time of testing (4:1), this petition should be understood not so much as one for God not to lead the disciple into temptation, but for the disciple to be delivered from Satan so as not to yield to temptation.
6:13b The doxology printed in the NLT mg ("For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.") is not found in the most ancient manuscripts ( B D Z 0170) and is very likely not a part of the original version of this Gospel. It seems to have been added for liturgical purposes and is based on 1 Chr 29:11-13 (for a further explanation, see Comfort 2007:[Matt 6:13]).
6:14-15 **If you forgive those who sin against you.** Just as the phrase "on earth as it is in heaven" (6:10) relates to all three of the previous petitions, so also here the words of 6:14-15 on the necessity of a forgiving spirit relate not just to 6:12, the fifth petition, but to all three requests for human needs. The disciple will not ask for his or her needs to be met with an unforgiving spirit, but will realize that his experience of God's forgiveness enables him to forgive others (cf. 5:23-24, 38-48; 18:21-35).
**your Father will not forgive your sins.** The relationship of God's forgiving humans to humans' forgiving others is much debated. This is not "legal ground," where our act of forgiving others merits God's act of forgiving us, as some classic dispensationalists implied. Rather the point is that God's initiative in graciously forgiving one should motivate one to forgive others. Forgiving others demonstrates that one has been forgiven by God. Forgiven, we are freed to forgive (cf. 9:2, 5, 6; 12:31-32; 18:32; Eph 4:31-5:2; Col 3:13).
6:16-18 **when you fast, don't make it obvious.** The section on fasting addresses this religious act with the same pattern found in the previous teaching on giving and praying.
**comb your hair and wash your face.** One should not neglect one's appearance while fasting so as to draw attention to oneself. Rather, one should groom oneself as usual so that God alone notices and rewards. Of the three activities treated in 6:1-18, fasting is certainly the least important to most Christians. It is not commanded in any of the NT Epistles. Fasting was a prescribed part of various OT community activities involving repentance (Joel 1:14); in addition, pious Jews fasted voluntarily (1 Sam 7:5-6; Neh 1:4; Dan 9:3; Jonah 3:5; Luke 2:37; 18:12). Here, the voluntary fasting is primarily in view. Jesus himself fasted (4:2; cf. Moses and Elijah, Exod 34:28; 1 Kgs 19:8) and spoke metaphorically of the appropriateness of fasting for his disciples after his departure from earth (9:14-15). The Pharisees fasted (9:14; cf. Luke 18:12), and Jesus did not criticize them for the practice. In Acts, the disciples fasted before the important decision of selecting church leaders (13:2-3; 14:23). Isaiah's critique of fasting that was not accompanied by just behavior (Isa 58:1-9; cf. Zech 7:4-14) is not unlike Jesus' condemnation of hypocritical fasting here.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 6:1-18 presents the teaching of Jesus on three religious duties that would be basic for Matthew's Christian Jewish community. After enunciating the general principle (6:1), Jesus addresses the practice of alms (6:2-4), prayer (6:5-15), and fasting (6:16-18). This material is closely related thematically and literarily to the preceding section, 5:21-48. Thematically, 6:1-18 presents another area of life in which Jesus, the ultimate teacher of the law and prophets, explains the greater righteousness (5:20) by which disciples emulate the righteous character of the Father (5:48). Literarily, 6:1-18 resembles the structure of 5:21-48 by its logical movement from a general principle of righteousness (6:1; cf. 5:20) to specific examples (three examples in 6:2-18; cf. six examples in 5:21-48). Another literary similarity is the use of a repeated phrase that clearly demarcates the structure of the material (6:2, 5, 16; cf. 5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43). Throughout the text, contrasting statements are used to show the difference between the greater righteousness of Jesus' Kingdom and the traditional teaching of the religious leaders.
The general principle enunciated by 6:1 connects righteousness with the disciples' intention. The disciples must watch out for religious acts done in order to impress people, since such acts will not be rewarded by the heavenly Father. Each time Jesus applies this to a specific practice, a similar pattern occurs: | Hypocritical Religion Prohibited | Genuine Religion Commanded
---|---|---
1. The occasion | "when you . . . give . . . pray . . . pray . . . fast" (6:2, 5, 7, 16) | "but when you . . . give . . . pray . . . pray . . . fast" (6:3, 6, 9, 17)
2. The activity | ostentatious action (6:2, 5, 7, 16) | secret action (6:3, 6, 9-13, 17)
3. The motivation | to be admired by others (6:1, 2, 5, 16) | to be seen only by the Father (6:4, 6, 18)
4. The solemn affirmation | they have received all the reward they will ever get (6:2, 5, 16) | "your Father, who sees everything, will reward you" (6:4, 6, 18)
Matthew 6:5-15, Jesus' teaching on prayer, is the centerpiece of 6:1-18. It contains more detailed teaching than the sections on alms and fasting. In 6:5-8 Jesus contrasts publicity and privacy (5-6), and verbosity and simplicity (7-8) in prayer. The Pharisees sought publicity, and the pagans were known for verbosity, but the disciples were to pray privately and simply. These two contrasts lead naturally into the model prayer, which balances three petitions for the Father's glory (6:9-10) with three petitions for the disciple's needs (6:11-13). The phrase "on earth as it is in heaven" (6:10) characterizes the first set of three petitions, and the attitude of forgiveness (6:14-15) characterizes the second set of three petitions.
Religious Performance and Its Proper Audience. The disciple of Jesus strives to be perfect as the heavenly Father is perfect (5:48). This means that holiness comes from the inside out. The disciple's _character_ is to be modeled on the Father's character, and the disciple's _performance_ is to be done for the Father's approval. This certainly cuts against the grain of Western culture, which is often characterized by exhibitionism and ostentation. The world's "if you've got it, flaunt it" principle has infiltrated the modern church as surely as it had the synagogues of Jesus' day. But Jesus would have his disciples not only do the right thing, he would also have them do it the right way.
When it comes to giving, trumpets should not be blown, but the names of those who give the most are often publicized in modern churches. Surely this violates the central principle of this passage and forgets the lesson of the widow's mite (Mark 12:41-44). In the matter of praying, eloquence and length are confused with effectiveness. This makes it seem that God is ignorant of the disciples' needs and reluctant to meet them. As for fasting, the tendency is to ignore it altogether, but similar religious endeavors we think are "above and beyond the call of duty" are often given much publicity. In all three areas mentioned in Matthew 6:1-18, we are reminded that to gain the fleeting applause of today's crowd is to forfeit the approval of our heavenly Father tomorrow and forever. We must learn the lesson that disciples are content to be noticed by the Father, realizing that the crowd's approval does not matter in light of eternity. Giving to the needy in order to receive publicity is not giving at all—it is paying for human approval, and it forfeits divine approval (Plummer 1915:91).
The Model Prayer. The "Lord's Prayer" is in fact the model prayer for his disciples. It provides for them not a mantra to be mindlessly and superstitiously repeated but an example of godly Kingdom priorities in prayer. It is helpful to think of 6:9-10 as indicating the _person_ to whom prayer is addressed (6:9b) and the _priorities_ by which prayers are formed (6:9c-10). Concerning the _person_ to whom prayer is addressed, he is characterized as "Father." One's relationship to one's human father inevitably colors one's view of the heavenly Father. In this day of awareness of dysfunctional families, it can be helpful to acknowledge that one's relationship to one's human father may help or hinder one's perception of God as heavenly Father.
God is "our Father in heaven" because he has come near to his children by his grace. Yet he is at the same time "our Father in heaven" because he remains distant from his children due to his glory. The fact that he is "our" Father leads disciples to intimacy and community. He is not someone else's Father—he is _ours_. And he is not _my_ Father in individualistic isolation from others who know him; he belongs to all disciples. The fact that he is in heaven leads his disciples to approach him with awe and reverence. God deserves the utmost respect as the one who perfectly blends goodness and greatness, grace and power, immanence and transcendence. When prayer is made, one's view of God must balance his goodness and his greatness to avoid a syrupy sentimentality on the one hand and an austere apathy on the other.
Concerning the _priorities_ by which prayers are formed (6:9c-10), one must keep foremost in one's mind that one's motive should not be to receive goods and services from God but to render service to God. Prayer is not primarily to vindicate the disciple's causes, meet the disciple's needs, fulfill the disciple's desires, or solve the disciple's problems. Therefore, one must not rush into God's presence with one's spiritual grocery list and demand instant gratification. Rather, the disciple's priorities are to be the promotion of God's reputation, the advancement of his rule, and the performance of his will. These three petitions are essentially one, as each is characterized by a burning desire to see the Father honored on earth as he is already honored in heaven (cf. Rev 4–5). As believers become partners with God's purposes, they begin to realize these priorities, but they also increasingly long for the day when God's priorities will be fully realized on earth.
The Kingdom of God encroaches on Satan's domain whenever people come to faith in Jesus Christ. The Kingdom comes when Jesus' disciples grow in their relationships to God and neighbor. The Kingdom is not merely future, and the disciples' hope is not escapism—they do not look to leave the earth for an ethereal heavenly existence. Rather, they look for a concrete existence in which heaven comes to earth, and they seek heaven's interests on earth today.
It is helpful to think of Matthew 6:11-15 as concerning the _problems_ about which disciples pray (6:11-13) and the _principle_ that governs their prayers (6:14-15). They pray for problems relating to provision (6:11), pardon (6:12), and protection (6:13). As they pray, they remind themselves that if God had not forgiven them, they would not be praying at all. And they respond to God by forgiving others (6:14-15).
When disciples pray for provisions, they pray for daily bread, which represents the necessities rather than the luxuries of life. In biblical times, workers were paid on a daily basis (20:8). When one prays for daily bread, one asks God for immediate necessities. In Matthew 6:25, disciples are told not to worry about such necessities, and in 6:34 they are told not to worry about tomorrow. Rather, they are to trust their Father implicitly for everything.
When disciples pray for pardon, they recognize that by God's grace they are now better than they were but not as good as they ought to be. Disciples are not yet perfect and must realize that their attitudes and activities fall short of Kingdom standards. As they admit spiritual poverty, and hunger and thirst for righteousness (5:3, 6), they pray for God to forgive their ethical lapses. Receiving his pardon is an unspeakable privilege, but it comes with a corresponding responsibility—extending pardon to others. A forgiven person is a forgiving person.
When disciples pray for protection from temptation to sin, they are praying for God to break the cycle that so often plagues them (cf. Josh 7:20-21; Jas 1:13-15). Disciples are tempted by the world, the flesh, and the devil. Temptation leads to sin, and sin leads to the necessity of praying for forgiveness. And the cycle goes on and on. That is why they pray for protection from temptation and deliverance from the evil one's strategies (cf. 4:1-11).
As disciples pray about their problems, their petitions are governed by a principle. Just as petitions for the Father's glory are based on the principle "on earth, as it is in heaven" (6:10), so their petitions for their own needs are based on the principle "as we have forgiven those who sin against us" (6:12, 14-15). Disciples may not presume to ask God to forgive them if they have not forgiven others. Reconciliation with God will not happen apart from reconciliation with neighbors (cf. 5:23-24). One has no right to pray for divine reconciliation if one has not practiced human reconciliation. It is not that disciples merit God's forgiveness by forgiving others, but that they demonstrate that God has forgiven them when they forgive others (cf. 18:21-35).
Conclusion. Disciples today must reflect on how their prayers compare to the Lord's model prayer. They must first consider whether they are truly exercised by the vision that God's will must be done on earth as it is in heaven. They also must be reconciled with neighbors, as they depend on reconciliation with God when they pray for their own needs. As prayer for personal needs is considered, anxiety over material things inevitably surfaces. Matthew 6:19-34 presents Jesus' teaching on this topic.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. Material possessions (6:19-34)
19 "Don't store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 Store your treasures in heaven, where moths and rust cannot destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. 21 Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be.
22 "Your eye is like a lamp that provides light for your body. When your eye is healthy, your whole body is filled with light. 23 But when your eye is unhealthy, your whole body is filled with darkness. And if the light you think you have is actually darkness, how deep that darkness is!
24 "No one can serve two masters. For you will hate one and love the other; you will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and be enslaved to money.
25 "That is why I tell you not to worry about everyday life—whether you have enough food and drink, or enough clothes to wear. Isn't life more than food, and your body more than clothing? 26 Look at the birds. They don't plant or harvest or store food in barns, for your heavenly Father feeds them. And aren't you far more valuable to him than they are? 27 Can all your worries add a single moment to your life?
28 "And why worry about your clothing? Look at the lilies of the field and how they grow. They don't work or make their clothing, 29 yet Solomon in all his glory was not dressed as beautifully as they are. 30 And if God cares so wonderfully for wildflowers that are here today and thrown into the fire tomorrow, he will certainly care for you. Why do you have so little faith?
31 "So don't worry about these things, saying, 'What will we eat? What will we drink? What will we wear?' 32 These things dominate the thoughts of unbelievers, but your heavenly Father already knows all your needs. 33 Seek the Kingdom of God[*] above all else, and live righteously, and he will give you everything you need.
34 "So don't worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring its own worries. Today's trouble is enough for today."
## NOTES
6:19-21 **Don't store up treasures here on earth.** These verses (cf. Luke 12:33-34) contain a prohibition against the hoarding of earthly treasures (6:19), followed by a symmetrical command enjoining the accumulation of heavenly treasure (6:20), followed by an explanation that one's heart will inevitably be devoted to what one treasures (6:21).
**where moths eat them and rust destroys them.** Heavenly treasure (cf. 13:44) is not susceptible to decay from moths (cf. Isa 50:9; Jas 5:2-3) and "eating" (NLT, "rust"; _brōsis_ [TG1035, ZG1111], cf. Isa 51:8 LXX) or to theft (cf. 24:43) like earthly treasure is. The "eating" spoken of here could be from rust, other insects, dry rot, or some other type of decay. Heavenly treasure alone can provide genuine security (Matt 19:21; cf. Luke 12:16-21; 1 Tim 6:18-19), and it should be the focus of one's heart.
**Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be.** Here the heart (cf. 5:8, 28) stands for the person's intellectual and volitional core, the source of one's deeds (cf. 15:17-20). Human finiteness alone, even without the exacerbating effects of sin, makes it very difficult to focus the heart solely on God and not on possessions (cf. 6:24). The heart is inevitably drawn to what one values most. If one's life is focused on the values of the Kingdom, as expressed succinctly in the beatitudes of 5:3-10, one is indeed laying up treasure in heaven.
6:22-23 **Your eye is a like lamp that provides light for your body.** The metaphor of the eye found here (cf. Luke 11:34-36) is difficult to understand. This verse begins with a proverbial statement about the eye being the body's lamp, which is followed by two opposite scenarios that emanate from good and bad eyesight respectively.
**When your eye is healthy, your whole body is filled with light.** Good eyesight illumines one's whole life, while poor eyesight is a great hindrance. But Jesus is speaking metaphorically.
**your eye is unhealthy, your whole body is filled with darkness.** There may be an allusion in 6:23 to the "evil eye," which in ancient eastern culture was viewed as a source of greed and avarice (Hagner 1993:158; cf. Matt 20:15; _m. Avot_ 2:12, 15; 5:16, 22). Given what precedes (the heart is where the treasure is) and what follows (the dilemma of two masters), it seems that Jesus was saying that a proper view of possessions is basic to Kingdom values. An evil and covetous eye will hoard earthly possessions only to see them decay. A good and generous eye will store up treasures in heaven that will never decay.
**light you think you have.** It is a perversely ironic situation when one's eye, which should provide light (metaphorically, generosity), provides only darkness (metaphorically, avarice). This last comment is a call to self-examination (Davies and Allison 1988:640).
6:24 **No one can serve two masters.** Structurally, this verse is a perfect example of chiastic or introverted parallelism. The practice of slavery is the background for the statement (cf. Luke 16:13); a slave cannot successfully and wholeheartedly serve two masters, since slavery demands the total, undivided attention of the slave to the master. If there are two masters, their demands will be incompatible. Similarly, Jesus' disciples cannot divide their loyalties between the heavenly Kingdom and earthly treasures.
**you will hate one and love the other.** The use of the polar opposites "hate" and "love" reflects a Semitic idiom that should not be pressed unduly (cf. Luke 14:26). The point is that the slave will inevitably love and be devoted to one master more than the other one (cf. 10:37).
**You cannot serve God and be enslaved to money.** This metaphor on the impossibility of divided loyalty is meant to show that a disciple cannot be the loyal slave of both God (resulting in heavenly treasure) and money (resulting in earthly treasure). God's Kingdom demands an exclusive, transcendent loyalty. One's devotion to it must be single-minded.
6:25-27 If a person serves God rather than money (6:24), he should not be anxious about the material things money can buy. These verses contain a general prohibition against worrying about "everyday life," followed by applications to two areas of day-to-day life: what one eats and what one wears (6:25). God's provision of food and clothing is then stressed in 6:26-27 and 6:28-30 respectively, before the general prohibition against worry is restated in 6:31 and again in 6:34 (cf. Luke 12:22-31).
**not to worry about everyday life.** The first occurrence of the triple prohibition sets the agenda for the entire paragraph of 6:25-34—the disciple must not be anxious over "everyday life." This general term stands for the material goods that support life: food, drink, and clothing. Food and drink appear separately in 6:25a and 6:31, but in 6:25b-26 food alone is mentioned.
**Isn't life more than food, and your body more than clothing?** The prohibition against worrying is underlined by three rhetorical questions, the first (6:25d) on whether life is more than food and clothing. The implication is that the God who gives life itself can easily supply the means to sustain life (cf. 4:4).
**aren't you far more valuable to him?** The second question (6:26) is based on God's providential care for birds (cf. 8:20; 13:32), who do not work to grow their food, let alone worry about it. The argument is from the lesser to the greater, a common pattern in rabbinic texts, where it is called _qal vahomer_ (light and heavy). Evidently reasoning from the fact that humans are created in the image of God, Jesus asked whether humans are not of more value than birds (cf. 10:31; 12:12).
**Can all your worries add a single moment to your life?** The third question (6:27) is asked bluntly without an accompanying illustration. It alludes to the impotence of worry to lengthen one's life. This question's power lies in its absurdity—of course worry cannot add "a single moment" to one's life. In fact, worrying may actually shorten a person's life. The Gr. wording here seems to speak of adding a cubit ( _pēchus_ — approximately 18 inches; cf. Luke 12:25; John 21:8; Rev 21:17) to one's height ( _hēlikia;_ cf. Luke 12:25; Eph 4:13), but this does not make the best sense in the context. Since _hēlikia_ can arguably refer to length of life, and _pēchus_ can be used metaphorically to describe a short period or span of time (Sir 30:24; _Psalms of Solomon_ 5:6; cf. Ps 39:5), the NLT and many modern translations render the idea accordingly (cf. BDAG 435-436; 812).
6:28-30 **why worry about your clothing?** These verses turn from worry about sustenance back to worry about clothing (cf. 6:25).
**Look at the lilies of the field.** The lesser to greater argument is very similar to that of 6:26. The illustration is drawn from God's providential care for lilies (though the word may refer to flowers in general), which without a moment of work are more beautiful than King Solomon in all his royal splendor (6:29; cf. 1 Kgs 4:20-34; 10:14-29).
**Why do you have so little faith?** The rhetorical question of 6:30 causes disciples to reflect on the nature of God's wonderful providence. If God cares so much for flowers, which have such a short life span (cf. Pss 37:2; 103:15-16; Isa 40:6-8; Jas 1:10-11; 1 Pet 1:24-25), will he not care much more for the disciples of his beloved Son? If the disciples hesitated for a moment in giving a positive response to this question, it is because they had "little faith." This expression occurs in other challenges to the disciples in Matthew (8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20). It points to the need for Jesus' disciples to strengthen their genuine although insufficient commitment to the values of the Kingdom.
6:31-32 These verses form an _inclusio_ by repeating the prohibition of 6:25 and summarizing the reasons of 6:26-30.
**What will we eat . . . drink . . . wear?** Disciples must not ask what they will eat, drink, or wear, since these questions are like those of "unbelievers" (lit. "Gentiles," meaning non-Jewish pagans; cf. 6:7) who do not realize that they have a heavenly Father (cf. 5:45, 48; 6:1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 15, 18, 26) who knows their needs (cf. 6:8; 7:11). The Greco-Roman deities were notorious for their capricious, arbitrary actions. Devotees of these gods had to wonder whether their gifts and offerings had sufficiently appeased the gods and rendered them benevolent. Not so with the disciples' heavenly Father, whose love and concern were trustworthy and unchanging. Previously, Jesus stated that the practice of loving only one's friends was unacceptable for his disciples since it was acceptable pagan conduct (5:47). Now he points out similarly that worry over food and clothing is similarly unacceptable. As Mounce (1985:58) states, "Worry is practical atheism and an affront to God." The heavenly Father who loves his enemies also cares for his disciples. In response, they must love their enemies and trust their Father to meet their needs.
6:33 **Seek the Kingdom of God above all else.** The positive command of 6:33 balances the prohibition of 6:31. The disciples must not be anxious but must have as their primary concern God's Kingdom and the upright lifestyle that accompanies it. Putting God first in this way will result in God giving them all the food and clothing they need. By contrast, worrying does nothing except marginalize God and his Kingdom. The present seeking of Kingdom values is equivalent to living righteously in this world. Prayer for the progressive realization of God's Kingdom and will on earth (6:10) must be linked to the disciple's own efforts to realize its greater righteousness (5:20). While the disciples' needs may be met only partially during the present life (5:3-10; 6:11), they will receive an abundant reward when the Kingdom comes in its fullness (19:28-29).
6:34 **don't worry about tomorrow.** The conclusion of all this returns to the initial prohibition of anxiety (6:25)—tomorrow's food and clothing is not the disciple's concern. Disciples must address themselves to today's concerns while believing that tomorrow is in the hands of the loving heavenly Father (cf. Prov 27:1; Jas 4:13-15). This passage does not teach that the disciple will receive food and clothing automatically without planning and work but that such planning and work must not lead to anxiety that distracts from the first things—God's Kingdom and righteous standards. When his disciples put first things first, God will meet their needs for sustenance and clothing.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 6:19-34 can be understood as an interweaving of commands against anxiety and materialism with commands to believe that God will meet one's material needs. Some divide the passage into two units, the first on materialism (6:19-24) and the second on anxiety (6:25-34). Others agree that 6:25-34 is a unit but divide 6:19-24 into three units, 6:19-21, 6:22-23, and 6:24. The most difficult part of this passage is 6:22-23, which is not only hard to understand in itself but is also hard to relate to its context. Overall, Matthew 6:19-34 does not seem to be structured as clearly as preceding parts of the Sermon, but Davies and Allison (1988:625-627) attempt to diagram it and point out its strong structural resemblance to 7:1-12.
Matthew 6:19-34 is closely tied to the human needs portion of the disciples' prayer, especially the request for daily sustenance (6:8b, 11, 25, 31). It would also seem to be related to the ostensible state of persecution in which the disciples will often find themselves. Anxiety over material needs would be exacerbated by persecution. The passage revolves around three kinds of statements:
1. Prohibitions against materialistic activities and anxious thoughts (6:19, 25, 31, 34a).
2. Exhortations enjoining Kingdom priorities in activities and attitudes (6:20, 33).
3. Motivations (statements, proverbs, illustrations, and rhetorical questions) that move disciples toward obedience (6:21-24, 26-30, 32, 34b).
These three types of statements are woven together in a repetitive manner that reinforces Jesus' teaching. Instead of materialistic pursuits, Jesus' disciples are to pursue Kingdom priorities, while being assured of the Father's care.
In Matthew 6, Jesus addresses two matters, religious hypocrisy (6:1-18) and anxious materialism (6:19-34). The first part of the chapter enjoins the proper practice of religious duties, and the second part stresses the proper priority in meeting one's worldly needs. Both parts of the chapter call upon disciples to put God first. Davies and Allison (1988:648) comment, "Having prayed the prayer of Jesus, how could one remain anxious?" Disciples are taught in 6:1-18 to live for the Father's reward, not the crowd's applause. Their prayers are first to express zeal for God's glory and only second to express concern for their own needs. Disciples are taught in 6:19-34 that their heavenly Father's care for them is much greater than his care for birds and flowers. Ironically, if disciples seek the Father's Kingdom first, their needs will be met (cf. Lev 25:18-22; Ps 127:2; Phil 4:6-7; 1 Tim 6:6-10; Heb 13:5; 1 Pet 5:7). They will receive that for which they did not seek. But if they seek first to meet their own needs, they will be no different than the pagans who do not have a God who knows what they need.
The Father expects his children to put him first, but he delights to meet their needs. Disciples must not permit their needs to dominate their prayers, their thoughts, and their activities. That is immaturity. However, disciples must not think that God doesn't care about their needs. That is unbelief. Disciples must prioritize their allegiance to God, his rule, and his righteous standards. In so doing they will receive all they need to eat and wear, as it were, as fringe benefits. But if they insist on prioritizing their own needs in their prayers and activities, they will never experience the joy of resting in the Father's care and provision. As the hymn by Carolina Berg puts it, "Children of the Heavenly Father safely to his bosom gather; Nestling bird nor star in heaven such a refuge e'er was given."
This section of Matthew provides Christians with great insight about how to live and how to teach. Concerning how to teach, one should note how Jesus balances the positive and negative elements of his teaching and in the process blends in clear motivation and vivid illustration. Concerning how to live, this passage has much to say to materialistic cultures. God's care for his own does not necessarily guarantee an easy life filled with luxuries (see 5:10-12; 10:16-39; 24:9-13). God's care for his own may involve poverty for some and wealth for others. Contrary to human stereotypes, wealthy people are not necessarily materialistic, and poor people are not necessarily living by Kingdom priorities. The issues are one's priorities and one's stewardship of whatever resources one has for God's glory. This passage does not prohibit planning and work, as if food and clothing will come floating down out of the sky. The passage prohibits making one's plans and work the center of one's life and living as if God and his Kingdom did not exist.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Discernment in dealing with people (7:1-6; cf. Luke 6:37-42)
1 "Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. 2 For you will be treated as you treat others.[*] The standard you use in judging is the standard by which you will be judged.[*]
3 "And why worry about a speck in your friend's eye[*] when you have a log in your own? 4 How can you think of saying to your friend,[*] 'Let me help you get rid of that speck in your eye,' when you can't see past the log in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite! First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend's eye.
6 "Don't waste what is holy on people who are unholy.[*] Don't throw your pearls to pigs! They will trample the pearls, then turn and attack you."
## NOTES
7:1 **Do not judge others.** The prohibition relates to previous commands about reconciliation (5:21-26), love, loving one's enemies (5:43-48), and forgiveness (6:12, 14-15; cf. 18:21-22). It is an instance of practicing the "golden rule" (7:12), and it does not rule out the need for spiritual discernment (7:6). Jesus prohibits judgmentalism and warns of divine judgment.
It may be, as Davies and Allison (1988:668) suggest, that this teaching is intended to warn the disciples against being like certain Pharisees, who are presented as being judgmental (9:10-13; 12:1-8; cf. Luke 15:1-2; 18:9-14).
**and you will not be judged.** This is a "divine passive," referring to God's judgment on the last day. God alone can make ultimate judgments about people (cf. 13:36-43, 47-50). The motivation for stopping such judgmental activity (7:2) is the principle of _lex talionis_ , punishment in kind (cf. 5:38; Jas 2:13). God will judge people by the same standards they use to judge other people. If people don't want to be judged and punished harshly by God, they will not judge and punish fellow humans harshly. This prohibition is closely related to previous commands that the disciples must seek reconciliation (5:21-26), love their enemies (5:43-48), and forgive those who injure them (6:12, 14-15; cf. 18:21-22). It amounts to a specific instance of the practice of the "golden rule" (7:12). But this prohibition of judgmentalism does not rule out the need for spiritual discernment (7:6).
7:3-5 **How can you think of saying to your friend . . ?** In these verses, this translates the Gr. word _adelphos_ [TG80, ZG81], which is more commonly translated as "brother." It evidently refers to one's fellow member of the community of disciples. The motivation provided by the warning of harsh divine judgment is here augmented by two rhetorical questions (7:3-4) that stress the perverse tendency of humans to criticize in others what they excuse in themselves (cf. Luke 6:41-42).
**Hypocrite!** These questions are followed by a charge of hypocrisy and a command to look honestly at oneself before one looks judgmentally at another (7:5, which forms a chiasmus with 7:4).
**log in your own** **eye . . . speck in your friend's** **eye.** Jesus' hyperbolic metaphors of the log and the speck refer respectively to blatant sins and minor shortcomings. Picturing one's sin as a log in one's eye stresses the inability of fallen human beings to render just judgment. How can someone whose vision is totally obscured by a log in his eye render a just assessment of another person's minor vision problems that are due to a speck or splinter (7:3)? And how can the person with the log in his eye think that he is capable of rendering assistance in removing the speck from his brother's eye (7:4)? Jesus labels this absurd situation as hypocrisy and plainly states that judgment of others can be rendered justly only when one has first judged oneself (7:5; cf. 18:15-17; 1 Cor 11:31; Gal 6:1; Jas 4:11-12).
7:6 **Don't give the sacred to dogs** [ **NLT mg** ]. **Don't throw your pearls to pigs!** This unique Matthean verse guards against an attitude that is the very opposite of the one addressed in 7:1-5. Jesus' disciples must not be censorious, but neither must they be oblivious to genuinely evil people. It appears that the setting of this warning is not so much the Eucharist service ( _Didache_ 9:5) as mission activity. It is quite unlikely that this verse concerns secret teachings that should be held back from outsiders. Rather, disciples should realize that the sacred message of the Kingdom must be handled with discernment, since there are malicious people who will respond to the message with violence against the messengers. In first-century Palestine, dogs were generally wild scavengers (15:26-27; cf. 1 Kgs 21:19; Ps 22:16; Phil 3:2; 2 Pet 2:22; Rev 22:15), and pigs were viewed as unclean beasts (8:32; cf. Lev 11:26; Deut 14:4, 8; Acts 10:12-14). Their use as metaphors of those who contemptuously and viciously reject the message of the Kingdom is striking. This teaching did not forbid the evangelization of Gentiles, although the Gentile mission had not yet been mandated (10:5; 15:24). In fact, Matthew repeatedly drops hints into his narrative about Gentile receptivity to the Kingdom (e.g., 1:3, 5-6; 2:2; 8:10; 15:28; 27:54), and concludes his Gospel with a statement that leaves little doubt about the extent of the disciples' mission (28:19-20). But disciples are to be wary while preaching the message of the Kingdom, since it is volatile truth and will often polarize those who hear it (10:14-15; 24:9; cf. Acts 5:33-40; 6:8–8:3; 13:44-51; 16:19-22; 18:12-17; 19:23-41; 21:27-32; Titus 3:10-11; Heb 10:32-34).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The flow of Matthew 7:1-11 is difficult to understand. Judgmentalism is the topic of 7:1-5. Keener (1999:240) aptly points out that this prohibition of judgmentalism is related to the previous command for forgiveness (6:12-15). With due respect to some scholars (e.g., Hagner 1993:171), 7:6 should be understood not as a detached unrelated saying but a warning against gullibility, the opposite of judgmentalism (Carson 1984:185; Gundry 1994:122). The difficulties in understanding the connection of 7:7-11 to 7:1-6 and 7:12 will be discussed in the next section of the commentary.
Jesus' teaching on how to deal with people in 7:1-6 presents two opposite extremes. First there is a warning against judgmentalism in 7:1-5, which may be analyzed as an initial prohibition (7:1) supported by a theological motivation (7:2) and a humorous hyperbolic illustration (7:3-5). Then there is a brief warning against the opposite of judgmentalism—namely, gullibility (7:6). This warning takes the literary form of chiasmus or introverted parallelism in the Greek text:
"Don't waste what is holy on dogs,
and don't throw your pearls to pigs!
They [the pigs] will trample the pearls,
then [the dogs will] turn and attack you."
Hypocritical Judgmentalism versus Genuine Discernment. Matthew 7:1 has the dubious distinction of being one of the most misquoted verses in the New Testament. Some postmoderns use this verse in particular to supply a sophisticated philosophical basis for those before them who have stressed relativism and subjectivity and denied that there were moral absolutes on which one could make absolute statements about right and wrong, good and evil. But depending on the context, the words "judge" and "judgment" can connote either analysis and evaluation or condemnation and punishment. Discipleship inevitably requires discerning "judgments" about individuals and their teachings (e.g., 3:7; 5:20; 6:24; 7:6, 16, 20; 10:13-17). Jesus himself made such judgments (see 4:10; 6:2, 5, 16; 7:21-23; 8:10-12; 13:10-13; 15:14). Therefore, Jesus did not forbid here what he has commanded and exemplified elsewhere.
What is forbidden is a rigid, censorious judgmentalism that scrutinizes others without even a glance at oneself (7:3; cf. Rom 2:1; 14:10; 1 Cor 4:5; 5:12; Jas 4:11-12; 5:9). Such a rigorous standard will return to haunt the one who condemns others by it (7:2; cf. 5:43-47; 18:15-20; Luke 6:37-42). King David learned this lesson the hard way (2 Sam 12:1-15). Jesus taught that genuine, honest introspection is an indispensable prerequisite for clear discernment and just moral judgments. Such judgments will be ultimately constructive, not retributive, since Jesus' disciples will not demand an eye for an eye and will love their enemies (5:33-48; 18:15-20; cf. Gal 6:1).
Jesus' disciples should be neither censorious inquisitors (7:1-5) nor naive simpletons (7:6). Those who viciously reject and continue to scorn the gospel must be regarded as dangerous enemies of the Kingdom whose evil actions can do great damage (cf. 2:16; 4:10; 5:11-12; 10:14-31; 12:14). Disciples must be wary of such people (cf. Prov 9:7; Col 4:5; 2 Tim 3:5; Titus 3:10). But unless one has removed the log from one's own eye, as it were, one will not be able to discern the difference between a fellow disciple with a relatively minor problem and an enemy who will do great harm to the Kingdom (cf. 11:12; 13:28-39). If genuine introspection does not occur, a disciple may blunder on the side of judgmental hypocrisy or naive gullibility. Ignorance of oneself is often mixed with arrogance toward others (Davies and Allison 1988:673), with disastrous results.
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. God answers prayer (7:7-11; cf. Luke 11:9-13)
7 "Keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened.
9 "You parents—if your children ask for a loaf of bread, do you give them a stone instead? 10 Or if they ask for a fish, do you give them a snake? Of course not! 11 So if you sinful people know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give good gifts to those who ask him."
## NOTES
7:7-8 The instructions about prayer in 7:7-11 (cf. Luke 11:9-13) are not easily related to the preceding and following contexts. See the commentary below for discussion. The three commands of 7:7 correspond exactly to the three promises of 7:8. The paired triple constructions emphasize the reality of answered prayer.
**Keep on asking . . . Keep on seeking . . . Keep on knocking.** The NLT interprets the three Gr. present imperatives as enjoining habitual prayer. The three corresponding promises of 7:8 stress the readiness of the heavenly Father to meet the needs of the disciples, who will receive what they need, find what they are looking for, and have the opportunities they desire.
7:9-11 The triple command/promise structure of 7:7-8 is now supported by two rhetorical questions (7:9-10; cf. Luke 11:11-12), which lead to a lesser-to-greater argument (7:11). Both rhetorical techniques have been used previously in the Sermon, questions in 5:13, 46, 47; 6:25-27; 7:3-4 and lesser-to-greater arguments in 6:26-30. Family imagery is the key to 7:9-11.
**You parents—if your children ask for a loaf of bread, do you give them a stone instead? Or if they ask for a fish, do you give them a snake?** The questions of 7:9-10 forcefully make the point that human parents (lit. "man," referring to a father) would not give their children (lit. "his son," although "children" is the literal translation in 7:11) a stone (cf. 4:3) and a snake when they are hungry and ask for bread and fish. The argument of 7:11 builds on the normal human situation; even though human parents are sinful, they generally know how to meet their children's basic needs and act accordingly.
**how much more will your heavenly Father give good gifts to those who ask him.** Prayer is thus encouraged all the more by the force of Jesus' lesser-to-greater logic, which augments the threefold promise of 7:8.
Careful readers of this passage will note that the positive, gracious tone of 7:7-11 provides a welcome change from the many prohibitions that have preceded it. Commands have led to reassurance. Kingdom standards are high, but disciples should not be discouraged or anxious in pursuing them. God is infinitely better than the best of human parents, and he promises to supply the needs of his family. A similar argument with feminine imagery is found in Isa 49:15.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
These verses are in the form of an _inclusio_ , with "your heavenly Father [will] give good gifts to those who ask" in 7:11 corresponding to "Keep on asking and you will receive" in 7:7 (cf. John 16:23-24). Hagner (1993:173) is right that on the surface, 7:7-11 is about prayer and has no obvious connection to the preceding or following topics. However, other scholars (e.g., Gundry 1994:119, 123) attempt to find a connection in the common theme of how to treat people. If this is the case, the passage teaches that one must treat people with discernment, not being judgmental (7:1-5) or gullible (7:6), but displaying the same generosity exhibited by the heavenly Father in answering prayers (7:7-11). In so doing, they must remember the "golden rule" and treat others as they would like to be treated (7:12). Carson (1984:186) finds a connection by relating 7:7-11 as the disciples' resource, as they aspire to the greater righteousness taught by Jesus from 5:21–7:6. But it must be admitted that neither of these options shows a really convincing connection. Davies and Allison (1988:626-627) present an interesting comparison of the structure of 7:1-12 to that of 6:19-34, though their discussion of the connection of 7:1-12 to the preceding and following contexts is not as helpful (1988:677-678).
Jesus on Prayer. Matthew 7:7-11 may be regarded as a sort of postscript to the model prayer of 6:9-13 (cf. Luke 11:1-13). That prayer builds on the truth that religious duties are to be performed for God's eyes only (6:4, 6, 18). He sees what is done in private and will reward his disciples. Additionally, Jesus assured the disciples that their heavenly Father knew what they needed even before they could ask him (6:8, 32). So it has already been taught that God is aware of his disciples and their needs. Accordingly, 7:7-11 goes even further by stressing that the God who knows his disciples' needs will certainly answer their prayers (7:7-8) from the depths of his goodness (7:11).
In the midst of their trials, disciples of the Kingdom are often tempted to think that God is unaware of their problems and needs. That understandable but absolutely mistaken notion is put to rest by Matthew 6:8, 32—"your Father knows." Even when they are assured that God knows their needs, disciples still wonder at times whether God is able to answer their prayers, but 7:7-8 makes it abundantly clear that an answer is certain to come—"you will receive." And even when disciples believe that God knows and will answer, they may doubt that the answer is good. But they are comforted by the affirmation of God's benevolence provided by 7:9-11—"how much more will your heavenly Father give good gifts." God is not ignorant. God is not impotent. God is not malevolent. These truths must be learned and relearned daily in the crucible of Christian experience.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. The Golden Rule (7:12; cf. Luke 6:31)
12 "Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets."
## NOTES
7:12 **Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you.** Because it is connected to the preceding verses by the Gr. conjunction _oun_ [TG3767, ZG4036] ("therefore"; not translated in NLT), this verse (cf. Luke 6:31) should be understood as a conclusion to everything said since 5:20. In one sense, 7:12 can be understood as concluding from God's benevolent response to the wishes of his disciples that his disciples should likewise do for others whatever they would like to be done for them. But in a wider and much more profound sense, 7:12 concludes the entire body of the Sermon that began in 5:17 with Jesus' statement of his mission. Just as he did not come to cancel but to accomplish the purpose of the law and the prophets, so his disciples must live according to Scripture.
The essence of the law and the prophets is that one should treat other humans just like one would like to be treated by them (cf. 19:19; 22:34-40). All of Jesus' teaching since 5:21 about the greater righteousness necessary for his Kingdom (5:20) is summarized here by the "golden rule." It may be argued that Jesus sets this "rule" in the unique context of his own words and deeds, which manifest the nearness of the Kingdom, but it is well known that similar "rules" may be found in Jewish and Greco-Roman literature of the period. See Davies and Allison (1988:686-688) for examples. The wellspring for Jesus' teaching was, of course, the Hebrew Bible (Lev. 19:18, 34; Exod 23:4-5). Jesus brought the law and prophets to their intended goal, setting their teaching in the context of his own definitive eschatological message.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Inspired by the beneficence of their heavenly Father, disciples of the Kingdom must be like him. As their Lord had come not to abolish but to accomplish the purpose of the law and the prophets, they too should live by a transcendent ethic. These themes meet in 7:12, where doing good to others (as the heavenly Father does; cf. 5:45-48) is identified as the quintessence of biblical ethics. The general statement of 7:12 condenses the 39 books of the Hebrew Bible into 12 words in the NLT. In 5:21–7:11, Matthew has summarized the definitive teaching of Jesus on several key areas of ethical and religious life. Matthew presents this definitive teaching as climactic in nature (5:17-20)—a more profound ethical standard could not be conceived in his view. The ethic is explained in the concrete contexts of obeying the Torah (5:21-48), practicing religious duties (6:1-18), dealing with material possessions (6:19-34), relating to people (7:1-6), and praying (7:7-11).
The Father's character and standards as incarnated in the Son's ministry of word and deed is the basis for this sublime ethic. "Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you" could be construed as a sort of "ten commandments" of Jesus:
1. You will not commit "verbal murder" (5:21-26). You will make reconciliation with fellow disciples your first religious priority.
2. You will not commit "mental adultery" (5:27-30). You will deal decisively with your sinful thoughts.
3. You will not divorce, except when infidelity has occurred (5:31-32). You will make every effort to remain with your spouse.
4. You will not make vows (5:33-37). You will always tell the truth.
5. You will not seek personal retribution (5:38-42). You will be generous even to those who injure you.
6. You will not hate your enemies (5:43-48). You will love and pray for your persecutors.
7. You will not perform religious duties to gain temporary human approval (6:1-18). You will perform religious duties only to gain eternal divine reward.
8. You will not be anxious over things (6:19-34). You will be exclusively loyal to God's Kingdom and righteous standards.
9. You will not be judgmental or naive in your estimate of fellow humans (7:1-6). You will examine your own life before making judgments about others.
10. You will not avoid prayer because you doubt God's goodness (7:7-11). You will believe that God is good and rest in his answers to prayer.
Conclusion. With the summarizing statement of the "golden rule" in 7:12, the Sermon's main body has concluded. Jesus came not to abolish but to fulfill the law and the prophets (5:17), and he requires that his disciples do no less. The summation of the law as loving one's neighbor or doing for others whatever one would like them to do to him is therefore not a higher law that replaces the Torah but the true goal of the law. (Paul's view is similar on this point; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). The Sermon will now conclude with solemn warnings on the necessity of obedience to his teaching (7:13-27).
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. Warnings (7:13-27)
13 "You can enter God's Kingdom only through the narrow gate. The highway to hell[*] is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose that way. 14 But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult, and only a few ever find it.
15 "Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves. 16 You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit. 18 A good tree can't produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can't produce good fruit. 19 So every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire. 20 Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions.
21 "Not everyone who calls out to me, 'Lord! Lord!' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. 22 On judgment day many will say to me, 'Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.' 23 But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God's laws.'
24 "Anyone who listens to my teaching and follows it is wise, like a person who builds a house on solid rock. 25 Though the rain comes in torrents and the floodwaters rise and the winds beat against that house, it won't collapse because it is built on bedrock. 26 But anyone who hears my teaching and doesn't obey it is foolish, like a person who builds a house on sand. 27 When the rains and floods come and the winds beat against that house, it will collapse with a mighty crash."
## NOTES
7:13-14 **The highway to hell is broad . . . the gateway to life is very narrow.** This image (cf. Jer 21:8; Luke 13:23-24) contrasts the narrow gate and the difficult road that lead to life with the wide gate and broad highway to "hell" (lit. "destruction" or "ruin").
7:15-16 The second and most complex picture of contrasting responses to the Kingdom is found in 7:15-23. The vivid imagery of this section is drawn from both animal (7:15) and plant (7:16-20) life and is meant to portray the false prophets who endanger the journey of the disciples (cf. Luke 6:43-44). The section begins with the general warning of 7:15, which compares the deceptiveness of the false prophets (cf. 24:11, 24) to vicious wolves (cf. John 10:12; Acts:20:29) that somehow appear as sheep (10:16; 25:33; cf. Ps 78:52).
**harmless sheep.** The word "harmless," though clearly implied by the metaphor, is not in the Gr. text. This warning is followed by the basic instruction on how to detect the marauding wolves (7:16a).
**identify them by their fruit.** The notion of identifying the false prophets by their fruit (lit. "fruits" here and throughout the section except for 7:19; cf. 3:8, 10; 12:33; 13:8, 26; 21:19; John 15:2-8; Gal 5:22) involves an abrupt shift of metaphor from the animal kingdom to that of plants.
**Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?** The plant metaphor continues in 7:16b with a rhetorical question that highlights the folly of expecting harmful weeds to produce beneficial fruit. These false prophets are in some sense part of the community of the disciples, since they call Jesus "Lord" and minister in his name (7:21-22; cf. 10:16; 24:11, 24).
7:17-18 **A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit.** The imagery of the rhetorical question of 7:16 is the basis for the developed imagery of 7:17-19, where "good fruit" answers to the grapes and figs, and the "bad tree" corresponds to the thornbushes and thistles. The same idea is stated first positively and then negatively in the parallel clauses of 7:17-18. Both good and bad trees produce corresponding fruit (7:17); it is impossible for them to do otherwise (7:18; cf. Jas. 3:12).
7:19 **every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire.** Here the imagery reminds the reader of John the Baptist's stern words, which speak of eschatological judgment (3:8-10; cf. 13:40, 42, 50; 18:8-9; 25:41). Disciples (good trees) repent and obey Jesus (good fruit). Others (worthless trees) turn away from God and his Kingdom and live accordingly (bad fruit).
7:20 Here Jesus draws a conclusion that repeats verbatim the words of 7:16a. Thus the _inclusio_ structure of 7:16-20 involves the initial statement of a thesis (7:16a) followed by supporting argument (7:16b-19), which brings one full circle back to the initial statement, restated as a conclusion (7:20). The conclusion of the matter is that the false prophets' sheep-like appearance need not deceive the disciples because their true identity can be perceived by examining their deeds or works, metaphorically described as "fruits." For Matthew, one's spiritual identity is determined not by what one says but by what one does, because what one does inexorably reveals one's heart. In this situation as in many others, the truism holds—actions speak louder than words. The latter are empty and hypocritical when the former are missing. For Matthew, "faith and works never part company" (Davies and Allison 1988:705).
7:21-23 Jesus now turns from the works of the false prophets to their words (cf. Luke 6:46; 13:25-27). It is noteworthy that Jesus refers to the Father as "my Father" in 7:21 (cf. 6:9, 15). This is evidently due to his unique sonship (cf. 3:17) and his unique role as the Father's appointed eschatological judge.
**On judgment day.** Lit., "that day" (cf. 10:15; 11:22, 24; 24:19, 22, 29, 36, 38; Isa 10:20).
**many will say to me, "Lord! Lord!" We prophesied . . . cast out demons . . . and performed many miracles in your name.** These people claim they have prophesied, exorcised demons, and done many miracles in Jesus' name (cf. 4:24; 8:3, 13, 16; 9:6, 22; 10:1, 8; 12:24-29). The problem is not that there is no fruit, but that the fruit is counterfeit, though the false prophets claim it is genuine (cf. 13:24-30, 36-43, 47-50; 24:23-28). Only those who do the Father's will (6:10; 12:50; 21:28-32; 26:42) will enter the Kingdom.
7:23 **I never knew you.** Jesus' reply is chilling: he affirms that despite their claims he never "knew" (cf. 25:12) the false prophets. He does not accept their addressing him as Lord, and he utterly renounces them as his followers. This expression is akin to OT passages in which God's knowledge of his people implies a personal relationship, not merely an awareness of facts (Heb. _yada'_ [TH3045, ZH3359]; Gen 18:19; Ps 1:6; Jer 1:5; Amos 3:2; cf. John 10:14; 1 Cor 8:3; Gal 4:9; 2 Tim 2:19).
**Get away from me, you who break God's laws.** An allusion to Ps 6:8 (cf. 25:41), this statement seems to be a key to the identity of the false prophets (though see the cautions of Davies and Allison 1988:718-719). It describes them literally as those "who do lawlessness" (cf. 24:12 where lawlessness is probably connected with the false prophets in 24:11, as well as 13:41; 23:28), which means that they take a lax view of the law and the need of obedience to it. Jesus came to fulfill the law (5:20), so antinomians, those who disregard the law, are not genuine disciples no matter how many spectacular deeds they perform. Jesus' disciples must be on guard against these counterfeit prophets who will lead them away from the narrow road of repentance and down the wide boulevard of lawlessness.
7:24-27 These verses (cf. Luke 6:47-49) present a third picture of contrasting responses to the Kingdom. The form of the language used in 7:24, 26 ("anyone who . . .") amounts to an implied invitation to obey and an implied warning to those who refuse to obey. Again Matthew employs parallel contrasting statements.
**Anyone who listens to my teaching and follows it is wise, like a person who builds a house on solid rock.** The wise (cf. 10:16; 24:45; 25:2, 4, 9) response to the message of the Kingdom is pictured as building one's house on bedrock.
**anyone who hears my teaching and doesn't obey it is foolish.** The foolish (cf. 5:22; 23:17; 25:2, 3, 8) response is pictured as building one's house on sand. When the trials of life, pictured as rains, floods, and winds, beat upon it, the house built on sand falls with a crash—but the house wisely built on bedrock does not collapse. Evidently, the houses are pictured as being built along a "wadi," which is a dry gulch in the summer but becomes a raging torrent during the winter rains.
It is important to note that both the wise and foolish builders hear the teaching of Jesus. It is his teaching, no longer that of Moses, that is the standard of judgment. But it is not enough to have heard the teaching of Jesus. Hearing and knowing the teaching of Jesus are worthwhile activities only when they result in application. The false prophets, whatever their appearance and words, are lawless. The wide gate, though attractive, leads to destruction. Eschatological judgment utterly destroys houses built on sand, but houses built on rock withstand it. (See 16:18 for the use of the building metaphor in a different context.)
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The statement of the epitome of Kingdom ethics in 7:12 ends the body of the Sermon. There are no more commands to be obeyed, except for those that warn against disobedience. Matthew 7:13-27 is a warning that features three pictures of contrasting responses to the message of the Kingdom.
Matthew 7:13-27, the conclusion to the Sermon, is divided by the NLT into four paragraphs: 13-14, 15-20, 21-23, and 24-27. But the judgment scene in 7:21-23 is clearly tied to the parabolic language of 7:15-20, since both paragraphs speak of false prophets (7:15, 22; cf. 24:5, 11, 24) whose evil deeds (7:17-19, 22) are known (7:16, 20, 23) and judged (7:19, 22-23). Therefore, 7:15-20 (actions of the false prophets) is linked to 7:21-23 (words of the false prophets), and there are really only three sections in 7:13-27. These verses constitute a stern warning that presents two contrasting responses to the Sermon in the form of three metaphors: (1) two gates (7:13-14; cf. Luke 13:24); (2) two trees (7:15-23; cf. Luke 6:43-46); and (3) two builders (7:24-27; cf. Luke 6:47-49).
The chart below portrays the ethical dualism of 7:13-27, which vividly and repeatedly contrasts discipleship with antinomianism. Such dualism has roots in the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Deut 30:15, 19; Jer 21:8; Ps 1). It is found in intertestamental literature (e.g., _4 Ezra_ 7:6-14), Qumran texts (e.g., 1QS 3:20-21), early Christian literature ( _Didache_ 1–6, _Barnabas_ 18–20), and rabbinic literature ( _m. Avot_ 2:12-13; _Sifre_ 86a). | DISCIPLESHIP | ANTINOMIANISM
---|---|---
Two gates _(7:13-14)_ | Narrow gate | Wide gate
|
Difficult way | Broad way
|
Life | Destruction
|
Few | Many
Two trees _(7:15-23)_ | True Prophets (implied) | False prophets
|
Sheep | Wolves
|
Good trees | Bad trees (thorns, thistles)
|
Good fruit (grapes, figs) | Bad fruit
|
Life (implied) | Judgment (fire)
|
Doing the Father's will | Saying "Lord, lord . . ."
Two builders _(7:24-27)_ | Wise person | Foolish person
|
Hears/obeys Jesus | Hears/does not obey Jesus
|
House built on rock | House built on sand
|
House stands during flood | House falls during flood
Two Roads. This section begins with a command to enter by the narrow gate (7:13a). Then there are two symmetrical contrasting statements supporting the command. The first (7:13b) explains that many (those who are spiritually complacent) take the gate and road to destruction, evidently because this looks like the easy way. The second (7:14) speaks, in contrast, of the few (those who are spiritually committed) who opt for the difficult path to life (cf. 19:24). The narrow gate and the difficult road are metaphors for repentance and Kingdom ethics, and the relatively few who find this route are the disciples. The description of the road as difficult may allude to trials caused by persecution (cf. 5:10-12; 10:16-23; 13:21; 24:9, 21, 29). "Finding" the gateway to life implicitly pictures the activity of discipleship as a search for the Kingdom, the opposite of the passive complacency that takes the easy way. "Life" is the full experience of eternal fellowship with God, the polar opposite of the destruction of hell. It is roughly synonymous with the future manifestation of the Kingdom (19:23-24; cf. 18:8-9; 19:29; 25:46).
It is difficult to know exactly how to imagine the gates and roads of Matthew 7:13-14. Some take it that one travels the road and then comes to the gate, but this reverses the order of the terms as they occur in the text. Although it is not necessary to answer this question to "get the picture," it is helpful to picture a wall with a narrow gate and a wide gate. One can easily enter the wide gate, and once inside, the path of antinomianism is smooth. But suddenly, as if a bridge has collapsed without warning, one arrives in hell. The wide path that seemed to promise freedom has ended in destruction—separation from God. By contrast, when one takes the difficult step of entering the narrow gate, the path of discipleship can be very arduous. But suddenly one is ushered into eternal life. The rugged path that threatened to destroy has ended in freedom, sharing in the life of God. These two gates and roads vividly indicate that those who do not turn from sin to God take an easy road, but it leads to the most difficult destination imaginable. But those who take the difficult way of the Kingdom arrive at the best possible destination, where they experience the ultimate in the life of the Father.
The contrast of the many and the few in 7:13-14 is sobering. While in one sense there will be many who opt for the rigorous way to life (cf. 8:11; 20:28), the many who become disciples are relatively few when compared with all of humanity (cf. 22:14). Instead of speculating on the number of the elect (Luke 13:23-24), disciples should strive first to enter the narrow gate themselves. Then they should focus on their master's universal authority and his command to make disciples from all the nations of the earth (24:14; 28:18-20).
Two Trees. Jesus' plain words in 7:15-23, which clearly distinguish between two kinds of fruit and two kinds of trees, seem to be regularly blurred in some circles. At times, evangelical Christians tend to exchange Jesus' stark soteriological dualism for the "cheap grace" thinking that says that many who luxuriate on the broad path will somehow after all end up in the Kingdom with those who have made the rigorous trek of discipleship. That there should be anything controversial about Christ's Lordship in salvation is amazing when one considers a text such as Matthew 7:15-29. Elsewhere in Matthew, the metaphor of fruit has been used to show that only an upright lifestyle is compatible with discipleship (3:10; 12:33; 13:18-23, 37-42; cf. 10:22; 19:16-30; 24:13). Matthew would agree with James 2:26 that "faith without works is dead." While this teaching must not be made even more rigorous by legalistic and perfectionistic accretions, neither must it be diluted by antinomianism. Even Paul, to whom antinomians regularly appeal, frequently stressed the necessity (not the option) of perseverance and good works (e.g., Rom 2:13; 3:8; 11:22; 13:14; Gal 5:6; Eph 2:10; Col 1:23; Titus 2:7, 14; 3:8, 14).
But the focus of the good and bad trees in Matthew 7:15-23 is on false prophets, who are likened not only to bad trees that produce worthless fruit but also to wolves that masquerade as sheep. This disguise is extremely deceptive—the wolves are even able to perform the "sheep-like" activities of prophecy, exorcism, and miracles, and they do not hesitate to mouth the Lordship of Jesus. Though the situation is grim, there is a solution. These wolves masquerading as sheep can be unmasked when their works, pictured as fruit, are inspected by the standards of the Sermon. If their ethical activities are incompatible with the values of the Kingdom expounded here, they are to be identified and exposed as false prophets. Their spectacular charismatic achievements aside (24:23-28; cf. Deut 13:1-5), their ministries will only detour would-be disciples from the repentance road to life onto the antinomian highway to hell. Beware!
It would be wrong to conclude from this warning against antinomian prophets that Matthew takes a consistently dim view of prophets and their charismatic activities. Jesus himself is the prophet par excellence, and he commissioned his disciples to do powerful deeds (10:1, 8) and to preach, which to some extent is related to prophesying (10:6). Such ministry is to be supported by the disciples, whose reception of prophets will bring them a reward equivalent to that of the prophets themselves (10:41). Indeed, Jesus promised to send future prophets (23:34), but their destiny is to share in the persecution that their master and his other disciples would experience. Thus, Matthew opposes antinomianism, not prophets per se.
Two Builders. The comparison of discipleship to the construction of a house in 7:24-27 is very effective. This picture is found elsewhere in Scripture (Deut 28:15, 30; Prov 10:25; 14:11), especially in Ezekiel 13:8-16, which denounces false prophets as those who build a defective wall that falls down during a storm. This metaphor also rings true today, since one regularly hears of housing problems, caused by shoddy craftsmanship and inferior materials, which come to light during times of extreme weather. But what is the difference between a wise builder who constructs a solid house and a foolish cobbler who throws up a shoddy house? In Jesus' metaphor, the difference is the obedient deeds of wise disciples who act on what they hear from their master, contrasted with the inactivity of the complacent hearers who do nothing. The former build an enduring house on rock, the latter a doomed edifice on sand.
For the third time, the clear warning has been given. Neither the ancient crowds who originally heard the Sermon from Jesus on the mount nor the modern readers who encounter the gist of it today in Matthew 5–7 can dare to walk away unchanged, complacent. To do so is ultimately to not weather the storm, to be eternally separated from Jesus, to arrive in hell. So let us heed the warnings, weather the storm, enter the Kingdom, and find life! We have been warned.
## TEXT [Commentary]
12. Result of the Sermon (7:28-29)
28 When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29 for he taught with real authority—quite unlike their teachers of religious law.
## NOTES
7:28-29 Just as 4:25–5:2 led the reader from the narrative into the discourse, so 7:28–8:1 leads the reader out of the discourse back into the narrative. Both passages mention large crowds following Jesus and his respective ascent or descent of the mountain.
**the crowds were amazed at his teaching.** The response of the crowd (cf. 4:25; 5:1) was amazement (7:28; cf. 13:54; 22:33).
**he taught with real authority.** They were overwhelmed, not by the novelty or clever presentation of the teaching, but by Jesus' uniquely authoritative way of teaching, which was so different from what they were used to hearing from their "teachers of religious law" (7:29; cf. the discussion in the notes on 2:4). Jesus' teaching assumed a transcendent authority that their teachers rightly did not claim to possess.
**quite unlike their teachers of religious law.** The pronoun "their" evidently distinguishes Jewish scribes in general from those Jewish scribes who believed in Jesus (13:52; 23:34). Matthew as narrator did not mention whether the crowd engaged Jesus with questions or disputed any his teaching. Thus, the crowd's amazement further underlines the unique authority of Jesus as the definitive teacher of the law (cf. 17:5) who expects a righteousness greater than that of the religious leaders (5:20).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The alternation of narrative and discourse blocks throughout Matthew, signaled at the end of each discourse by the recurring words, "When Jesus had finished saying . . . ," is probably the most distinctive element of Matthew's approach to telling the story of Jesus. The crowd's amazed response to Jesus' authoritative words contained in the discourse (Matt 5–7) anticipates their amazed response to his authoritative works contained in the narrative (8:1–9:34; esp. 8:9; 9:6-8). The effect of this alternating narrative and discourse structure is heightened by the matching "bookends" of 4:23 and 9:35.
The crowd's amazement at the authority of Jesus was evidently derived not so much from the clarity and bluntness of what he said but more from his daring juxtaposition of his own views with statements from the Torah in the contrasts of 5:21-48. Jesus' teaching included exegesis of Torah, but it was not primarily exegesis of Torah. Jesus did not cite human authorities who might support his views. This authoritarian mode of communication put Jesus above even Moses, who received the Torah from the finger of God on Mount Sinai. As astonishing as that revelation to Moses was, God's revelation of his ultimate law through the definitive teachings of Jesus the Messiah was even more so.
This authority of Jesus that amazed the crowds has only begun to impact the reader of Matthew. Matthew has yet to show that the deeds of Jesus are also authoritative (Matt 8–9), that the disciples will soon receive like authority for their early ministries (10:1), and that even fuller authority will ultimately be given to the exalted Jesus, who will use it to commission his disciples for worldwide ministry to all the nations (28:18-20).
Conclusion. Jesus' Sermon on the Mount gets to the heart of authentic discipleship. Various camps within evangelicalism push pop theologies to the effect that Jesus' disciples are popular with people, keep a list of human rules, have many possessions, perform spectacular works, or have deep knowledge. But the Sermon explicitly denies that any of these is at the heart of authentic discipleship. Instead, the Beatitudes summarize the character traits that, by God's grace, become the norms for disciples of the Kingdom. Jesus' Kingdom fulfills the Old Testament; the disciples of this Kingdom obey the ethical norms of the Old Testament in a manner transcending that of the Pharisees. The disciples' religious devotions are done privately, and their public careers put the righteousness of the Kingdom first. They also avoid judgmentalism and gullibility in their dealings with people. In loving God wholeheartedly and in loving their neighbors as themselves, they take the narrow way, they produce good fruit, and they build their lives on bedrock.
Those of us who hear the Sermon on the Mount's emphasis on _doing_ risk misunderstanding it when we compare it with the apostle Paul's emphasis on _believing_. All this stress in the Sermon on works may sound like the type of religion Paul condemned in Galatians. But any "contradiction" is only apparent. Paul was writing to correct the error that made salvation a result of works, while Jesus' Sermon speaks of the works that result from repentance. According to Matthew, only those who repent when they hear the Kingdom message are inclined by God's grace to obey the norms of the Kingdom by loving God and neighbor (5:17; 7:12). And according to Paul, authentic religion is essentially a matter of "faith expressing itself in love" (Gal 5:6). All who seek to grasp the Sermon must ask themselves whether _they_ have been grasped by it. If they have, they will express their repentance in love to God and neighbor.
## TEXT [Commentary]
III. The Galilean Ministry Continues (8:1–10:42)
A. Three Cycles of Miracles and Discipleship (8:1–10:4)
1. Three healing miracles (8:1-17)
1 Large crowds followed Jesus as he came down the mountainside. 2 Suddenly, a man with leprosy approached him and knelt before him. "Lord," the man said, "if you are willing, you can heal me and make me clean."
3 Jesus reached out and touched him. "I am willing," he said. "Be healed!" And instantly the leprosy disappeared. 4 Then Jesus said to him, "Don't tell anyone about this. Instead, go to the priest and let him examine you. Take along the offering required in the law of Moses for those who have been healed of leprosy.[*] This will be a public testimony that you have been cleansed."
5 When Jesus returned to Capernaum, a Roman officer[*] came and pleaded with him, 6 "Lord, my young servant[*] lies in bed, paralyzed and in terrible pain."
7 Jesus said, "I will come and heal him."
8 But the officer said, "Lord, I am not worthy to have you come into my home. Just say the word from where you are, and my servant will be healed. 9 I know this because I am under the authority of my superior officers, and I have authority over my soldiers. I only need to say, 'Go,' and they go, or 'Come,' and they come. And if I say to my slaves, 'Do this,' they do it."
10 When Jesus heard this, he was amazed. Turning to those who were following him, he said, "I tell you the truth, I haven't seen faith like this in all Israel! 11 And I tell you this, that many Gentiles will come from all over the world—from east and west—and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob at the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven. 12 But many Israelites—those for whom the Kingdom was prepared—will be thrown into outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
13 Then Jesus said to the Roman officer, "Go back home. Because you believed, it has happened." And the young servant was healed that same hour.
14 When Jesus arrived at Peter's house, Peter's mother-in-law was sick in bed with a high fever. 15 But when Jesus touched her hand, the fever left her. Then she got up and prepared a meal for him.
16 That evening many demon-possessed people were brought to Jesus. He cast out the evil spirits with a simple command, and he healed all the sick. 17 This fulfilled the word of the Lord through the prophet Isaiah, who said,
"He took our sicknesses
and removed our diseases."[*]
## NOTES
8:1 **mountainside.** This recalls 5:1 and frames the intervening discourse. A mountain is repeatedly mentioned in Matthew at theologically significant junctures (4:8; 5:1; 8:1; 14:23; 15:29; 17:1, 9, 20; 21:21; 24:3, 16; 26:30; 28:16). Some argue that this implies a comparison between Jesus and Moses. The "crowds" are also frequently mentioned in Matthew (4:25; 5:1; 8:1, 18; 9:8, 33, 36, 37; 11:7; 12:15; 13:2; 14:22-23; 15:30; 19:2; 21:9; 26:55).
8:2 Here the first of three sets of three miracle stories begins (see the analysis in the following commentary). The first set involves individuals who were at the margins of Israelite society.
**a man with leprosy.** Matthew's first story is about a leper who was healed by Jesus (cf. Mark 1:40-44; Luke 5:12-14). Lepers were social and religious outcasts in biblical times. Leprosy in the Bible can refer to a variety of skin problems and should not be equated with the dreaded modern malady known as leprosy (Hansen's disease). Even garments could become "leprous" (Lev 13:47-59). In all these cases, the priests were responsible to make official rulings on the ritual status of the questionable individual, impurity or uncleanness versus purity or cleanness. They were to quarantine questionable individuals until their status became clear. Lepers were not permitted any social contact with other Israelites but were to shout warnings of their impurity to those who might come near them (Lev 13:45-46). As such, this leper was rather audacious even to approach Jesus (contrast Luke 17:12) and to request cleansing, although his posture, his calling Jesus "Lord" (See the discussion under Christology in the Major Themes section of the Introduction.), and his confidence in Jesus' power indicate his great respect for Jesus (8:2). Although this leper's faith is striking, the next story involves even greater faith. (For the OT background on leprosy see Lev 13-14; Num 12:10-15; 2 Kgs 5 [cf. Luke 4:27]; 2 Chr 26. In the Gospels see Matt 8:2-3; 10:8; 11:5; 26:6; Mark 1:40-42; 14:3; Luke 4:27; 5:12-13; 7:22; 17:12. See also _m. Negai'm_.)
8:3-4 **I am willing.** Jesus' willingness, not his touch, was all that was necessary for the healing (cf. 8:8), but the touch was probably the first human contact the leper had experienced throughout the duration of his illness. Touching the leper was even more audacious than the leper's approaching Jesus, since Jesus would also became ritually unclean when he touched the leper (Lev 5:3). But the touch, instead of defiling Jesus, immediately cleansed the leper.
**Don't tell anyone about this. Instead, go to the priest.** Jesus' instructions (8:4) for the cleansed leper were twofold. First, he was to tell no one about his cleansing. This surprising command may be due simply to the necessary priority of the second instruction, to go to a priest to certify the cleansing and to offer a sacrifice (cf. Luke 17:14), which was in keeping with Lev 13–14, especially 14:2ff. The instructions were also intended to make the cleansing of the leper a testimony to the religious leaders (cf. 10:18; 24:14). This is not simply a testimony of the cleansed leper's fitness to rejoin society, as Hagner maintains (1993:200). Jesus commissioned his disciples to cleanse lepers (10:8), and he mentioned the cleansing of lepers as a messianic sign when he was asked by John's messengers whether he was the Messiah (11:5).
Why did Jesus command silence about the healing (cf. 9:30; 12:16; 16:20; 17:9)? W. Wrede's "messianic secret" theory (cf. Tuckett 1983) took texts like this one, which are more prominent in Mark, as non-historical interpolations by the early church, designed to explain why so few people believed in Jesus during his lifetime. But such a theory is not only dubious on historical grounds, it is also unnecessary given the nature of Jesus' mission. At times, Jesus found it necessary to withdraw from the scene when his popularity due to his miracles reached near-riot proportions (e.g., 4:23–5:1; 8:18; 13:2; 21:11). At other times, he seemed simply to need solitude, a respite from the press of the multitudes (14:23). Also, there was the looming presence of the religious leaders, whose hostility seemed to grow in direct proportion to Jesus' popularity with the masses (9:32-34; 12:22-24; 15:21; 16:4, 20). But it was not only prudent for Jesus to avoid inflaming the messianic speculations of the crowds and to keep a low profile at times (9:30; 14:13; 17:9), it was also in keeping with messianic prophecy (12:15-21; cf. Isa 42:1-4).
8:5-9 Matthew's second story is about the healing of a Roman officer's servant at Capernaum (cf. Luke 7:1-10).
**Roman officer.** This is often translated "centurion" since the Gr. word's etymology contains the word "one hundred" (cf. Cornelius in Acts 10).
**young servant.** Or "child" (NLT mg). This reflects the semantic range of the Gr. word _pais_ [TG3816, ZG4090], which can connote a child (cf. 2:16; 17:18; 21:15; Luke 2:43) or a servant (14:2; Luke 7:7; 12:45; 15:26). Some think the term should be translated "boy" or "son" (e.g., Hagner 1993:204). Capernaum has already been mentioned as Jesus' hometown in 4:13 (cf. 9:1; 17:24). It will later be excoriated by Jesus for its unbelief (11:23), a marked contrast to the officer's faith.
8:8 **Lord.** As in the previous case of the leper, the officer sought out Jesus and called him "Lord." He pled for his servant because he had severe pain and paralysis (8:6; cf. 4:24). Jesus immediately agreed to go to the servant and heal him but the officer then displayed his amazing faith. He acknowledged he was unworthy (cf. 3:11) for Jesus to come to his house, which may imply both a degree of perception of Jesus' Lordship and an awareness that coming to the house of a Gentile was not an acceptable Jewish practice (cf. Acts 10:28; 11:3). Having already addressed Jesus as "Lord" twice (8:6, 8), the officer compared Jesus' authority (cf. 7:29; 9:6-8) to his own position in the military chain of command.
**Just say the word.** He realized that only a word from Jesus was necessary (8:8; cf. 8:16). Such healing from a distance is unprecedented in Matthew at this point and was quite unusual in the ancient world.
8:10-12 **he was amazed.** Since the officer was a Gentile, his astonishing faith (cf. 9:2, 22, 29; 15:28; 21:21 and contrast "little faith" in 6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8) became the occasion of an even more astonishing teaching. Matthew 15:21-28 contains a very similar story.
**those who were following him.** This phrase implies discipleship at some level, and it likely includes both the inner circle and the crowd that was less committed to Jesus (cf. 8:1).
**many Gentiles will come from all over the world.** After contrasting the Gentile officer's faith with the lack of faith shown by many Jews, Jesus spoke of the future Kingdom as a time when "many Gentiles" ("Gentiles" is not in the Gr. text but is a correct interpretation) from all over the world (cf. Ps 107:3; Isa 2:2-3) would sit with Abraham and the patriarchs, enjoying the great eschatological feast (cf. Isa 25:6-9; Matt 22:1-14; 25:10; Luke 14:15-16; Rev 19:9), while many Israelites would be excluded. Thus, the officer became a forerunner or harbinger of future Gentile salvation, a theme related to Matthew's stress on the universal mission of the church (28:20).
The presence of many Gentiles at the feast signals a reversal in which many Israelites, "those for whom the Kingdom was prepared" (NLT; lit. "the sons of the Kingdom"; cf. the metaphor in 9:15; 23:15), will not experience its glories. Instead of being the privileged companions of the patriarchs at a banquet where they would sink their teeth into a sumptuous meal, they will be thrown into a horrible place of darkness (the opposite of Christ's light in 4:16; cf. 22:13; 25:30), where they will grind their teeth in pain (cf. 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30). This frightening imagery achieves for the reader one of the most sobering moments of Matthew's story of Jesus and his teaching. Yet one must note that Matthew's reversal and "universalism" must be qualified by the word "many," which describes both the included Gentiles and the excluded Jews. The reversal is not as "absolute" as some indicate (e.g., Hagner 1993:206). For the inclusion of Gentiles in God's plan, see also 1:1, 3-5; 2:1-12; 3:9-10; 4:15-16; 15:21-28. For the exclusion of unbelieving Jews, see 3:9-10; 21:43.
8:13 **Jesus said to the Roman officer.** Jesus turned from addressing his evidently stunned followers to the officer whose shocking faith led to the shocking teaching of 8:10-12. He told the man to go home since, lit., "Because you believed, it has happened" (cf. 9:29; 15:28). At that time his servant was healed, not by touch as in the case of the leper, but from a distance. The precise timing and the distance are noted to underline the supernatural authority of Jesus.
8:14-15 The third and final healing story in Matthew's first set is the shortest. It involves Peter's mother-in-law (cf. 1 Cor 9:5), who was **sick in bed with a high fever** at Peter's house (cf. Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39). It is possible that excavations in Capernaum have uncovered the foundations of this very house (Davies and Allison 1991:33-34). The leper took the initiative for his own cleansing, the centurion took the initiative for his servant's healing, but here the initiative is solely that of Jesus.
**Jesus touched her hand.** As in the case of the leper, this healing involved touch (cf. 9:29; 20:34). Again, the authority of Jesus is underlined, this time by the immediacy and totality of the healing. As soon as Jesus touched her, the woman got up and started serving Jesus. The NLT's "prepared a meal" is plausible, but the Gr. text is not that specific. This brief story is clearly chiastic in structure (Hagner 1993:209), with the touch of Jesus transforming the situation from one in which he served her to one in which she served him:
Jesus sees Peter's mother-in-law
She is sick in bed
with a fever
Jesus touches her
The fever stops
She gets up
She serves Jesus
8:16-17 The leper was healed somewhere on the journey between the mountain and Capernaum, the officer's servant upon arrival in Capernaum, and Peter's mother-in-law in Peter's house. Evidently this string of healings encouraged the residents of the area to bring many other sick and demon-possessed people to Jesus later that evening (cf. Mark 1:32-34; Luke 4:40-41).
**with a simple command.** The exorcism of the evil spirits was lit. "by a word" (cf. 8:8), which again shows the authority of Jesus.
**he healed all the sick.** Jesus' authority is further stressed by the statement that he healed "all" who were ill. This summary statement (cf. 4:23-24; 9:35) leads into another OT fulfillment formula in 8:17, which cites Isa 53:4.
**He took our sicknesses and removed our diseases.** Isaiah 53, a passage rich in messianic significance, describes the servant (Isa 52:13; 53:11) as a despised person who bears the sins (Isa 53:4-6, 8, 11-12) of others without complaint (Isa 53:7). The words used by Matthew in 8:17 are evidently his own translation of Isa 53:4 (he also alludes to Isa 53 in 26:28; 27:12, 38). The words usually refer to literal illness and pain but can also serve as metaphors for sin. Matthew obviously took them in the physical sense here. See the commentary below for further discussion of the matter of healing in the atonement.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
As previously discussed (see the commentary on 7:28-29), Matthew presents the authoritative words of Jesus in chapters 5–7 and the authoritative works of Jesus in chapters 8–9. This prepares the reader for the mission of the disciples, who are commissioned in chapter 10 for a similar ministry of word and works. Thus, in chapter 8, Matthew begins a selected and representative list of Jesus' miracles in order to demonstrate his authority (8:9; 9:6-8). Jesus' miracles have already been generally noted (4:23-24) and will be summarized again (8:16; 9:35). Matthew's tendency toward topical arrangement and the location of the parallel passages in Mark and Luke make it likely that some of these events actually occurred before the Sermon on the Mount.
The stories included in Matthew 8–9 are not presented in a random fashion but in a clear pattern. It appears that Matthew in 8:2–9:17 has interwoven three sets of three miracle stories with two sets of two discipleship stories. This is followed by a pericope stressing the need for messengers of the Kingdom (9:35-38). All in all, the emphasis is on faith, following Jesus in discipleship, and mission to the Gentiles. As Davies and Allison explain (1991:1-2), some have stressed that there are actually ten miracles in this section (8:18-26 contains two miracles), and have concluded that Matthew intended a comparison between Jesus' miracles and Moses' ten plagues on Egypt. But the arguments for this are unconvincing. Yet the structure of three cycles, each containing alternating stories about miracles and discipleship, remains, as the following analysis shows:
1a. Miracles (8:1-17): Three healing miracles
1b. Discipleship (8:18-22): Two would-be disciples confronted
2a. Miracles (8:23-9:8): Three miracles (storm, demons, paralytic)
2b. Discipleship (9:9-17): Association with sinners, newness
3a. Miracles (9:18-34): Three miracles (daughter/woman, blind men, demons)
3b. Summary/transition (9:35-38): Plentiful harvest yet few workers
The three miracle stories that comprise Matthew's first set are about a leper (8:1-4), a Roman centurion (8:5-13), and a woman (8:14-17). It is interesting that the first and third stories are both about Jewish people and both conclude with Scripture citations (Lev 13:49; 14:2 in 8:4 and Isa 53:4 in 8:17). Although the second story does not contain a Scripture citation, it is nevertheless the featured story in this set because (1) it is given more space than the other two; (2) it stresses the key theme of Matthew 5–9, the authority of Jesus (8:9); and (3) it emphasizes the faith of a Gentile (8:10-12), another key Matthean motif.
Jesus and the Outsiders. Why did Matthew select—from the many stories about healing evidently available to him—these three stories about a leper, a Gentile, and a woman? It is very likely that the selection was made to show Jesus as a friend to those who were powerless in Jewish society. The leper was ceremonially impure and would thus have been an outcast from all Jewish social and religious functions. The Roman officer would have had military power over the Jews, whose land his empire occupied, but due to his ethnicity, he would have had no religious clout whatsoever in Judaism. Peter's mother-in-law would have no ceremonial or ethnic handicaps, but her sex would preclude her from many privileges available only to males. None of the three would have been able to be admitted to the "court of Israel" in the Temple, where Jewish males presented their offerings to the priests (Bruner 1987:307-308). Nevertheless, it is these people, who for various reasons were at the margins of society, whose healing stories Matthew tells. Matthew does not feature stories about the social elite of his day but stories about those who lacked status. Why is that?
Matthew was consistently interested in those who were "down and out" because he knew they had been surprisingly open to the message of the Kingdom. From the tawdry women in Jesus' genealogy (ch 1), to the appearance of the bizarre astrologers (ch 2), to those healed in Matthew 8, and on and on throughout this Gospel, Matthew frequently shows his readers not only that Jesus will save his people from their sins but also that his people are amazingly diverse. Matthew's community was most likely made up of Christian Jews (See "Occasion of Writing and Audience" in the Introduction), and it was crucial for them to acknowledge their mission to disciple not only their own nation (10:5-6), but all the nations (24:14; 28:19). Matthew therefore presented Jesus not only as the Messiah of all nations but also as the model for ministry that brings the Messiah to all the nations. Jesus' disciples in Matthew's community must go beyond their understandable but mistaken scruples in the areas of ritual purity, ethnic exclusivity, and sexual stereotypes. And so must any Christian community today examine its own myopia in comparable areas. Whatever one's culturally driven views of illnesses, ethnicity, and sex, one must submit to the Master's model and love outsiders as he did (Bruner 1987:308; Keener 2000:364).
Healing and the Atonement. The use of Isaiah 53:4 in Matthew 8:17 has occasioned much debate over the relationship of Jesus' ministry and death to physical healing. It is helpful to note that pain, illness, and death are rooted in sin (Gen 3), and that redemption from sin will ultimately result in the redemption of the body (Rom 8:23) and the end of pain (Rev 21:4). Matthew saw the healings and exorcisms performed by Jesus as indications of the presence of the Kingdom, the first few raindrops before the full outpouring of that future reality (11:2-6; 12:28-29). Therefore, Matthew connected Jesus' healing of physical illnesses to his substitutionary death, as well as to his ministry of healing (20:28; 26:28). In connection with the Kingdom message, the healings are tokens of the ultimate eschatological results of Jesus' redemption. While some have made far too much of this, taking it as supporting the notion that Christians need never be sick, the answer to the perennial question about whether there is healing in the atonement is "yes." But this must be qualified by pointing out that such healing is guaranteed for all only in the future aspect of the Kingdom. There are individual experiences of healing in the present age, but these do not warrant the notion that Christians can simply "name and claim" their healing on the basis that it has already been guaranteed by the atonement. Matthew 8:17 applies Isaiah 53:4 to Jesus' earthly ministry, not to his atoning death. The point of the miracles is to stress Jesus' unique authority, not the blessings he brings to his people. This is Christology, not therapy.
The role of faith in these three healings is not uniform. Faith was obviously involved in the first two healings, that of the leper and the officer's servant, though in the latter case it was not the faith of the servant but of the officer. In the third case, that of Peter's mother-in-law, there is no indication of anyone's faith precipitating the healing. Perhaps it is the leper whose words best imply an appropriate view of healing. The leper knew that Jesus _could_ heal him if he _wished_ to heal him. This puts omnipotence and providence side by side. There is no doubt about the former—Jesus is able. But the leper did not presume upon Jesus' sovereignty—that would be putting the Lord to the test (cf. Matt 4:7). The disciple cannot dictate that God is willing to heal but must rest in a sovereign providence that makes no mistakes (Bruner 1987:299-300). The leper was not deficient in faith and was amazingly proficient in spiritual wisdom.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Two would-be disciples (8:18-22)
18 When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he instructed his disciples to cross to the other side of the lake.
19 Then one of the teachers of religious law said to him, "Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go."
20 But Jesus replied, "Foxes have dens to live in, and birds have nests, but the Son of Man[*] has no place even to lay his head."
21 Another of his disciples said, "Lord, first let me return home and bury my father."
22 But Jesus told him, "Follow me now. Let the spiritually dead bury their own dead.[*]"
## NOTES
8:18-20 Two interviews with would-be disciples (8:18-20 and 8:21-22; cf. Luke 9:57-62) now occur between the first (8:1-17) and second (8:23–9:8) sets of three miracle stories. These two interviews illustrate the nature of Jesus' ministry and show by contrast what type of disciples he was seeking (see 6:33).
**the other side of the lake.** In view of the ever-increasing press of the crowd at Capernaum, Jesus commanded the disciples to go to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (8:18), which required a boat trip. This command is important in the ensuing narrative, since it places the interviews with the would-be disciples in the context of the account of the stilling of the storm, which encourages the reader to view the historical storm also as a metaphor of discipleship (Bornkamm 1963:52-57). Matthew's narrative itself implies the reader should understand 8:18 as a call to discipleship, not just as a command to get away from the crowd by taking a boat across the lake.
**one of the teachers of religious law.** Lit., "one of the scribes." He addressed Jesus as teacher and promised to follow him wherever he might go (8:19). Thus far in Matthew, the scribes have not been presented positively (2:4; 5:20; 23:13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29; but see 13:52; 23:2-3, 36), and in Matthew those who call Jesus "teacher" are not disciples (12:38; 19:16; 22:16, 24, 36). The scribe's promise was evidently made solely on his own initiative, and Jesus took a dim view of it.
**the Son of Man has no place even to lay his head.** Jesus starkly alluded to his itinerant form of ministry, which left him with not even a place to sleep. Even the animals have that (cf. 6:26). Matthew's readers can only conclude that the scribe's enthusiasm was superficial and that he had not counted the cost of discipleship. Perhaps his enthusiasm was due to witnessing the many miracles Jesus was performing. Be that as it may, his promise was hasty and unreliable.
It is important to note that 8:20 is the first time the Christological title "Son of Man" occurs in Matthew. Here it stands in place of the pronoun "I." This much debated title, derived from Dan 7:13-14, stresses the exaltation of Jesus (cf. 9:6; 19:28; 25:31; 26:64). Here it describes a strange situation: even though Jesus is the exalted miracle-working Messiah, he is a homeless itinerant preacher, deprived of basic creature comforts. When he stays in a house, it is someone else's, like Peter's in this context. (For additional discussion of the "Son of Man," see "Christology" in the Major Features section of the Introduction, and the convenient summaries in Davies and Allison 1991:43-53; Hagner 1993:214-215.)
8:21-22 **Lord, first let me return home and bury my father.** A second individual made an excuse for not immediately following Jesus (cf. 1 Kgs 19:19-21). Matthew's use of the phrase "another of his disciples" in 8:21 shows that both the scribe in 8:20 and the person who was concerned about his father here were followers of Jesus in some sense of the word. Matthew used the term "disciple" approximately 75 times and the precise nuance of the term must be picked up in each context (cf. Wilkins 1988). This second individual purported to have a family situation that took priority over following Jesus—namely, his father's funeral. Some scholars think that such Jewish customs as extended mourning or eventual secondary burial of the deceased's bones in an ossuary are implied here (cf. the possibilities in Davies and Allison 1991:56-58). But such conjectures must not be allowed to soften the harshness of Jesus' words. Jesus will have none of the excuse.
**Let the dead bury their own dead** (NLT mg). Though there may be hyperbole here (cf. 5:29-30), Jesus demanded immediate loyalty to the Kingdom ministry and stated that those who were not loyal to the Kingdom could care for the burial. The NLT's "spiritually dead" attempts to clarify Jesus' pun that the dead can bury their own dead. These "dead" people who would bury the would-be disciple's father were dead to the Kingdom, not alive to its unique eschatological demands that supersede even one's duty to one's parents. This would-be disciple seems to have had the opposite problem of the scribe in 8:18-20. That scribe's superficial enthusiasm is a foil to this would-be disciple's excessive caution.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The two individuals who spoke to Jesus about discipleship in 8:18-22 illustrate opposite problems. The first (8:18-20) was carried away with emotional enthusiasm but had not fully considered the sacrifice involved in an itinerant ministry. Perhaps his mind was on all the miracles Jesus had been performing and he wanted to continue to experience these glorious events. But there will be miracle workers who are not acknowledged by Jesus as his own at the final judgment (7:21-23), and true disciples must be willing to be deprived of life's basic necessities.
The second individual evidently had a more realistic understanding of the sacrifice entailed in Jesus' ministry. He wanted to postpone following Jesus until he could bury his father, an excuse that seems legitimate in view of Genesis 50:5, Exodus 20:12, and Deuteronomy 5:16. Jesus himself, in the context of debunking the traditions of the Pharisees, reaffirmed the Torah on the necessity of honoring one's parents (15:4-6). But, harsh as it may seem, Jesus taught that the demands of his Kingdom revise one's notions of family (cf. 10:37; 12:46-50).
Neither individual was the stuff of which a faithful disciple is made. The first's enthusiasm was due to his ignorance of the cost of discipleship, and the second's timidity was due to his awareness of that cost. Jesus needs people who have counted the cost of discipleship, people whose faith is tempered with a realistic understanding of the deprivations that may come to the one who follows Jesus (cf. 10:34-39; 16:24-25; 19:29; 20:26-27). We hope that both these individuals were prompted by these rebukes to examine themselves and later to follow Jesus. But the silence of Matthew's narrative is sobering.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. A storm tests the disciples' faith (8:23-27)
23 Then Jesus got into the boat and started across the lake with his disciples. 24 Suddenly, a fierce storm struck the lake, with waves breaking into the boat. But Jesus was sleeping. 25 The disciples went and woke him up, shouting, "Lord, save us! We're going to drown!"
26 Jesus responded, "Why are you afraid? You have so little faith!" Then he got up and rebuked the wind and waves, and suddenly there was a great calm.
27 The disciples were amazed. "Who is this man?" they asked. "Even the winds and waves obey him!"
## NOTES
8:23 **into the boat . . . with his disciples.** Lit. "his disciples followed him." The NLT does not translate the word "follow," which obscures a theologically significant detail—the disciples followed Jesus' initiative in getting into the boat. This is another indication that this nature miracle is also a test of discipleship.
8:24-25 **a fierce storm.** Matthew uses the Gr. word _seismos_ [TG4578, ZG4939] to describe the storm. This is an unusual nuance for a word that generally refers to the shaking of earthquakes (cf. 24:7; 27:51).
**Jesus was sleeping.** Perhaps his sleep has implications of trusting in God's protection (Ps 3:5-6; Prov 3:24-26), or perhaps the reader is to recall OT texts in which it seemed that during trials God had gone to sleep and forgotten Israel (Pss 35:23; 44:23-24; 59:5; Isa 51:9).
**The disciples went and woke him up, shouting.** The disciples frantically went to him and pled for deliverance from imminent death by drowning (cf. 14:30). The force of this storm must have been significantly strong since it terrified even the four disciples who were commercial fishermen, used to the weather on the Sea of Galilee (cf. 4:18-22).
8:26 **You have so little faith!** Instead of immediately responding to their plea for deliverance from the storm, as would be expected, Jesus first rebuked them for their lack of faith (cf. 14:31).
**rebuked the wind and waves.** The sudden squall was over as quickly as it began. This calming of the storm by Jesus is reminiscent of God's actions in the OT (Pss 65:7; 89:8-9; 107:23-32; Isa 51:9-10; Jonah 1:1-16). Jesus' "rebuke" of the wind and waves is striking in that these supposedly "natural" forces were personified and spoken to in language used at times in exorcisms (cf. 17:18). This may imply that this "nature" miracle was actually a victory over evil supernatural forces.
8:27 **The disciples were amazed.** The theme of amazement recalls 7:28 and anticipates 9:8, 33; 12:23 (cf. 21:20). Jesus' authority over nature produced the same result with the disciples as his authoritative teaching had with the crowd.
**Who is this man?** More lit., "what sort of man is this?" This causes the attentive reader's mind to wander back to Matthew 1–4, where Jesus' unique birth, early experiences, baptism, and temptation all imply his uniqueness among human beings. Due to the work of the narrator, the reader knows more about this than the disciples do.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The story of the calming of the storm (cf. Mark 4:35-41; Luke 8:22-25) begins the second set of three miracle stories (8:23-27, 28-34; 9:1-6). Matthew's previous narrative has shown Jesus' authority over sin, disease, and demons, but here he demonstrates Jesus' authority over nature. It also appears, from the way Matthew tells the story, that the nature miracle is intended to teach about discipleship. Davies and Allison (1991:68) point out a chiastic structure that places the key interaction between Jesus and the disciples in 8:25-26 at the center of the pericope. Jesus planned to go to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (8:18). Two would-be disciples apparently delayed the voyage, but their interviews with Jesus teach the reader important lessons about following Jesus. As soon as the voyage commences, the storm erupts and the disciples' "little faith" (cf. 6:30; 14:31; 16:8) is tested. It is genuine faith, but it is limited in its awareness of the power of Jesus. After the challenge of the storm, and the rebuke of Jesus, their faith was ostensibly strengthened. The most critical concern of Jesus' disciples is not the potential persecutions or disasters they might face. Rather, it is the quality of their faith, which is directly proportionate to the accuracy of their perception of Jesus, the object of their faith. On this point, it is instructive to recall 8:26, where in the middle of a disaster in process, as the boat is about to go under, Jesus addresses the disciples' weak faith before he rebukes the storm. This indicates that the first priority of both ancient and modern disciples must be to focus on the power of Jesus, not the power of life's "storms," which sometimes threaten to overcome them. It may seem that Jesus is "asleep," unaware of their difficulties, but he is able to handle the difficulties easily, as his disciples maintain their faith in him. They must realize that Jesus, the object of their faith, is able to get them to "the other side of the lake."
Blomberg (1992:150) makes the valid point that this pericope is more about Christology than discipleship, but Matthew would not bifurcate the two. The interrelationship between Christology and discipleship is especially apparent in 8:25, where the disciples do indeed call Jesus "Lord" in the face of imminent death by drowning, but evidently do not have a strong grasp on the authority implied by that title. The Old Testament texts cited in the note on 8:26 show that Matthew is not the first to use storms on the sea as metaphors for life's perils. Matthew's teaching is that disciples must trust in the potency of Jesus in order to overcome anemic faith. Unless they are saved from little faith, they will indeed perish. One need not go so far as to allegorize the boat as symbolizing the Church (as did Tertullian in _On Baptism 12) to come to this conclusion_.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus exorcises demons (8:28-34)
28 When Jesus arrived on the other side of the lake, in the region of the Gadarenes,[*] two men who were possessed by demons met him. They came out of the tombs and were so violent that no one could go through that area.
29 They began screaming at him, "Why are you interfering with us, Son of God? Have you come here to torture us before God's appointed time?"
30 There happened to be a large herd of pigs feeding in the distance. 31 So the demons begged, "If you cast us out, send us into that herd of pigs."
32 "All right, go!" Jesus commanded them. So the demons came out of the men and entered the pigs, and the whole herd plunged down the steep hillside into the lake and drowned in the water.
33 The herdsmen fled to the nearby town, telling everyone what happened to the demon-possessed men. 34 Then the entire town came out to meet Jesus, but they begged him to go away and leave them alone.
## NOTES
8:28-29 **arrived on the other side of the lake, in the region of the Gadarenes.** The group evidently crossed the Sea of Galilee from Capernaum on the northwest to some locale on the eastern shore. The town of Gadara was five or six miles from the Sea of Galilee, but according to Josephus ( _Life_ 9.42), the region of Gadara was adjacent to the sea. See Blomberg (1987:149-50) for discussion of the geographical and textual questions (some manuscripts read "Gerasenes" [TG1046A, ZG1170] and others read "Gergesenes" [TG1086, ZG1171]), which arise from a comparison of Matt 8:28 with Mark 5:1 and Luke 8:26.
**Have you come here to torture us before God's appointed time?** The demons wondered whether Jesus had come to torture (cf. Rev 14:10; 20:10) them prematurely, before the appointed time of judgment (cf. 13:30; 16:3). Their awareness of Jesus' identity as the Son of God, a key Matthean theme (1:23; 2:15; 3:17; 4:3, 6; 14:33; 16:16; 17:5; 27:54; cf. Jas 2:19), and of the future judgment of demons (25:41; cf. 1 Cor 4:5) is striking. Their question points up Matthew's "inaugurated" eschatology, in which the future reign of God is already encroaching on Satan's domain, even now (cf. 12:28).
8:30-32 **the demons came out of the men and entered the pigs.** The presence of a large herd of pigs nearby provided a way for the demons to escape Jesus' presence. The demons themselves spoke, requesting to be sent into the pigs if Jesus cast them out of the men (cf. 12:43-45). It may be that the reader is to think of the pigs and the previous cemetery residence as ritually unclean for Jews. It is striking that the demoniacs have thus far done all the talking in this pericope, and that Jesus' reply is only one word, "Go!" (NLT's "all right" is based on the contextual notion of permission). Jesus granted them this wish, and they entered the pigs, precipitating a stampede of the entire herd down a steep hillside into the lake, where all the pigs were drowned. This dramatic result from a single word of Jesus underscores his authority. This authority, although genuine, is not yet exercised as universal, since Jesus freed the two men but permitted the demons to destroy the pigs and presumably to continue their devious activities elsewhere before their ultimate judgment. The herding of pigs (cf. Luke 15:15) and the eating of pork were of course forbidden to Jews (Lev 11:7; Deut 14:8; Isa 65:4; 66:3, 17; 1 Macc 1:47; 2 Macc 6:18-23; _m. Bava Qamma_ 7:7). Evidently the reader is to think of Gadara as Gentile or mixed race territory, since it is east of the Sea of Galilee and supports pig herding. One wonders whether the demoniacs were Gentiles, since the mission to the Gentiles had not yet begun (10:5-6, 18), but this was a chance encounter, not a sustained mission.
8:33-34 **the entire town came out to meet Jesus.** The result of the exorcism was that those who herded the pigs observed their watery demise and spread the news to the people of the nearby town, who came to Jesus en masse to ask him to go away. Their reasoning is not made clear, but it is plausible that this region was populated by Gentiles whose livelihood depended upon the drowned pigs. If so, economics was more important to these people than the freeing of the demoniacs from Satan's dominion. Matthew's Christian Jewish readers would probably take the opposite view, that the destruction of a herd of unclean pigs was appropriate and even humorous. At any rate, this negative response to a miracle is quite a contrast to the responses to Jesus' miracles preciously narrated by Matthew.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The story of the exorcism in the land of the Gadarenes (8:28-34; cf. Mark 5:1-20; Luke 8:26-39) is the second miracle story in the second set of three such stories in Matthew 8–9 (see the commentary on 8:1-17. Matthew 9 will conclude the second set with the story of the healing of the paralytic (9:1-8).
Demon possession appears frequently in Matthew (4:24; 7:22; 8:16, 28, 31, 33; 9:32-34; 10:8; 11:18; 12:22, 24, 27, 28; 15:22; 17:18), but the details of this particular incident are remarkable. Previously, Jesus had cast out demons, and he had just calmed a storm, but here his single word, "go," demonstrates his authority over demons, animals, and the Sea of Galilee. The authority of Jesus' words (7:28-29) and deeds (8:9; 9:6) is thus a key point of this story, as it is in all of Matthew 8–9. But this episode shows that the authority of Jesus operates alongside his mercy (Davies and Allison 1991:116). Jesus treated these dangerous demoniacs with the same compassion that has been implicit in his ministry since 4:23 and that will become explicit in 9:36 as a model for his disciples' own mission in chapter 10.
Evidently, the country of the Gadarenes was Gentile country. The rejection of Jesus by the inhabitants may parallel 10:13-15, in which the disciples are warned that their mission trip will also result in rejection in some households and villages. The rejection of Jesus is exemplary for his disciples, who should not view themselves as above their Master. Rather, they must face rejection and persecution realistically, with faith instead of fear (10:24-33). All who minister for Jesus need to be reminded that, at times, their best intentions for unbelievers will be received in a negative way (cf. 7:6). Those who do not know Jesus often make it clear that they do not want to know about Jesus. But people who reject his authority exclude themselves from his mercy. Carson's wry comment (1984:219) about the Gadarenes puts it well: "They preferred pigs to persons, swine to the Savior." But the grace of God can still turn those who reject Jesus into his followers when the gospel is faithfully proclaimed in the words and deeds of Christians.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Jesus heals a paralyzed man (9:1-8; cf. Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26)
1 Jesus climbed into a boat and went back across the lake to his own town. 2 Some people brought to him a paralyzed man on a mat. Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralyzed man, "Be encouraged, my child! Your sins are forgiven."
3 But some of the teachers of religious law said to themselves, "That's blasphemy! Does he think he's God?"
4 Jesus knew[*] what they were thinking, so he asked them, "Why do you have such evil thoughts in your hearts? 5 Is it easier to say 'Your sins are forgiven,' or 'Stand up and walk'? 6 So I will prove to you that the Son of Man[*] has the authority on earth to forgive sins." Then Jesus turned to the paralyzed man and said, "Stand up, pick up your mat, and go home!"
7 And the man jumped up and went home! 8 Fear swept through the crowd as they saw this happen. And they praised God for giving humans such authority.
## NOTES
9:2 **Be encouraged, my child. Your sins are forgiven!** His encouraging words to the paralyzed man and his tender reference to him as "my child" (cf. 9:22) again show that Jesus' authority was exercised with compassion. The forgiveness of sins reminds the attentive reader of the prediction of 1:21 that Jesus would save his people from their sins (cf. 3:6; 6:12; 9:13; 11:19; 12:31; 26:28).
9:3 **blasphemy! Does he think he's God?** The teachers of religious law thought Jesus had blasphemed (cf. 26:65; John 10:33). Ironically, it was not Jesus who was blaspheming, but the scribes themselves, who ascribed his miracles to Satan (cf. 9:34; 12:24, 31; 26:65). The NLT's "Does he think he's God?" is not in the Gr. text but brings out the implications of Jesus' forgiving the man's sins. Blasphemy amounts to the slander of God by reviling his name or by pretending to do what he alone can do. The forgiveness Jesus granted the paralyzed man was not pretend, but the teachers' words slandered the Son of God.
9:4-5 **Jesus knew what they were thinking.** Jesus' knowledge of the teachers' thoughts (cf. 12:25; 22:18) should be attributed to the ministry of the Holy Spirit in his life, not simply to his divinity (3:16; 4:1; 12:28; cf. 10:20).
**Why do you have such evil thoughts?** In light of this knowledge, Jesus asked them why they thought evil of him and then posed a second question, aimed at the root of their evil thoughts (9:4-5). Evidently the teachers thought Jesus spoke of sin being forgiven because it was easier to pronounce forgiveness than to heal paralysis. Indeed, it is easier, so Jesus told them that the imminent healing would demonstrate his authority to forgive sins.
9:6 **So I will prove.** Lit., "in order that you may know." The man's immediate healing and departure (9:7) underlines the central point of Matt 9–10: Jesus' works confirm Jesus' authority as the Son of Man (cf. 8:20; Dan 7:13-14) to forgive sins. Both his teaching and his miracles demonstrate the authority of God's rule on earth.
9:7-8 From 9:3 the reader knows that one result of this incident is the opposition of the teachers of religious law. But here two additional results are explained: the paralytic's healing and the crowd's reaction. First we see the paralyzed man get up, pick up the mat he was lying on, and go home (9:7). Then, though there is no comment on Jesus' emotions in this account, the crowd's emotions are described. The miracle caused a reverential fear in them (cf. 14:30; 17:6; 27:54), and they praised God for giving such authority to humans.
**for giving humans such authority.** The use of the plural here is either a reference to the idea that the authority given to Jesus benefits mankind or that the authority has been given to Jesus and his disciples (cf. 16:19; 18:19).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 9:1-8 completes the second set of three miracle stories with the account of the healing of a paralyzed man. Thus, the three miracle stories of Matthew 8:23-9:8 correspond to 8:1-17, and the second pair of discipleship stories in Matthew 9:9-17 answers to 8:18-22. Rejected in a Gentile area (Gadara), Jesus traveled "back across the lake to his own town" (Capernaum, not Nazareth; cf. 4:13; 8:14), where he healed a paralyzed man (cf. 4:24; 8:6). Comparison of this account with the synoptic parallels (cf. Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26) shows that Matthew probably placed this story here for topical rather than chronological reasons.
The pericope on the healing of the paralytic (9:1-8) occurs after a return to Capernaum (9:1), where Jesus intentionally stressed his authority to forgive sins (9:2). This occasioned the charge of blasphemy from the scribes who were present (9:3). Jesus read their thoughts—they were thinking he vainly pronounced forgiveness because he was unable to heal (9:4-5). In response, Jesus healed the man to demonstrate his authority to forgive (9:6-7), and the crowd marveled at his authority and glorified God (9:8).
The healing of the paralyzed man extends the authority of Jesus to its most crucial aspect, the forgiveness of sins. Readers of Matthew have already seen how Jesus taught with authority in the Sermon on the Mount (7:28-29) and have become aware of his authoritative acts of healing, even from a distance (8:9). But authority over the forgiveness of sins is much greater than authoritative words and actions. Authority to forgive sins gets to the root of the problems and illnesses that are the symptoms of sin. One can teach against sin, but this does not cause the sin to stop, let alone secure its forgiveness. One can heal sick people, but sooner or later they will get sick again, and ultimately they will die. Jesus' authority in these domains, as great as it is, pales in comparison to his authority to forgive the sins that are the root of all the other problems. Such authority is at the heart of Jesus' mission to save his people from their sins (1:21) by giving his life as a ransom for them (20:28), thereby inaugurating the new covenant (26:28; cf. Jer 31:31). As God's beloved Son, Jesus acts with divine prerogative. He does not blaspheme; he saves.
The relation of sin and sickness is a complex matter. Humans do not have the requisite insight to diagnose whether sin is the cause of sickness in individual cases (Job; Luke 13:1-5; John 9:2-3; Jas 5:15; but cf. Paul's apostolic insight in 1 Cor 11:30). Yet it is possible that Jesus, through the Spirit, knew that this man's illness was due to sin (Bruner 1987:329-330). And it is also possible that his illness was psychosomatic, and that the forgiveness of his sins freed his mind of guilt and thereby healed him (Barclay 1975:1.327-328). However, Matthew does not focus on the reason for the man's paralysis but on the authority of Jesus to forgive his sins. In the present age, the righteous may suffer many physical maladies. But in redemptive history, human sickness and death are ultimately the results of human sin (Gen 3). Human beings find themselves caught in the maelstrom of sickness and death because of the rebellion of the first Adam. But through the obedience of the second Adam, the new humanity can find immediate release from sin's bondage and ultimate physical healing as well (cf. Ps 103:3 and the comments on 8:17). Jesus' healings are a sign that the ultimate defeat of sin and Satan has begun.
It is significant that Matthew's portrayal of Jesus' response to the Jewish teachers here is not conciliatory but confrontational. The accusation of blasphemy contradicts Jesus' unique standing as the Son of God, and no gentle compromise is possible in this case. This confrontation signals that Matthew has begun to touch on the theme of opposition, which escalates as his story continues.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Jesus calls Matthew (9:9-13; cf. Mark 2:13-17; Luke 5:27-32)
9 As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man named Matthew sitting at his tax collector's booth. "Follow me and be my disciple," Jesus said to him. So Matthew got up and followed him.
10 Later, Matthew invited Jesus and his disciples to his home as dinner guests, along with many tax collectors and other disreputable sinners. 11 But when the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with such scum?[*]"
12 When Jesus heard this, he said, "Healthy people don't need a doctor—sick people do." 13 Then he added, "Now go and learn the meaning of this Scripture: 'I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.'[*] For I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners."
## NOTES
9:9 **a man named Matthew sitting at his tax collector's booth.** Somewhere near Capernaum Jesus encountered Matthew working at a tax collector's booth (cf. 5:46; 10:3). Matthew was called Levi in Mark and Luke. The collector's booth may have been near the Sea of Galilee, where Matthew would have collected taxes on fishermen or duties on goods brought into Antipas's domain by boat. The call of Matthew to follow Jesus recalls the previous call of four other disciples in 4:18-22 and anticipates the list of the Twelve in 10:1-4. One wonders whether there was any contact between Matthew and Jesus before the call, but as in 4:18-22, Jesus took the initiative, and Matthew responded immediately, without question.
**Follow me and be my disciple.** Although the words "and be my disciple" are not in the Gr. text, it makes explicit what is entailed in following Jesus. (Following Jesus is mentioned in 4:19-25; 8:1, 10, 19, 22; 9:9, 27; 12:15; 14:13; 16:24; 19:2, 21, 27-28; 20:29, 34; 21:9; 26:58; 27:55.)
9:10-11 **Later, Matthew invited Jesus and his disciples to his home as dinner guests.** The length of time between Matthew's call and the dinner mentioned here is not specified in the text, but it was likely a short time span. The NLT's translation of 9:10 expresses the likely view that Matthew invited Jesus and the disciples to a dinner at his house (cf. Luke 5:29), but the Gr. text is not explicit on this matter.
**many tax collectors and other disreputable sinners.** The NLT's somewhat redundant "disreputable" is not in the Gr. text, though it gives the right connotation. Undoubtedly, these were Matthew's friends and colleagues, who were invited to the dinner along with Jesus and his disciples (cf. 11:19; 21:31-32). Tax collectors would likely be unacceptable to the Pharisees due not only to their deserved reputation for extortion (cf. Luke 3:12-13) but also to their frequent associations with Gentiles. The term "sinners" (9:11, 13; 11:19; 26:45; cf. Mark 2:14-22; Luke 5:27-32) designates those whose behavior was egregiously ungodly, but from the Pharisaic perspective it may also include those who did not observe the traditional interpretations of the Bible (15:2) on such matters as ritual purity, food laws, and Sabbath observance. The Pharisees would not attend such a dinner as this, and they were offended that Jesus and his disciples did attend. Fellowship around a table was taken seriously in Jesus' time, as being an act that implies deeper unity than is currently attributed to it in the West. His participation in table fellowship probably should be viewed as a foretaste of eschatological festivities (8:11; 22:1-14; 25:1-13; 26:29).
**Why does your teacher eat with such scum?** The phrase "such scum" interprets the tone of the question, which lit. repeats the same terms used in 9:10, "tax collectors and sinners."
9:12-13 **Healthy people don't need a doctor—sick people do.** Jesus' answer depends upon a cultural association of sin with disease, which is involved in some way in 8:16-17; 9:1-8. Metaphorically and proverbially speaking, the sinners with whom he associated were "ill" and needed a "physician."
**I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.** This is an allusion to Hos 6:6, a prophetic critique of the mentality that prioritized the performance of religious ritual over the maintenance of personal integrity (cf. 5:7; 12:7; 1 Sam 15:22; Jer 7:22-23; Ps 40:6-8; Heb 10:4-9). Jesus bluntly put the two as "either-or" alternatives, but it is likely this is an idiomatic way of saying that God desires ethical loyalty more than participation in the sacrificial system (cf. Isa 1:10-17; Jer 7). The prophets did not want to abolish the sacrificial system but to reform it by stressing inner purity over ritual purity. Jesus' final words apply the metaphorical language to the reality of his mission—the "healthy" are those who think they are righteous, like the Pharisees (whose question was really an accusation), and the "sick" are those who realize that they need Jesus' "medicine." It is to this second group that Jesus was sent, and he called them to repentance (3:2; 4:17).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The second set of three miracle stories is now complete, so once again the narrative turns to a discipleship story (9:9-13; cf. Mark 2:13-17; Luke 5:27-32). This pericope clarifies the mission of Jesus by recounting events that transpired after the call of Matthew (9:9). After being called, Matthew had a dinner party for his associates, both old and new (9:10). Certain Pharisees accusingly asked Jesus' disciples about their social companions (9:11; cf. the similar story about Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10). The teaching about Jesus' mission flows from this controversy (9:12-13; cf. Hos 6:6).
As the ultimate and definitive teacher of the law (5:17), Jesus exemplified the ideals of Hosea 6:6 in calling Matthew the tax collector to be his disciple and in associating with tax collectors and sinners. While the Pharisees no doubt knew this text, they did not grasp its applicability to the matter of associating with outcasts. Jesus had previously exemplified such ideals in his ministry to the leper, the Roman officer, and Peter's mother (8:1-17). His Kingdom ministry is not circumscribed by ritual impurity, ethnicity, or gender, and neither will social stigmas limit its outreach. God's primary attribute in relating to sinful humans is mercy. Thus, God's primary desire for his people is for them to show mercy, not to offer sacrifices. Matthew portrays Jesus' ministry to outcasts as epitomizing this ideal. It is not that Jesus downplays adherence to the law or the sacrificial system, but that for him, adherence to the law starts with a compassionate heart. Davies and Allison (1991:105) put it well: "cultic observance without inner faith and heart-felt covenant loyalty is vain." Certain Pharisees opposed this kind of ministry.
Matthew skillfully presented the opposition to Jesus from the religious leaders as becoming more and more pronounced. Here the Pharisees questioned Jesus indirectly through his disciples, but later (excepting 17:24) the questions of the various Jewish religious leaders will be addressed to him directly (cf. 15:1-2; 16:1; 19:3; 21:16, 23; 22:16, 23, 35). Ultimately, Jesus "turns the tables" and asks them a question they either cannot or will not answer, and this effectively ends the pattern of interrogation (22:41-46). Jesus' social interaction with notorious sinners scandalized the Pharisees of his own day, and it likewise tends to embarrass those in our day whose views of separation from worldliness stress externals rather than personal integrity. Jesus and his disciples had no qualms about associating with sinners, and Christians today dare not hide their light under a basket due to legalistic scruples. Associations with unbelievers must be handled with wisdom, so that ethical compromise is avoided, but fear of such compromise cannot become an excuse for isolation from those who most need the message of the Kingdom (5:13-16). Associating with unbelievers is the way to summon them into the Kingdom of God.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. A discussion about fasting (9:14-17; cf. Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39)
14 One day the disciples of John the Baptist came to Jesus and asked him, "Why don't your disciples fast[*] like we do and the Pharisees do?"
15 Jesus replied, "Do wedding guests mourn while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. But someday the groom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.
16 "Besides, who would patch old clothing with new cloth? For the new patch would shrink and rip away from the old cloth, leaving an even bigger tear than before.
17 "And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. For the old skins would burst from the pressure, spilling the wine and ruining the skins. New wine is stored in new wineskins so that both are preserved."
## NOTES
9:14 **Why don't your disciples fast like we do and the Pharisees do?** The question of John's disciples regarding fasting (cf. 6:16, 18; Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39) indicates that they and the Pharisees regularly fasted but that Jesus' disciples did not. The phrase "like we do" should not be interpreted as meaning that Jesus' disciples fasted in a different manner than John's disciples and the Pharisees. John's ascetic lifestyle is mentioned elsewhere in Matthew (3:4; 11:18). His disciples evidently felt that the absence of fasting was inconsistent with Jesus' avowal of loyalty to God and the law of Moses. The fasting in question here was most likely the voluntary twice-weekly fast favored by the Pharisees (cf. Luke 18:12), not the obligatory fast commanded in connection with the Day of Atonement (Num 29:7-11), which Jesus and his disciples evidently kept. _Didache_ 8:1 says the Pharisees fasted specifically on Monday and Thursday and encourages Christians to fast on Wednesday and Friday (cf. 1QpHab 11:7; _Psalms of Solomon_ 3:8).
9:15 **Do wedding guests mourn while celebrating with the groom?** Jesus' answer employs images from weddings (9:15; cf. 22:1-14; 25:1-13), garment mending, and wine making (9:16-17) in a metaphorical fashion. Just as it would be inappropriate for "wedding guests" (lit., "sons of the wedding hall") to fast while they are with the bridegroom, so it was inappropriate for Jesus' disciples to fast while he was with them. The arrival of the long-awaited Messiah is hardly the time to mourn or fast. Note also that in the OT (e.g., Isa 54:5-6; 62:4-5; Hos 2:16-23), God is sometimes pictured as a bridegroom, and that John the Baptist used this image to describe Jesus accordingly (John 3:29).
**someday the groom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.** The mention of the groom being taken away (cf. Isa 53:8) is probably a veiled prediction of Jesus' arrest and crucifixion (cf. 12:38-40; 16:21; 17:9-13, 22-23; 20:28; 26:11).
9:16-17 **who would patch old clothing with new cloth? . . . And no one puts new wine into old wineskins.** The second part of Jesus' answer to the question of John's disciples contains two metaphors about the incompatibility of the new with the old, the first concerning patching garments (9:16) and the second concerning wine and wineskins (9:17). No one would patch an old garment with new cloth, since the new cloth would shrink when washed and the old garment would be ripped worse than before. Similarly, no one would put new wine in old wineskins, since the pressure from the fermentation process would burst the old, brittle skins (cf. Job 32:19). Rather, new wine would be put into new, flexible skins.
How do these two metaphors connect with the bridegroom metaphor of 9:15, and what is the answer to the question of John's disciples? Commentators (e.g., Blomberg 1992:159; Hagner 1993:244-245) take the point of the three metaphors to be the incompatibility of the old age, exemplified by the traditional piety of the Pharisees, with the new age, exemplified by the definitive climactic teaching of Jesus. The rule of God in Jesus' life, words, and works cannot coexist with the old ways (e.g., fasting) of Pharisaic Judaism. The weakness with this interpretation is that Jesus was answering John's disciples, not the Pharisees. The disciples were taught how to fast in 6:16-18. Also, Jesus indicates that his disciples would fast after he had gone. A different interpretive approach will be articulated in the commentary that follows.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This pericope concerning the question of John's disciples about fasting is similar to the previous pericope on associating with sinners in that in both stories Jesus' disciples did not follow the traditional practices of the Pharisees. They enjoyed table fellowship with undesirable persons and did not fast. So again the basic issue is the relationship of Jesus, his teaching, and his disciples, to Moses, his law, and his disciples (the Pharisees saw themselves in this role). While many interpreters argue that this pericope shows the fundamental incompatibility of Jesus and Moses, Israel and the Church, law and grace, this view cannot be sustained in light of Matthew 5:17-20. A more nuanced approach is needed, one that takes due note of the temporary presence of the bridegroom with the wedding guests. A wedding celebration obviously calls for a feast, not a fast. During the short time of messianic jubilation, while Jesus was with his disciples, fasting was inappropriate. But Jesus would not always be with the disciples (26:18), so the time while he was with them should be characterized by extraordinary joy and devotion. After Jesus was taken away, his disciples would fast once again.
Matthew 9:14-17 is a key text on the matter of continuity and discontinuity in biblical theology. While it has been argued above that the text does not teach a blunt supersessionism in which Jesus replaces Moses, it is clear that when the disciples fast after Jesus has been taken away, they will not go back to fasting as if he had never come. Jesus did not endorse the Pharisaic fasting traditions, but he did teach his followers how to fast (6:16-18). What did Jesus imply with the final clause of the pericope, "so that both are preserved"? Did he mean to say that the new wineskins and new wine are both preserved (Hagner 1993:244), or that the old wineskins and new wine are both preserved (Davies and Allison 1991:112, 115)? It appears, in light of 5:17-20 and Matthew's overall teaching, that the second option is best.
Jesus, as the ultimate teacher of Israel, preserved the law and prophets by fulfilling them, not by merely reiterating past teaching (which overstates continuity) or by bluntly jettisoning past teaching (which overstates discontinuity). Fasting is preserved, but in the new context of the righteousness of the inaugurated Kingdom, not in the old context of Pharisaic tradition.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Jesus raises a synagogue official's daughter and heals a woman (9:18-26)
18 As Jesus was saying this, the leader of a synagogue came and knelt before him. "My daughter has just died," he said, "but you can bring her back to life again if you just come and lay your hand on her."
19 So Jesus and his disciples got up and went with him. 20 Just then a woman who had suffered for twelve years with constant bleeding came up behind him. She touched the fringe of his robe, 21 for she thought, "If I can just touch his robe, I will be healed."
22 Jesus turned around, and when he saw her he said, "Daughter, be encouraged! Your faith has made you well." And the woman was healed at that moment.
23 When Jesus arrived at the official's home, he saw the noisy crowd and heard the funeral music. 24 "Get out!" he told them. "The girl isn't dead; she's only asleep." But the crowd laughed at him. 25 After the crowd was put outside, however, Jesus went in and took the girl by the hand, and she stood up! 26 The report of this miracle swept through the entire countryside.
## NOTES
9:18-19 **the leader of a synagogue came and knelt before him. "My daughter has just died," he said, "but you can bring her back to life again."** As the encompassing story of the official's daughter begins, the official expresses the hope that although his daughter has just died, Jesus can nevertheless revive her. Synagogue officials are also mentioned in Mark 5:22; Luke 13:14; Acts 18:8. According to a later passage from the Talmud ( _b. Pesachim_ 49b), such officials were highly respected.
**if you just come and lay your hand on her.** This is the only healing by the laying on of hands in Matthew (but cf. 8:15). The ruler's exceptional faith in Jesus is shown not only by these words but by his worshipful posture before Jesus (cf. 2:11; 8:2; 15:25). In response, Jesus said nothing but acted by rising and following the official, accompanied by his disciples (9:19). At this point (9:20) the story of the healing of the hemorrhaging woman begins.
9:20-22 Now the encompassed story of the healing of the woman is told.
**a woman who had suffered for twelve years with constant bleeding.** Her problem, a twelve-year chronic hemorrhage (evidently due to a uterine disorder), led her to touch the fringe of Jesus' cloak (9:20; cf. 14:36; 23:5; the required tassels of Num 15:38-39; Deut 22:12). The thoughts that caused her action are mentioned in 9:21.
**Daughter, be encouraged! Your faith has made you well.** In 9:22 Jesus encouraged her (cf. 9:2; 14:27) and pointed to her faith as the means of her healing. As in the healing of the leper (8:2-4), Jesus would technically contract ritual impurity by touching this woman (Lev 15:25-27; _m. Zavim_ 5:6; _Negaim_ 3:1; 13:9). However, her hemorrhage immediately vanished at his touch. Possibly, she approached Jesus from behind due to her condition of ritual impurity. The Gr. word that expresses her healing in these verses is _sōzō_ [TG4982, ZG5392], which may describe deliverance from physical problems (see 8:25; 14:30; 24:22; 27:40, 42, 49) as well as spiritual ones (1:21; 10:22; 16:25; 19:25). This is the most direct statement of the agency of faith in healing in Matthew. It was the power of the woman's faith, not some quasi-magical power of touching Jesus' garment, that accomplished her healing.
9:23-24 Here the encompassing story of the official's daughter resumes.
**he saw the noisy crowd and heard the funeral music.** Jesus arrived at the official's house to find a disorderly crowd and flute (or perhaps clarinet) players, indicating that it was believed that the girl had died. The NLT's "heard the funeral music" is a rendering of "flute players"—this renders explicit what is implicit in the text. Hired musicians were customarily included in wakes (cf. 11:17; 2 Chr 35:25; Jer 9:17; Ezek 24:17; Amos 5:16; Rev 18:22; Josephus _War_ 3.437; _m. Ketubbot_ 4:4; _m. Shabbat_ 23:4).
9:24 **Get out! . . . The girl isn't dead; she's only asleep.** Jesus told this unruly group to leave, since the girl was merely sleeping, not dead (cf. John 11:11-14; Acts 20:9-12). Most likely Jesus' words "the girl isn't dead" did not so much deny the fact of her death as its finality; they affirmed that she would be raised from death (Davies and Allison 1991:131-132; Hagner 1993:250). In any event, biblical language cannot be pressed into the mold of modern medical precision.
**the crowd laughed at him.** The skeptical laughter of the crowd underlines the greatness of the miracle that Jesus was about to accomplish.
9:26 **The report of this miracle swept through the entire countryside.** The news of this miracle immediately spread throughout the area (cf. 4:24; 9:31). The simplicity and compactness of this story should not take away from the fact that raising the dead is probably the most spectacular of all Jesus' miracles (cf. 10:8; Luke 7:11-17; John 11:43-44). Jesus' raising the dead reminds the reader of similar miracles done by Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 17:17-24; 2 Kgs 4:17-37). Davies and Allison (1991:125) raise the intriguing question of the placement of the most spectacular miracle here instead of at the end of this section (9:34). They answer it by noting that an exorcism appears at the end in order to further the theme of the Jewish religious leaders' increasing rejection of Jesus and their attribution of his miracles to the prince of the demons (9:32-34; cf. 12:24).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The miracle of raising the synagogue official's daughter from the dead (9:18-19, 23-26) encompasses the miracle of the healing of the hemorrhaging woman (9:20-22; cf. Mark 5:21-43; Luke 8:40-56). This complex or double pericope marks the first of the third set of three miracle stories in Matthew 8–9. Both stories stress the activity of faith in initiating touch as the means of healing. In comparison with Mark and Luke, Matthew's version of the double story is highly condensed. The placement of the story of the healing of the woman in the middle of the story of the raising of the official's daughter delays the outcome of the initial story and heightens the suspense for the reader.
The two miracles in this double story address two basic issues of human existence, the depths of parental love and the pain of chronic disease (in this case resulting in social ostracism due to ritual impurity). The synagogue ruler's love for his little girl confronted the power of death when he took the initiative to plead for Jesus to touch and heal her. The power of Jesus defeated the power of death, and a family was spared the shattering effects of the loss of a child. When one keeps in mind the already/not yet conception of the Kingdom in Matthew, the raising of the little girl hints at the ultimate resurrection of the dead by the power of Jesus (cf. 27:52).
The hemorrhaging woman took the initiative to touch Jesus' garment so that she could be rid of her chronic disease and thus free of its ritual impurity and able to experience normal human social relationships again. Her condition may not have been as hopeless as that of the official's daughter, but her despair must have been deep after twelve years in which she had found no relief. The Greek verb used for her "deliverance" ( _sōzō_ [TG4982, ZG5392]) implies an even greater deliverance from the sin that was the root cause of the physical infirmity. (See the notes and commentary on 8:17; 9:2, 6 for further reflection on this theme.)
As touching as these human needs are, the major thrust of Matthew's narrative is Christological. Jesus is presented once again as the One whose authority on earth to forgive sins is demonstrated by his powerful deeds of compassion (9:36). This presentation continues in the next two incidents, in which Jesus heals blind and mute men.
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. Jesus heals the blind and mute (9:27-34)
27 After Jesus left the girl's home, two blind men followed along behind him, shouting, "Son of David, have mercy on us!"
28 They went right into the house where he was staying, and Jesus asked them, "Do you believe I can make you see?"
"Yes, Lord," they told him, "we do."
29 Then he touched their eyes and said, "Because of your faith, it will happen." 30 Then their eyes were opened, and they could see! Jesus sternly warned them, "Don't tell anyone about this." 31 But instead, they went out and spread his fame all over the region.
32 When they left, a demon-possessed man who couldn't speak was brought to Jesus. 33 So Jesus cast out the demon, and then the man began to speak. The crowds were amazed. "Nothing like this has ever happened in Israel!" they exclaimed.
34 But the Pharisees said, "He can cast out demons because he is empowered by the prince of demons."
## NOTES
9:27 **Son of David.** This title implies that Jesus possesses messianic authority to heal (1:1; 12:22-23; 15:22; 20:30; cf. Mark 10:47-48; Luke 18:38-39). As Jesus moved onward toward Jerusalem, his Davidic origins become an occasion for controversy (12:3; 21:9, 15; 22:42, 45).
9:28 **They went right into the house.** The initiative of these two men was remarkable, since they followed Jesus right into a house.
**Do you believe I can make you see?** Although their initiative had already demonstrated their faith, Jesus asked them if they believed he could heal them, and they readily affirmed their faith in him. Jesus, as God's Son, thereby became the specific object of the blind men's general faith in God.
9:29-31 **he touched their eyes.** The declaration of the blind men's faith led directly to Jesus' touching and healing them. This healing, like that of Peter's mother-in-law (8:14-15) and the official's daughter (9:25), occurred in the relative privacy of a house.
**Don't tell anyone about this.** Jesus' command for silence brings up the vexed question of the "messianic secret" (cf. 8:4; 12:16; 17:9). As the citation of Isa 42:1-4 in Matt 12:15-21 shows, Jesus did not want his spectacular works to result in a mob scene that would eclipse his authoritative words, not to mention incite the Jewish religious leaders and the Romans to view him as politically subversive.
**spread his fame all over the region.** The two men did not follow Jesus' orders (cf. 4:24; 9:26).
9:32 **a demon-possessed man who couldn't speak.** Matthew makes a distinction here between the physical malady of muteness (cf. 12:22, 24; Isa 35:5-6) and its supernatural cause, demon possession (cf. 4:24; 8:16, 28, 33; 9:32; 12:22; 15:22). The story of this healing is without parallel in Mark and Luke
## COMMENTARY [Text]
With these two miracle stories, the third set of three miracle stories (9:18-34) comes to an end. Matthew began this pattern in 8:1, and the narrative block containing this material is now complete except for a concluding summary in 9:35-38, which answers to 4:22-25. (See the analysis of this structure in the commentary on 8:1-17.) Although the story of the healing of the two blind men (cf. 20:29-34; Isa 35:5-6) is without parallel in Mark and Luke, one need not conclude, with Davies and Allison (1991:133-134), that its historicity is thereby compromised.
Since 8:1, Jesus has been portrayed as a healer of leprosy, paralysis, fever, demon-possession, blindness, and muteness. He has even raised a little girl from the dead. It must be remembered that these acts not only demonstrate his compassion, which is highlighted next in 9:35-38, but also demonstrate his authority on earth to forgive sin (9:6). For Matthew, the miracles are not so much about human needs as they are about God's grace through his Son, the Messiah.
In the concluding verses of this pericope, a seemingly unremarkable exorcism has two antithetical results. The multitudes were amazed at Jesus' unique power, but the Pharisees attributed the exorcism to Jesus' being empowered by the devil. This latter theme, mentioned again in the mission discourse in 10:25, comes to its ugly climax in 12:22-37 and is discussed further in the commentary on that passage.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. A compassionate shepherd and a plentiful harvest (9:35-38)
35 Jesus traveled through all the towns and villages of that area, teaching in the synagogues and announcing the Good News about the Kingdom. And he healed every kind of disease and illness. 36 When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them because they were confused and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. 37 He said to his disciples, "The harvest is great, but the workers are few. 38 So pray to the Lord who is in charge of the harvest; ask him to send more workers into his fields."
## NOTES
9:35 The summary of Jesus' ministry in this verse repeats verbatim the summary statement of 4:23 except for its replacement of "the region of Galilee" with "all the towns and villages of that area" and its omission of the final phrase of 4:23, "among the people," though this Gr. phrase is not reflected in the NLT. With this verse Matthew begins to close the narrative of Jesus' miracles that began in 8:1. (See the note on 4:23 for further comments.)
9:36 **he had compassion on them because they were confused and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.** As Jesus healed the multitudes of all their diseases, taught in the synagogues, and preached the rule of God, there were many occasions for his compassion to be manifested (cf. 14:14; 15:32; 20:34). But the needs of the multitudes were not the only reason for the compassion of Jesus—his pity for the crowds was heightened because their state of distress and helplessness was similar to that of sheep without a shepherd (cf. Mark 6:34). The language pictures a predator mangling the sheep and throwing them to the ground. This metaphor recalls many passages in the Heb. Bible that speak of Israel as God's flock and Israel's leaders as shepherds (e.g., Num 27:17; 2 Sam 5:2; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 3:15; 10:21; 23:1; Ezek 34:5; Zech 10:2-3; 11:16; Jdt 11:19). Matthew himself used this imagery elsewhere (2:6; 25:32; 26:31). Thus, the comparison of Israel to sheep without a shepherd implies that the religious leaders of Israel were not faithful shepherds of Israel but vicious predators. On this point, Matthew echoes the prophetic critique of the Jerusalem establishment and prepares the reader for the sustained polemics against the leaders yet to come.
9:37-38 **The harvest is great, but the workers are few.** Jesus' compassion for needy Israel, which is beset with many problems and lacks godly leaders, brings him to another metaphor, that of the harvest. He points out to his disciples that the situation is like a bountiful harvest without sufficient workers. This saying is also found in Luke 10:2.
**pray to the Lord who is in charge of the harvest; ask him to send more workers into his fields.** They should pray that God would send even more workers into the field. Harvest imagery is found elsewhere in Matthew (3:8-10, 12; 6:26; 13:30, 39; 21:34; 25:24, 26; cf. Mark 4:29; John 4:35-38). These words about the paucity of laborers for the abundant harvest provide a transition into the next chapter (Blomberg 1992:165-167), where Jesus commissions his disciples for their own mission to Israel (10:1-4) and instructs them on the rigors they will endure (10:5-42).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 9:35-38 concludes a narrative of selected miracle stories that began in 8:1; at the same time, it introduces the mission discourse of chapter 10. For the structure of Matthew 8–9, see the commentary on 8:1-17. It is important to note how the stress in Matthew 8–9 on the authoritative deeds of Jesus (8:8-9; 9:6) answers to the stress in Matthew 5–7 on the authoritative teaching of Jesus (7:28-29). Thus, Matthew 5–9 presents Jesus as the authoritative Messiah of Israel, whose words and deeds proclaim the rule of God. The nearly identical summaries in Matthew 4:23 and 9:35 serve as bookends bracketing the two "books" of Jesus' words and deeds respectively. At the same time, 4:23–5:2 and 9:35–10:4 provide narrative contexts for the discourses in Matthew 5–7 and Matthew 10 respectively (Davies and Allison 1991:143).
When one considers Matthew 9:35-38 as a "bookend" with 4:22-25, it becomes apparent that Matthew 5–9 amounts to a sampling of Jesus' authoritative words and deeds. Both his teachings and his actions demonstrate the authority of God's rule, and his actions demonstrate his authority as Son of Man to forgive sins. Thus, the most important theme of Matthew 5–9 in general and 9:35-38 in particular is Christological. As Immanuel ("God with us"), Jesus' words and deeds epitomize the character and compassion of his Father in heaven. His ethical teaching and his compassionate acts exemplify the values and power of the Kingdom of Heaven
Matthew 9:35-38 serves two functions. It not only looks back to 4:22, it also looks ahead to the mission discourse of chapter 10. Matthew 8–9 presents three sets of three miracle stories, and interspersed before and after the second set are stories emphasizing discipleship (8:18-22; 9:9-17). These discipleship stories prepare the reader for the need for mission workers, expressed through the dual metaphor of shepherds for Israel who work in the harvest fields (9:36-38). Such workers count the cost of serving Jesus (8:18-22). They could perhaps come from the undesirable elements of the culture (9:9-13), and they understand the newness of Jesus' Kingdom message (9:14-17). Such are the kind of workers for whom the disciples were told to pray in 9:38. Judging from the sobering instructions in the mission discourse just ahead in the narrative, these workers will endure much opposition.
The opposition ahead for the disciples as shepherd-harvesters is also hinted at in Matthew 5–9. Jesus had taught that his disciples' righteousness must surpass that of the current religious leaders (5:20); his authoritative teachings had a powerful impact upon the crowds that transcended the influence of their current leaders (7:28-29). Many of those leaders would evidently be displaced at the eschatological banquet by people who acknowledged Jesus' authority (8:11-12). Certain of these leaders believed Jesus was blaspheming when he forgave sin and accused him of being in league with Beelzebub when he cast out demons (9:3, 34). Thus, it is no wonder that Jesus pictured Israel as sheep without a shepherd (9:36) and called for more harvesters (9:37-38). And it is not surprising that the current leaders would oppose the disciples' mission (10:14-25). In the next chapter, Matthew narrates how Jesus prepares his disciples to encounter the growing opposition already engendered by his own ministry.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. Jesus commissions the Twelve (10:1-4)
1 Jesus called his twelve disciples together and gave them authority to cast out evil[*] spirits and to heal every kind of disease and illness. 2 Here are the names of the twelve apostles:
first, Simon (also called Peter),
then Andrew (Peter's brother),
James (son of Zebedee),
John (James's brother),
3 Philip,
Bartholomew,
Thomas,
Matthew (the tax collector),
James (son of Alphaeus),
Thaddaeus,[*]
4 Simon (the zealot[*]),
Judas Iscariot (who later betrayed him).
## NOTES
10:1 **Jesus called his twelve disciples.** Jesus now commissions his twelve disciples to extend his ministry of the Kingdom through word and deeds (cf. Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16). The inner core of Jesus' disciples are first called "the twelve" here (cf. 10:2, 5; 11:1; 20:17; 26:14, 20, 47), and the number twelve also occurs in several other contexts in Matthew (9:20; 14:20; 19:28; 26:53 NLT mg). It is clear that Jesus' choice of twelve disciples was intended to correspond to the twelve tribes of Israel (19:28), who were lacking godly leaders (9:36). The disciples were presented by Matthew as Israel's new leaders (Turner 2002) to advance the Kingdom.
**gave them authority.** The authority of the Kingdom is a crucial theme in Matthew (7:28-29; 8:9; 9:6-8; 21:23-27; 28:18; cf. 12:22-29).
**to cast out evil spirits and to heal every kind of disease and illness.** This reminds the reader of Jesus' authority over evil spirits and every disease (4:23-24; 9:35). Jesus took the initiative in calling (4:18-22) and commissioning his disciples; he extended to them his authority.
10:2-4 **the twelve apostles.** Here is the only time in Matthew when the Twelve are described more technically as apostles, not disciples—as in 10:1 (cf. 11:1; 20:17; 26:20). Other lists of the Twelve are found in Mark 3:16-19; Luke 6:12-16; Acts 1:13. Of the Twelve, Simon (Peter), Andrew, James, and John have been mentioned previously (4:18, 21), so it is appropriate that they are the first four mentioned here. Matthew has already been mentioned in 9:9.
Simon Peter is mentioned many times in Matthew (Turner 1991), but Andrew is not mentioned again. In view of 4:18 and 16:16-19, it is fitting that Peter is mentioned at the head of the list with the description "first." The brothers James and John, the sons of Zebedee, are mentioned later (along with Peter) in the experience of Jesus' transfiguration (17:1). They are also mentioned as those who wanted to sit at Jesus' side in the Kingdom (20:20). Of the apostles listed in 10:3-4, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Thaddaeus, and Simon the zealot are not mentioned elsewhere in Matthew. James the son of Alphaeus may be the James mentioned in 27:56. Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, looms large toward the end of the Gospel (26:14, 25, 47; 27:3), and it is fitting that he is mentioned at the end of the list.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 10 comprises the second discourse of Jesus featured by Matthew. The discourse proper begins after 10:1-5a, which summarizes the commissioning of the apostles and lists them individually. It concludes with Matthew's characteristic transitional formula at 11:1 (cf. 7:28; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). The Twelve had seen Jesus' words and works; now it was their turn to go out on their own itinerant ministries as he continued his own ministry (11:1). Up to this point in the narrative, Jesus had demonstrated Kingdom authority through word and work, message and miracle, and now he delegated this Kingdom ministry to the Twelve for their mission to Israel (10:1, 5-8). They were to extend Jesus' ministry by announcing the Kingdom and demonstrating its power to Israel through mighty works. The chapter includes the setting of the discourse (10:1-5a), followed by instructions on (1) the audience and message of the mission (10:5b-8); (2) support for the mission (10:9-15); and (3) dealing with persecution and suffering (10:16-42).
As there are many different views of the structure of this discourse, it is probably safe to say that its structure is not as clear as that of the first discourse, the Sermon on the Mount. Davies and Allison's chiastic approach (1991:160-162) is not totally convincing, but there is a certain symmetry in that, after the initial instructions (10:5-10), the emphasis falls upon Kingdom reception or rejection:
A. Reception (10:11-13): Blessings for worthy houses and towns
B. Rejection (10:14-15): General warning for unworthy houses and towns
B'. Rejection (10:16-39): Specific warnings for synagogues, governors, kings, families
A'. Reception (10:40-42): Rewards for receiving Jesus' followers
The mission discourse is related primarily to the ministry of Jesus' original disciples to the cities of Israel, but there are indications that it speaks to the ongoing world mission of the church at large. There are references to appearing before Gentile rulers and to the necessity of perseverance until the day of judgment (10:18, 22, 26, 28). Thus, the discourse is very relevant to the church today. The fact that the modern Western church has not experienced widespread persecution of the sort mentioned in the discourse should not blind Western Christians to the profound truths presented here.
Jesus Chooses the Twelve. Jesus had just emphasized to his disciples the need for his mission and commanded them to pray for workers for the harvest (9:37-38). Now his commission amounts to their "putting feet to their prayers." Since the needy multitudes of Israel must be reached with the redeeming power of God's rule, the disciples were given authority to minister as Jesus had ministered in words and deeds. In the discourse to come, the disciples are repeatedly reminded that their fortunes will be inescapably linked to their allegiance to Jesus. As they continue his ministry of Kingdom, they will experience a mixed response to their message, which centers on his identity. If they are rejected and persecuted, he is rejected and persecuted (10:14, 18, 22, 24-25). If they are received, he is received (10:40). So it is today.
It is instructive to note that those of the apostles who are mentioned elsewhere in Matthew are not necessarily portrayed in a positive light. Judas is the best example of this. The sons of Zebedee are complicit in their mother's selfish petition that they be the greatest in the coming Kingdom (20:20-22). Peter's foibles are famous, yet when he confesses Jesus' identity, he becomes foundational for the church. It is humbling to acknowledge that the earliest leaders of the church were redeemed though flawed individuals, but at the same time this attributes the credit where it belongs, to Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 4:7). Yet the Twelve are the human agents upon whom Jesus will build the church. They are crucial for the continuity between the pre- and post-resurrection ministries of Jesus (Davies and Allison 1991:151), and they will be the eschatological rulers of Israel (19:28).
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. Mission and Suffering (10:5-42)
1. The apostles' commission (10:5-15; cf. Mark 6:8-11; Luke 9:3-5)
5 Jesus sent out the twelve apostles with these instructions: "Don't go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, 6 but only to the people of Israel—God's lost sheep. 7 Go and announce to them that the Kingdom of Heaven is near.[*] 8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cure those with leprosy, and cast out demons. Give as freely as you have received!
9 "Don't take any money in your money belts—no gold, silver, or even copper coins. 10 Don't carry a traveler's bag with a change of clothes and sandals or even a walking stick. Don't hesitate to accept hospitality, because those who work deserve to be fed.
11 "Whenever you enter a city or village, search for a worthy person and stay in his home until you leave town. 12 When you enter the home, give it your blessing. 13 If it turns out to be a worthy home, let your blessing stand; if it is not, take back the blessing. 14 If any household or town refuses to welcome you or listen to your message, shake its dust from your feet as you leave. 15 I tell you the truth, the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah will be better off than such a town on the judgment day."
## NOTES
10:5-6 After listing the twelve apostles, Matthew narrated the instructions Jesus gave them just before he sent them out.
**Don't go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, but only to the people of Israel.** The discourse begins abruptly with a striking prohibition: the disciples must not go to Gentiles or Samaritans (cf. 15:24). Thus, the destination of the mission is to be limited to the people of Israel, who are again likened to lost sheep needing a shepherd (cf. 9:36; 10:16; 12:11-12; 15:24; 18:12; 25:32-33; 26:31; Jer 50:6; Ezek 34:11, 16, 30). Gentiles and Samaritans are to be excluded at this point, yet before his death Jesus anticipated the mission to all nations (8:11; 10:18; 21:43; 22:9; 24:14), and after his resurrection he commanded it (28:19). Despite this, mission to Gentiles was controversial in the early church, as noted in the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 11:1-18). The priority of Israel in redemptive history is underlined by this stress in Jesus' ministry (Levine 1988). This is the only time the Samaritans, who occupied territory between Judah and Galilee, are mentioned in Matthew.
10:7-8 **the Kingdom of Heaven is near.** The central message of the disciples is to be that which John and Jesus have already preached: "the Kingdom of Heaven is near" (cf. 3:2; 4:17; 9:35; 13:19). The anticipated church, which will be built by Jesus, is also to preach this message of the rule of God (24:14). The authority of the ministry of word is to be demonstrated by the ministry of deed: the disciples are to heal, cast out demons, and even raise the dead. They have already seen Jesus do each of these deeds. Since they have freely received the gracious blessings of the Kingdom, they are to extend those blessings freely to others.
10:9 **Don't take any money.** The Twelve are told not to take money or extra clothes with them on the mission. Rather, their needs are to be met by the anticipated hospitality and support of those who receive their message (cf. 10:11-13, 40-42). The message of the Kingdom is not for sale (cf. Acts 8:20), but those who receive it should also receive its messengers.
10:10 **or even a walking stick.** The instructions of 10:9-10, especially regarding the walking stick, are difficult to reconcile with Mark 6:8-9 (cf. Luke 9:3), but see Blomberg (1987:145-146) for suggestions.
**Don't hesitate to accept hospitality.** Though not based on the Gr. text, this phrase was evidently added in view of the implications of the following context and to help explain the proverbial words "those who work deserve to be fed." This saying probably distills OT principles regarding day laborers and priests (Num 18:31; Deut 24:15; cf. Luke 10:7; 1 Cor 9:9-10, 14). In this culture, hospitality to God's messengers was viewed as a sacred duty (cf. _Didache_ 11–13).
10:11-13 In this passage contrasting responses to the Kingdom message are anticipated (cf. Mark 6:10-12; Luke 10:5-6).
**search for a worthy person.** The disciples were to seek out those purported to be "worthy" people and to stay with them. Their acceptance of the Kingdom message would show their genuine worthiness. Jesus' disciples were to accept offers of hospitality and give their blessing to worthy households who received the message of the Kingdom. But those who rejected the message of God's reign were unworthy of his messengers.
**let your blessing stand . . . take back the blessing.** If the disciples were staying in an unworthy home, they were to retract their blessing, evidently as they departed from the home. The word "blessing" is more lit. a "greeting" (cf. 5:47), which wishes peace for the house (cf. Luke 10:5). In 10:13 the words "let your blessing stand" and "take back the blessing" can be respectively translated "let your [greeting of] peace come upon it" and "let your [greeting of] peace return to you."
10:14 Reception of the disciples was linked to the response to their message (cf. Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5; 10:10-11). Refusal to heed the message was tantamount to rejection of the messenger. The disciples were to demonstrate the gravity of such rejection by a symbolic act of renunciation, shaking the dust of such houses or towns off their feet as they left. Some commentators understand this as shaking from one's outer garment the dust stirred up by one's feet (Gundry 1994:190; cf. Neh 5:13; Acts 13:51; 18:6), but it seems more naturally taken to be the dust on one's feet (cf. Luke 10:11). Either way, the action symbolizes the severance of fellowship—the disciples are to reject those who have rejected the Kingdom message and leave them to their inevitable judgment.
10:15 **the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah will be better off.** Jesus assured the disciples that those who reject them make a mistake even more serious than Sodom and Gomorrah's outrageously shameful treatment of God's angels (Gen 18–19). Rejection of God's rule in Christ renders one liable to a judgment more severe than the judgment of notorious Sodom and Gomorrah, which had attained proverbial status (11:24; 2 Pet 2:6; Jude 1:7; cf. Gen 18:20–19:26; Deut 29:22-23; Isa 1:9-10; 3:9; 13:19; Jer 23:14; 50:40; Lam 4:6; and esp. Ezek 16:46-56).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The instructions in this section deal with the destination (10:5-6), message (10:7), miracles (10:8), outfit (10:9-10), and reception (10:11-15) of the disciples' mission. The reader is impressed by the continuity of the disciples' mission with that of Jesus and John, as well as by the relative lack of funds and equipment the disciples are to take. This last feature reminds believers today that their ultimate resource in ministry is the Lord's power and promises, not their own provisions. Similarly, the simplicity of the disciples' provisions tends to reflect negatively upon the fund-raising techniques and lavish accoutrements that are in vogue with certain ministries today.
The prohibition of ministry to non-Jews (10:5) is perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of 10:5-15. This prohibition is obviously quite different from the concluding commission of this Gospel, which mandates mission to all the nations (28:18). How should this major difference be understood? The priority of Israel in God's covenant plan cannot be minimized. Matthew presents Jesus as the son of Abraham, through whom all the nations will be blessed (1:1; cf. Gen 12:2-3). Although mere physical descent from Abraham does not merit God's favor (3:9; 8:12), the Jews remain the foundational covenant people of God, and eschatological blessing amounts to sharing in the promises made to the patriarchs (8:11; 19:28). Thus, the Gentile world mission does not replace the foundational mission to Israel but supplements and broadens it. Christianity must not be separated from its roots in the Hebrew Bible. It is not a religion primarily, let alone exclusively, for Gentiles. The particularism of 10:5 is necessary for Jesus to be the fulfillment of Israel's history and prophetic hope. His disciples would become the nucleus and foundational leaders of the nascent church (cf. 16:28; 19:28; 21:43). In God's mysterious plan, most Jews—then and now—do not accept Jesus as their promised Messiah, but a messianic remnant of Christian Jews remains to this day. Therefore, Gentile Christians must always acknowledge the priority of Israel in redemptive history. This was taught by Jesus and Paul alike (John 4:22; 10:16; Rom 11:16-24; 15:7-12; Eph 2:11-13). Thus, there is a sense even today in which "to the Jew first" still rings true (Rom 1:16).
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Jesus warns of persecution (10:16-23)
16 "Look, I am sending you out as sheep among wolves. So be as shrewd as snakes and harmless as doves. 17 But beware! For you will be handed over to the courts and will be flogged with whips in the synagogues. 18 You will stand trial before governors and kings because you are my followers. But this will be your opportunity to tell the rulers and other unbelievers about me.[*] 19 When you are arrested, don't worry about how to respond or what to say. God will give you the right words at the right time. 20 For it is not you who will be speaking—it will be the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.
21 "A brother will betray his brother to death, a father will betray his own child, and children will rebel against their parents and cause them to be killed. 22 And all nations will hate you because you are my followers.[*] But everyone who endures to the end will be saved. 23 When you are persecuted in one town, flee to the next. I tell you the truth, the Son of Man[*] will return before you have reached all the towns of Israel."
## NOTES
10:16 **I am sending you out as sheep among wolves.** In this passage, the disciples were warned that those who rejected the Kingdom message would not leave it at passive unbelief. They would take active steps to oppress the messengers of the Kingdom. Metaphors from the animal world abound in this verse. The disciples are likened to sheep among wolves (cf. 7:15; John 10:12; Acts 20:29; Ezek 22:27)
**as shrewd as snakes and harmless as doves.** The disciples were encouraged to be as shrewd as snakes (cf. Gen 3:1) and harmless (cf. Rom 16:19; Phil 2:15) as doves. This command inculcates wisdom accompanied by integrity, a combination of intellectual and ethical characteristics. It is striking that the disciples will be among wolves as they minister only in Israel—their fellow countrymen, not Gentiles, will pose significant danger for them. The wolves of 10:16 are the religious leaders whose opposition to Jesus mounts as the narrative unfolds.
10:17-18 The persecution from the "wolves" is described in detail in the following verses (cf. Mark 13:9-13). Both Jews and Gentile rulers will be involved, with 10:17 probably alluding to religious persecution from Jewish courts (cf. Acts 5:27; 6:12) and 10:18 to negative treatment at the hands of provincial rulers and kings, usually Gentiles (cf. Acts 25:23; 27:24).
**will be flogged with whips in the synagogues.** Punishment in the synagogues would involve painful flogging (cf. 23:34; 2 Cor 11:23-25), but persecution for the sake of Jesus and his Kingdom was ironically an opportunity for further testimony. Jesus himself would be brought before both Jewish and Gentile authorities (cf. 26:57, 59; 27:2, 11), but the language of these verses looks beyond the immediate ministry of the disciples to their work after the resurrection of Jesus (cf. Acts 4:1-22; 5:17-41; 6:12; 12:1-3; 16:19-21; 21:27; Phil 1:12-18).
10:19-20 **don't worry.** Disciples need not worry (cf. 6:25, 31, 34) about what they will say during these coming times of duress because God will give them the appropriate words through the Spirit (cf. Mark 13:11-13; Luke 21:12-15).
**the Spirit of your Father.** This continues the frequent references in Matthew to God as the father of Jesus' disciples (5:16, 45, 48; 6:1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 14, 15, 18, 26, 32; 7:11; 10:20, 29; 13:43; 23:9). But God is the father of Jesus' disciples because he is first the father of Jesus (7:21; 10:32, 33; 11:25-27; 12:50; 15:13; 16:17, 27; 18:10, 14, 19, 35; 20:23; 25:34; 26:29, 39, 42, 53). Up to this point in Matthew, the Spirit has been mentioned solely in connection with Jesus and his Kingdom ministry (1:18, 20; 3:11, 16; 4:1; cf. 12:18, 28, 31-32). As the disciples extended the message of Jesus and the Kingdom, they too would experience the work of the Spirit in their lives (cf. John 14:15-17; 15:26;). Eventually, the post-resurrection church would experience Jesus' baptism with the Spirit (3:11) and be led by the Spirit in responding to persecutors (Acts 4:8, 31; 5:32; 6:5, 10; 7:55; 13:9).
10:21 **A** **brother will betray his brother to death.** In this most poignant verse of the discourse, it is predicted that even one's own family members will further this persecution (cf. 10:35-37), to the point of Jesus' disciples being killed because of the betrayal of their own siblings, parents, and children (cf. Mic 7:6, to which this verse alludes). Such betrayal is extremely distressing, but it is mollified somewhat by the existence of a new Kingdom family of disciples, with God as the father (10:20; 12:46-50; 23:8-9). It is a difficult teaching, but the primary allegiance of disciples must be to Jesus and to their new family of Kingdom disciples, not to their natural families (10:34-39). See the commentary on 10:24-33 for additional discussion.
10:22 **everyone who endures to the end will be saved.** During such a horrible scenario, in which disciples are universally despised, endurance is the mark of the true disciple (cf. 7:21, 24; 13:21). When disciples face persecution, only those whose perseverance demonstrates the authenticity of their faith will be saved.
10:23 **the Son of Man will return before you have reached all the towns of Israel.** As the disciples encountered persecution on their mission in one town, they were to flee to the next town (cf. 23:34) with the assurance that Jesus would come before they had finished going through the towns of Israel. Various views of this extremely difficult verse are discussed in the following commentary. It seems best to conclude that the "coming" of Jesus mentioned here is his return to earth. Therefore, this verse anticipates a continuing mission to Israel until the second coming of Christ.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This section contains two cycles of warning and encouragement. The first warns of persecution from religious courts and civil rulers (10:16-18) but encourages the disciples with the promise of the Spirit, who will speak through them in these dire circumstances (10:19-20). The second cycle warns of what is almost unthinkable—betrayal by one's own family (10:21)—and encourages by stressing the coming of Jesus, who will save those who remain faithful to the end (10:23).
The reference to the coming of the Son of Man in 10:23 is one of the more difficult passages in Matthew. There are several plausible explanations:
1. Jesus will soon "follow up" the ministry of the disciples. In this view the "coming" is not eschatological but simply refers to Jesus rejoining the disciples before they complete their immediate ministries.
2. Jesus' resurrection amounts to a "coming," since by it the new era of the church is inaugurated (Albright and Mann 1971:125; Stonehouse 1979:240).
3. The coming of Jesus is a process beginning with the resurrection, continuing through Pentecost, and culminating in his return to earth (Hendriksen 1973:467-468).
4. The destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 amounts to a coming in judgment upon Israel (Carson 1984:252-253; Hagner 1993:279-280).
5. Jesus will return to the earth before the disciples complete their mission to Israel (Davies and Allison 1991:192; Blomberg 1992:176; Gundry 1994:194-195; Harrington 1991:147-148).
Choosing between the various views is not easy. One's decision must be made with three matters in mind. First, one's view of other Matthean "coming" texts (16:28; 24:30, 44; 25:31; 26:64) must be considered. Presumably, a consistent picture should emerge when these texts are interpreted. Second, at least some of these "coming" texts depend on Daniel 7:13, and one must look carefully at it also. Third, one must decide whether Jesus' mission discourse in Matthew 10 describes solely the original mission of the Twelve, or in some places anticipates the later mission of the post-resurrection church. It seems best when all these things are considered to opt for view 5, but certainty is not possible.
Jesus' mission discourse does anticipate the mission of the church throughout the period between his first and second comings (Davies and Allison 1991:179-180), and that mission includes ongoing mission to Israel during the outreach to all the nations.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Jesus forbids fear (10:24-33)
24 "Students[*] are not greater than their teacher, and slaves are not greater than their master. 25 Students are to be like their teacher, and slaves are to be like their master. And since I, the master of the household, have been called the prince of demons,[*] the members of my household will be called by even worse names!
26 "But don't be afraid of those who threaten you. For the time is coming when everything that is covered will be revealed, and all that is secret will be made known to all. 27 What I tell you now in the darkness, shout abroad when daybreak comes. What I whisper in your ear, shout from the housetops for all to hear!
28 "Don't be afraid of those who want to kill your body; they cannot touch your soul. Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body in hell.[*] 29 What is the price of two sparrows—one copper coin[*]? But not a single sparrow can fall to the ground without your Father knowing it. 30 And the very hairs on your head are all numbered. 31 So don't be afraid; you are more valuable to God than a whole flock of sparrows.
32 "Everyone who acknowledges me publicly here on earth, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But everyone who denies me here on earth, I will also deny before my Father in heaven."
## NOTES
10:24 **Students are not greater than their teacher, and slaves are not greater than their master.** In case the disciples were surprised at the bleak prospects of their mission, Jesus reminded them of their place as his servants. The students or disciples should not expect better treatment than their teacher or master had received (cf. 23:8; Luke 6:40; John 15:20). Their identity was inextricably linked to his, and they would be treated as he had been treated.
10:25 **the prince of demons.** Gr., "Beelzeboul," which is evidently derived from Heb. words meaning "lord of the house" or "lord of the heights"; cf. 9:34; 12:24, 27. The term probably portrays Satan as exalted head of the demons. If Jesus had been called this, why should his disciples expect to be praised? The argument is from the greater to the lesser—if the persecutors are bold enough to call the master Beelzeboul, much more certainly they will call his servants Beelzeboul.
**will be called by even worse names!** The disciples' identification with their Teacher means not only that they will be called worse names than Jesus but also that they will share his fate. The malfeasance directed against Jesus will also fall upon them.
10:26 **don't be afraid.** Although fear of persecutors seems only natural, it is forbidden in 10:26-33 three times (cf. Luke 12:4-5; 1 Pet 3:14; Rev 2:10; 14:7). Both 10:26 and 10:27 are structured in the poetic fashion of Heb. "synonymous parallelism." Matthew 10:26 is not so much in contrast with the preceding (NLT "but"), as it is a conclusion drawn from the preceding. Recognizing that they share their master's fate should release disciples from fear (cf. 5:11-12). They should be emboldened by the realization that they are following in the footsteps of Jesus.
**everything that is covered will be revealed.** Additional motivation is found in the realization that the future will reverse the present. Secrets, evidently the hidden sins of the persecutors, will be revealed on judgment day.
10:27 **shout from the housetops for all to hear!** The truth of Jesus' message will win out on the last day. Therefore, the disciples must not fear but must openly proclaim what Jesus taught them privately, in spite of persecutors.
10:28 **Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body.** The disciples are here told whom they should fear, not the ones whose powers are merely temporal and physical but the One whose power is eternal (cf. Ps 33:18-19; 4 Macc 13:13-15). The language of this verse seems to assume a sort of dualism of body and soul. The "destruction" of body and soul in hell ( _geenna_ [TG1067, ZG1147]) does not support annihilationism (cf. 25:41, 46). See the commentary at the end of this section for further discussion of this. The persecutors are able only to cause physical death, but God is able to punish eternally in hell. Thus, God is viewed by Jesus as not only a loving father but also as the eternal judge. The disciples were encouraged to draw near to God as Father (cf., e.g., 10:20, 29), but as they do so, they are also reminded that they must be in awe of his authority as judge to determine their eternal destinies. The temporary peril of persecution should not be taken lightly, but it pales in comparison with the eternal punishment of God in hell.
**hell.** The word _Gehenna_ is used in a number of NT texts to designate the fiery place for punishment of sinners and is often translated "hell" or "the fires of hell" (5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:43, 45, 47). It is usually used in connection with the final judgment and often has the suggestion that the punishment spoken of is eternal. _Gehenna_ is derived by transliteration from the Heb. of the OT, "valley of Hinnom," a ravine on the south side of Jerusalem. This valley was the center of idolatrous worship in which children were burned by fire as an offering to the heathen god Molech (2 Chr 28:3; 33:6). In the time of Josiah it became a place of abomination, polluted by dead men's bones and the filth of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 23:10) and by garbage and rubbish dumped there. A fire burned continuously in this valley. It thus became a symbol of the unending fires of hell where the lost are consumed in torment (TBD 592). The term _geenna_ is not the same as _hadēs_ [TG86, ZG87], which is the place where the dead wait for the final judgment (NLT renders it "the place of the dead"; see 11:23; 16:18; Acts 2:27, 31; Rev 1:18).
10:29 **one copper coin?** Gr. _assarion_ [TG787, ZG837], which was worth one sixteenth of a denarius—the denarius being the normal wage for day laborers (cf. 20:2ff). Yet God's awareness of a comparatively worthless sparrow's fall to the ground provides much incentive for trusting that he is aware of the persecution of his people.
10:30 **the very hairs on your head are all numbered.** God's awareness extends even to the trivial matter of the number of hairs on their heads (cf. Luke 21:18; Acts 27:34), so they are of more value than a whole flock of sparrows (cf. 6:26; 12:12).
10:31 **you are more valuable to God than a whole flock of sparrows.** This reassuring section begins with a lesser-to-greater argument to the effect that disciples are of more value to God than sparrows (10:29-30). The rhetorical question that begins the section invites the disciples to reflect on the matter themselves (10:29). Such reflection should lead them to conclude that they need not fear persecutors. Disciples may never know fully why God permits persecution, but they can be sure that he knows their difficulties and will deal justly with their persecutors (10:26, 28, 33). Hagner 1993:286 puts it well: "God has the knowledge, the power, and the concern to protect the disciples from any ultimate harm or injury."
10:32-33 **Everyone who acknowledges me publicly here on earth, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven.** Persecutors will call upon disciples to join them in denying Jesus, so there will always be the temptation to deny Jesus and the Kingdom in order to avoid persecution. Confessing Christ before persecutors is a specific instance of the endurance called for earlier (10:22). These verses put the matter of facing up to persecutors as a stark antithesis, with the confession of 10:32 contrasting with the denial of 10:33 (cf. Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12). Denial is rejecting or disowning Jesus. If a person confesses Jesus before persecutors, Jesus will confess that person before his Father on judgment day (cf. 7:21). But if a person joins the persecutors in denying Jesus, that person will be denied by Jesus. This language seems to imply a setting on judgment day in which a person's public recognition or denial of Jesus in this life anticipates Jesus' recognition or denial of that person at the judgment. Loyalty to Jesus may result in persecution in this life, but it results in the loyalty of Jesus on judgment day.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This section provides three reasons why disciples should not fear the prospect of persecution. First, the disciples are reminded that as servants of their master, Jesus, they are not above him, and that they are to be like him. As his servants, they will share in his treatment by the persecutors (10:24-25). As the narrative proceeds and the opposition to Jesus intensifies, culminating in the disputes with the Jerusalem leaders during the passion week, the disciples presumably grasped this teaching more fully. Second, since they would share in Jesus' treatment, they need not fear because they would also share in Jesus' vindication (10:26-27). Later they could look back from a post-resurrection perspective, as Matthew the author does, and realize that the resurrection vindicated Jesus and that his return would vindicate them. Then the hidden things would be revealed. Third, the disciples should not fear persecutors but the One to whom both they and the persecutors will answer on judgment day (10:28-33). The ordeal inflicted by the persecutors is only temporary, but the persecutors will suffer eternal punishment. Disciples who acknowledge Jesus will be acknowledged by him before the Father, but persecutors who deny Jesus will be denied by him before the Father. Thus, the disciples can deal with fear by recalling their shared identity with Jesus, by focusing on his return, and by maintaining their awe of God.
Matthew 10:28 is frequently cited in support of the notion of annihilationism (sometimes called conditional immortality), the belief that those who reject God and Jesus cease to exist at the final judgment. In this view eternal punishment amounts to eternal nonexistence rather than conscious punishment, which is the traditional Christian teaching on the destiny of unbelievers. This was not a matter with which Matthew was concerned, but it is a common question today. The issue hinges on 10:28b, in which God is described as the One "who can destroy both body and soul in hell."
Annihilationists take the word "destroy" ( _apollumi_ [TG622, ZG660]) quite literally and posit a final judgment in which unbelievers are destroyed—that is, they cease to exist. But it is clear from other texts that this "destruction" is a state of punishment for the whole person (Matt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; 23:15, 33), which is as eternal in duration as the bliss of eternal life in God's Kingdom (25:41, 46; cf. Dan 12:2; 2 Thess 1:9; Rev 14:10-11; 20:10). The matter of eternal punishment is, to say the least, a fearful doctrine. But it is precisely the motivation given in Matthew 10 for fidelity in discipleship during days of persecution (10:22, 28, 33). To put it bluntly, if there were no hell to avoid, there would be one less reason to be faithful to Jesus, and there would be one more reason to deny him.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus promises reward after suffering (10:34-42)
34 "Don't imagine that I came to bring peace to the earth! I came not to bring peace, but a sword.
35 'I have come to set a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
36 Your enemies will be right in your own household!'[*]
37 "If you love your father or mother more than you love me, you are not worthy of being mine; or if you love your son or daughter more than me, you are not worthy of being mine. 38 If you refuse to take up your cross and follow me, you are not worthy of being mine. 39 If you cling to your life, you will lose it; but if you give up your life for me, you will find it.
40 "Anyone who receives you receives me, and anyone who receives me receives the Father who sent me. 41 If you receive a prophet as one who speaks for God,[*] you will be given the same reward as a prophet. And if you receive righteous people because of their righteousness, you will be given a reward like theirs. 42 And if you give even a cup of cold water to one of the least of my followers, you will surely be rewarded."
## NOTES
10:34 **I came not to bring peace, but a sword.** The opening verses concern the relationship of Jesus' Kingdom to peace. The presence of the Kingdom does not mean the absence of hostility. Jesus forbade the disciples from entertaining idealistic thoughts about the immediate results of his mission. His ministry would not bring unconditional serendipity to the world. Peace on earth (cf. Luke 2:14) cannot be attained apart from Jesus' work of reconciling people to God. Then people have the capacity to be reconciled to each other and are equipped to work for peace themselves (cf. 5:9; 10:13). But for those who refuse to acknowledge Jesus as God's agent of peace, the message of the Kingdom is another reason for division and alienation, even from one's own family members (cf. Luke 12:51-53).
10:36 **Your enemies will be right in your own household!** The division of families was mentioned earlier in 10:21, and Mic 7:6, the OT text cited here in 10:35-36, was also alluded to there. The alternative to peace is a sword, a symbol of conflict and warfare. The Kingdom message of repentance is indeed confrontational, and conflicting responses to this message can fracture even the dearest human relationships. The point of these sobering words is that family loyalties must not supersede loyalty to Christ.
10:37 **If you love your father or mother more than you love me.** In the setting of potential family strife due to opposite responses to the Kingdom message, disciples are warned not to misplace their loyalties. To love one's parents or children more than Jesus is to be unworthy of him.
10:38 **take up your cross and follow me.** Only when one is willing to sacrifice one's life and relationship to one's family for the sake of Jesus does one begin to live. Taking up the cross may allude to the Roman custom of the condemned man carrying his cross to his own crucifixion (cf. 27:32). The paradox here is similar to that found in Jesus' warning of Peter and the disciples in 16:24-25—if the prospect of martyrdom or alienation from family leads one to renounce Jesus, one loses one's life even while trying to save it.
10:40-42 **you will be given a reward like theirs.** The solemn words of 10:37-39 about one's deepest loyalties in the face of persecution are now balanced somewhat by these concluding words of the discourse, which stress reward. Those who receive the messengers of the Kingdom will be rewarded because reception of the Messiah's messengers amounts to receiving the Messiah, and reception of the Messiah amounts to receiving the Father. More specifically (10:41), those who receive a prophet (cf. 5:12) or a righteous person will receive a reward equivalent to the prophet or righteous person's reward. The words "prophets and righteous people" occur together again in 13:17. These are to receive hospitality due to what they stand for, prophets for the message and righteous people for the character of God.
**if you give even a cup of cold water to one of the least of my followers.** Even the seemingly insignificant gift of a cup of cold water to a disciple will bring a future reward to the hospitable person (10:42). Jesus' disciples are characterized en masse as "little ones" here (cf. 18:6, 10, 14; 25:40, 45). Thus, the NLT's "to one of the least of my followers" implies a gradation among disciples not present in the text.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' second discourse moves to its conclusion with a warning that he and his Kingdom message will not automatically bring peace to the earth. Indeed, the most sacred human relationships could be severed by his message. Thus, even one's family cannot take precedence over one's allegiance to Jesus. This difficult teaching is made even more so when one considers the importance of the family in the Hebrew Bible (Exod 20:12; Lev 20:9; Deut 5:16) and in the teaching of Jesus elsewhere (cf. 15:4-6; 19:8-9, 19). But one's allegiance to Jesus can cause such dissension in a family that one's family relationships must be severed. This loss would certainly bring deep anguish, but that temporary pain must be compared with the horror of eternal separation from Jesus. Jesus' own example shows that one's loyalties must lie with the new family of his followers (12:46-50). He promises that the pain of lost relationships in the present life will somehow be offset by the blessings of the future Kingdom (19:29).
The discourse ends on a positive note in 10:40-42, with the prospect of reward for those who show hospitality to Jesus' disciples. It is important to remember that it takes more than missionaries to accomplish Jesus' mission; the whole community must be involved. Those who support the missionaries will receive an equivalent reward. After the sobering words about the inevitability of persecution, even from one's own family, the conclusion provides a note of balance that encourages the disciples for their mission. Despite the difficulties of the coming days, they will find hospitable people who will respond positively to the message of Jesus and the Kingdom. But the conclusion of this discourse is not unlike that of the Sermon on the Mount. Both discourses present loyalty to Jesus and his Kingdom in blunt either-or language. One's "house" is built either on rock or on sand (7:24-27). One's life will be either lost or found (10:39). No doubt, some try to find ways of compromise so that one may have both family and Jesus, both "self-actualization" and discipleship, but there is no such middle ground in Jesus' teaching.
## TEXT [Commentary]
IV. Increased Opposition to the Kingdom of Heaven (11:1–12:50)
A. John the Baptist's Question (11:1-6; cf. Luke 7:18-23)
1 When Jesus had finished giving these instructions to his twelve disciples, he went out to teach and preach in towns throughout the region.
2 John the Baptist, who was in prison, heard about all the things the Messiah was doing. So he sent his disciples to ask Jesus, 3 "Are you the Messiah we've been expecting,[*] or should we keep looking for someone else?"
4 Jesus told them, "Go back to John and tell him what you have heard and seen—5 the blind see, the lame walk, those with leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised to life, and the Good News is being preached to the poor." 6 And he added, "God blesses those who do not fall away because of me.[*]"
## NOTES
11:1 **When Jesus had finished.** With a characteristic transitional formula (cf. 7:28; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1), Matthew turned from Jesus' discourse on mission to another block of narrative material. Having commissioned and instructed his disciples, Jesus embarked once again on his own itinerant ministry. The disciples were to carry out their ministry to the cities of Israel until Jesus returned (10:23), but in the meantime, he continued his own ministry of teaching and preaching (4:23; 9:35)
11:2 **John the Baptist, who was in prison.** Though his disciples were mentioned in 8:14, John has not been mentioned since his imprisonment at the beginning of Jesus' ministry in Galilee (4:12). Here another "beginning" of the ministry of Jesus is tied to John, which is significant for redemptive history. Although John had become aware of Jesus' identity (3:13-17), his question was evidently due to the limited outward effects of Jesus' ministry. He had heard about what Jesus was doing (lit., "Messiah's works"), but he probably expected a more immediate judgment of the religious and political _status quo_ (cf. Matt 3:7-12; Luke 7:18-23). For more on John the Baptist in Matthew, see 14:1-12; 17:9-13.
11:3 **the Messiah we've been expecting.** Lit., "the coming one," an expression that also occurs in 3:11; 21:9; 23:39.
11:4-6 **tell him about what you have heard and seen.** Jesus' answer calls John's messengers' attention to what is heard (words) as well as to what is seen (works). Six specifics are enumerated: the healing of blindness (cf. 9:27-28; 12:22; 20:30; 21:14), lameness (cf. 15:30-31; 21:14), leprosy (cf. 8:20), and deafness (cf. 9:32-33; 12:22; 15:30-31); the raising of the dead (cf. 9:18; 10:8); and evangelism to the poor (cf. 4:14-17, 23; 5:3; Luke 4:18). This description of Jesus' ministry is drawn from the OT (Isa 26:19; 29:18; 35:5-6; 42:7, 18; 61:1).
**God blesses those who do not fall away because of me.** If John focused on these words and works of Jesus, he would be blessed because he would not "fall away" from Jesus. Falling away is lit. "stumbling," which refers to spiritual defeat or apostasy (cf. 5:29-30; 13:21, 41, 57; 15:12; 16:23; 17:27; 18:6-9; 24:10; 26:31, 33). Thus, John was encouraged that he was on the right track and that he should stay on it despite the delay in the judgment he predicted.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Just as Matthew's first discourse, the Sermon on the Mount (chs 5–7), is followed by the narrative of Matthew 8–9, so the discourse on mission (ch 10) is followed by another narrative section (chs 11–12). And just as the structure of Matthew 8–9 is significant (see the commentary on 8:1-4), so is the structure of Matthew 11:12 (Verseput 1986). Overall, these two chapters stress Israel's unbelief (esp. 11:16-24; 12:41-42) and the escalating opposition to Jesus from the leaders of Israel (esp. 12:2, 10, 14, 24, 38). But there are more positive sections that respond to the unbelief and opposition with trust in God's sovereignty (11:25-30), fulfillment of prophecy (12:17-21), and commendation of discipleship (12:46-50).
Blomberg (1992:183) lays out an analysis of Matthew 11–12 that takes chapter 11 as implicit opposition and chapter 12 as explicit opposition. Although Matthew 11:1-16 might be rightly viewed as implicit opposition, Matthew 11:12, 18-24 is best understood as explicit animosity. A preferable analysis is suggested in general terms by Hagner (1993:298) and addressed in specifics by Davies and Allison (1991:233-234). This approach identifies three sets or collections of passages, each of which contains three elements, the first two stressing unbelief and the third belief:
I. First collection (11:2-30)
1. Unbelief: John the Baptist (11:2-19)
2. Unbelief: the towns of Galilee (11:20-24)
3. Belief: "Come unto me" (11:25-30)
II. Second collection (12:1-21)
1. Unbelief: Sabbath controversy (12:1-8)
2. Unbelief: Sabbath controversy (12:9-14)
3. Belief: "the hope of the Gentiles" (12:15-21)
III. Third collection (12:22-50)
1. Unbelief: the unforgivable sin (12:22-37)
2. Unbelief: an evil generation (12:38-45)
3. Belief: Jesus' true family (12:46-50)
It is interesting that Matthew 11:1 mentions only that Jesus had instructed the disciples before setting out on his own ministry. Matthew does not mention either that Jesus sent the disciples or that they later returned to follow Jesus, although they appear with him again in 12:1. Evidently, Matthew did not narrate the mission of the disciples or their return to Jesus because his literary purpose was centered on Jesus and the teaching of Jesus for the disciples and the church, which is built on them.
John's question (11:2-3) was essentially about what kind of Messiah Jesus was. It focused on Jesus' works, which Matthew has highlighted since 4:23. Matthew has shown that the response to these works was mixed, with popular acclaim (4:25; 7:28; 8:1, 18; 9:8, 33) balanced by increasing opposition from the religious leaders (5:20; 7:29; 9:3, 11, 34). So John's question as to whether Jesus was the expected Messiah is crucial for the reader of Matthew. Although John's doubts are often downplayed, they should be given full force. Although John had ample reason to believe in Jesus (3:13-17), his imprisonment (4:12) and the seeming delay in the coming of the Kingdom inevitably took a toll on his confidence. Jesus' answer to John served to refocus him on the fulfillment of the Old Testament promises of salvation, not the promises of judgment. Not only John, but all those who focus on the messianic works of Jesus will be blessed because they will not lose faith (11:6). John's doubts and the way Jesus dealt with them are exemplary for all of Jesus' disciples.
Matthew 11:1-6 interprets all of Matthew 4–10 (Davies and Allison 1991:242). Jesus was indeed the coming one whom John announced. His words and works bring the saving rule of God to bear on human sin and suffering, fulfilling the prophecies of Isaiah. But if one as great as John could doubt this, what of Jesus' other followers, both ancient and modern? They, too, must focus on Jesus' messianic words and works, for the opposition will only get worse as Matthew's narrative unfolds. If the followers of Jesus focus on the delay in God's judgment of sin, doubts will arise. Their focus must be instead on the presence of salvation (cf. 2 Pet 3:8-9, 15a).
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. Jesus' Testimony to John the Baptist (11:7-19)
7 As John's disciples were leaving, Jesus began talking about him to the crowds. "What kind of man did you go into the wilderness to see? Was he a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind? 8 Or were you expecting to see a man dressed in expensive clothes? No, people with expensive clothes live in palaces. 9 Were you looking for a prophet? Yes, and he is more than a prophet. 10 John is the man to whom the Scriptures refer when they say,
'Look, I am sending my messenger ahead of you,
and he will prepare your way before you.'[*]
11 "I tell you the truth, of all who have ever lived, none is greater than John the Baptist. Yet even the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he is! 12 And from the time John the Baptist began preaching until now, the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing,[*] and violent people are attacking it. 13 For before John came, all the prophets and the law of Moses looked forward to this present time. 14 And if you are willing to accept what I say, he is Elijah, the one the prophets said would come.[*] 15 Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand!
16 "To what can I compare this generation? It is like children playing a game in the public square. They complain to their friends,
17 'We played wedding songs,
and you didn't dance,
so we played funeral songs,
and you didn't mourn.'
18 For John didn't spend his time eating and drinking, and you say, 'He's possessed by a demon.' 19 The Son of Man,[*] on the other hand, feasts and drinks, and you say, 'He's a glutton and a drunkard, and a friend of tax collectors and other sinners!' But wisdom is shown to be right by its results."
## NOTES
11:7-8 The inquiry of John's disciples occasioned a mini-discourse to the crowd on John's significance in redemptive history (cf. Luke 7:24-35). As John's disciples departed to tell him of Jesus' answer, Jesus seized the moment to teach about John's epochal significance. His teaching first took the form of rhetorical questions: "What kind of man did you go out into the wilderness to see?" Then Jesus' words become a bit sarcastic and expect a negative answer—John was not "a weak reed," which evidently portays a feeble, wavering person. Nor was John "dressed in expensive clothes" (cf. 3:4; 2 Kgs 1:8) fitting the delicate luxury of a king's palace.
11:9-10 **Were you looking for a prophet? Yes, and he is more than a prophet.** The next rhetorical question (11:9) gets to the heart of the matter and expects a positive answer—John was neither a vacillating weakling nor a dapper gentleman but a prophet (cf. 14:5; 21:25; Luke 1:76), even the "superprophet."
**I am sending my messenger ahead of you.** The prophet's crucial role involved preparing the way for Jesus in fulfillment of Mal 3:1 (cf. Matt 3:3; Isa 40:3). This one who prepared the way is identified as Elijah in Mal 4:5-6, which is alluded to in Matt 11:14 in reference to John.
11:11 **none is greater than John the Baptist. Yet even the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he is!** Jesus' testimony to John's greatness continued with a striking contrast. No one greater than John had ever lived. But surprisingly, John's greatness pales in significance when compared with that of the least person who experiences the inauguration of the Kingdom of Heaven (cf. 13:17).
11:12 **from the time John the Baptist began preaching until now, the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing, and violent people are attacking it.** John was an epochal messenger of God, one whose ministry marked the apex of the old era and the outset of the new. Matthew 11:12 (cf. Luke 16:16) speaks of the Kingdom as inaugurated since the days of John, but the exact meaning of this verse is difficult to ascertain due to the ambiguity of the Gr. word _biazō_ [TG971, ZG1041]. The word speaks of forceful, even violent advance, and it can have a positive or negative nuance, depending on the context. It is possible that the first half of 11:12 describes the forceful attack of enemies upon the Kingdom. In that case both statements in 11:12 make the same point. But it is more likely 11:12 should be understood (as in the NLT) as contrasting the forceful advance of the Kingdom with the violent attack upon it. John's ministry marks the beginning of both these trends, growth and opposition, and thus he culminates the era of the law and the prophets and inaugurates the era of the Kingdom. See Carson (1984:265-268) and BDAG (175-176) for discussion of various views of this difficult passage.
11:13-14 **before John came, all the prophets and the law of Moses looked forward to this present time.** John's epochal role as the climax of the law and the prophets, an expression referring to the entire OT, is repeated here.
**he is Elijah, the one the prophets said would come.** In this role, John functions as Elijah, whose return is prophesied in Mal 4:5-6 (cf. 17:9-13). This reference to the coming of Elijah is anticipated by the reference to Mal 3:1 in Matt 11:10. Some believe this prophecy requires the literal return of Elijah, but most interpret it in the sense of Luke 1:17, that John's ministry in the "spirit and power of Elijah" fulfills Mal 4:5-6. Either way, the citation of Mal 3:1 in Matt 11:10 and the allusion to Mal 4:5-6 here make it clear that John's preparatory ministry was anticipated in the OT. For further discussion of the relationship of John and Elijah, see Kaiser 1982 and the commentary below.
11:15 **Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand!** This formula (cf. 13:9, 43) underlines the urgency of John's ministry and prepares for the tragic rebellion involved in rejecting it in 11:16ff.
11:16-19 **To what can I compare this generation?** Jesus then turned from explaining John's significance to confronting the unbelief of "this generation" (cf. 12:39, 41-42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36; 24:34). Jesus' words in 11:17-19 amount to a parable, which he applied to the contemporary situation (cf. Luke 7:32-35). Jesus compared John's rejection and his own to the behavior of childish brats who would not play either the wedding game or the funeral game. Neither John's ascetic abstinence (compared to mourning or singing a dirge at a funeral) nor Jesus' enjoyment of food and drink (likened to dancing at a wedding feast) was satisfactory. John was slandered with the charge of demon possession, and Jesus was smeared as a glutton and drunkard because he associated with tax collectors and sinners. No doubt Jesus did associate with such folk (cf. 9:10), but the charges of drunkenness and gluttony were unsubstantiated lies, evidently circulated by the Pharisees, who objected to table fellowship with sinners.
**wisdom is shown to be right by its results.** This probably refers to the righteous activities of both John and Jesus. Their deeds proved their wisdom.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Despite John's doubts (11:2-6), he should not be viewed as a weak, vacillating person. To the contrary, no greater human being ever lived, and there could be no prophet greater than the one spoken of in Malachi 3:1, who would prepare the way for the Messiah (11:7-10). John also lived at a great time, the crucial juncture of the end of the prophetic era, but he was martyred just before the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus inaugurated the new covenant (cf. 26:28). John's ministry heralded the forceful advance of the Kingdom, but he became a victim of the violent people who were attacking it. His role was that of Elijah. (11:11-15). Neither John nor Jesus, whose lifestyles were quite opposite, were acceptable to their evil contemporaries (11:16-19). "John is too holy; Jesus is not holy enough" (Hagner 1993:311). But ultimately Jesus, perhaps personified as wisdom, will be vindicated by his deeds (11:19). Matthew 11:7-19 sets the scene for the blatant slander raised against Jesus in Matthew 12.
John and Elijah. Jesus' solemn words, "anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand," underline the importance of grasping his identification of John the Baptist with Elijah (11:14-15). These words have been the occasion of a great deal of discussion. A first reading of Malachi 4:5-6 seems to indicate a future return of Elijah the prophet to the earth to herald the day of the Lord. That Malachi 4:5-6 was taken at face value may be seen from John 1:21 and Matthew 16:14; 17:10; 27:47, 49 (cf. Sir 48:10). Jesus himself seems to affirm a future role for Elijah in Matthew 17:11, and some believe that Malachi 4:5-6 will yet be literally fulfilled (see Toussaint 1980:211). But in what sense was John said to be Elijah? In other passages John denied that he was Elijah (John 1:21), but he was said to minister in Elijah's spirit and power (Luke 1:17), which may remind the reader of the manner in which Elisha succeeded Elijah (2 Kgs 2:9-15). John was not Elijah reborn, but he fulfilled a role similar to that of Elijah. Sadly, his contemporaries were, for the most part, not willing to accept this (11:14; 21:32), and his martyrdom (14:1-12) ominously hinted at a similar end for Jesus (17:12). Whether there is yet to be a literal return of Elijah to fulfill Malachi 4:5-6 must be left as an open question.
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. Jesus Pronounces Woe to Unbelievers (11:20-24)
20 Then Jesus began to denounce the towns where he had done so many of his miracles, because they hadn't repented of their sins and turned to God. 21 "What sorrow awaits you, Korazin and Bethsaida! For if the miracles I did in you had been done in wicked Tyre and Sidon, their people would have repented of their sins long ago, clothing themselves in burlap and throwing ashes on their heads to show their remorse. 22 I tell you, Tyre and Sidon will be better off on judgment day than you.
23 "And you people of Capernaum, will you be honored in heaven? No, you will go down to the place of the dead.[*] For if the miracles I did for you had been done in wicked Sodom, it would still be here today. 24 I tell you, even Sodom will be better off on judgment day than you."
## NOTES
11:20 **Jesus began to denounce the towns where he had done so many of his miracles.** The denunciation of Jesus' contemporaries begun in 11:16-19 is sharpened by two similar reproaches in 11:20-24. The reproaches are introduced by the general statement of 11:20, which highlights the guilt of those who saw Jesus' miracles but refused to repent (cf. John 12:37).
**What sorrow awaits.** This translates the word "woe." The pronouncement of woe here balances the beatitude spoken to John's followers in 11:11. Additional pronouncements of woe upon unbelief occur in the OT (see Num 21:29; Isa 3:9-11; Ezek 24:6-9) and in Matt 18:7; 23:13-16, 23-29; 24:19; 26:24.
11:21-22 **Korazin and Bethsaida!** These were towns near Capernaum at the north end of the Sea of Galilee. Jesus charged them with unbelief even worse than that of Tyre and Sidon, important coastal cities that were ancient enemies of Israel.
**Tyre and Sidon** would have shown their repentance with burlap and ashes (cf. Esth 4:1-4; Ps 69:11; Jonah 3:5) had they seen Jesus' miracles, so the verdict was rendered that Korazin and Bethsaida will fare worse than Tyre and Sidon on judgment day (cf. 15:21-28). Korazin and Bethsaida are not mentioned elsewhere in Matthew, but evidently were involved in the ministry of Jesus summarized in 4:23; 9:35; 11:1. (For Tyre and Sidon see 2 Sam 5:11; 1 Kgs 9:11-12; 2 Chron 2:10-11; Pss 45:12; 87:4; Isa 23:1-9; Jer 25:15, 22; 47:4; Joel 3:4-8; Amos 1:9-10; Zech 9:2-4.)
11:23 **Capernaum.** The second reproach follows the same pattern of charge (11:23) and verdict (11:24). Sodom will fare better on judgment day than will Jesus' own city of Capernaum (4:13; 9:1).
**you will go down to the place of the dead.** In describing Capernaum's unbelief, Jesus alluded to the OT (Isa 14:13-15; Ezek 26:20; 31:14; 32:18, 24) to compare Capernaum's arrogance to that of the pagan king of Babylon. Far from being exalted to heaven, Capernaum would be punished in hades, the place of the dead. And that punishment would be worse than that of Sodom, the most notoriously wicked city in the entire Bible. Jesus had already spoken in a similar way about Sodom in 10:15 (cf. among many texts Gen 18:20-19:28; Deut 29:23; 32:32; Isa 1:9-10; Ezek 16:46-56; 2 Pet 2:6; Jude 1:7). These three Galilean towns would face such severe judgment because they had received such clear and sustained revelation. With greater access to truth comes greater accountability to believe it.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The reproaches of 11:20-24 are the most severe words of Jesus to this point in Matthew (but see 23:13-36). If there are any questions on the part of the reader as to how Jesus' ministry was being received, they are put to rest here. Although Matthew has stressed how the multitudes followed Jesus due to his healing miracles, here he shows that the majority of these crowds did not grasp the point of the miracles—Jesus' authority on earth to forgive sins (9:6). Many had personally experienced the blessings of the miracles, and evidently many more had observed the miracles taking place. But sadly, relatively few had grasped the significance of the miracles as authenticating the Kingdom message of repentance (cf. John 6:14-15, 26-27). The eschatological blessings of the Kingdom were enthusiastically received, but the ethical imperative of repentance was rejected.
Jesus' woes against Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum assume an important principle of divine judgment, that of proportional accountability, which results in degrees of reward and punishment (cf. Luke 12:47-48). Tyre and Sidon, along with Sodom, were wicked cities that had rejected God's revelation. But the revelation they had received was not nearly so clear or sustained as the revelation of Jesus to Korazin, Bethsaida, and especially Capernaum, Jesus' adopted hometown (4:13; 9:1). Thus, the judgment of Tyre, Sidon, and even Sodom would be more tolerable than that of Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum.
Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum also serve as a warning to all those today whose familiarity with Christianity seems to have bred contempt. Being born into a Christian family, being a member of a church where the gospel is faithfully proclaimed, or even being a citizen of a country where Christianity is prominent are choice blessings from God, but none of them is a substitute for personal repentance. It is one thing to know about the gospel due to one's environment; it is another thing entirely to have personally acknowledged one's own need of the gospel. Judas Iscariot's life bears sad testimony to the fact that those who are nearest to the means of grace are sometimes the farthest from its end. Bruner (1987:424-429) makes some pointed and appropriate remarks about how this passage ought to impact those who have become nonchalant about the gospel.
## TEXT [Commentary]
D. Jesus' Thanksgiving and Invitation (11:25-30)
25 At that time Jesus prayed this prayer: "O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, thank you for hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike. 26 Yes, Father, it pleased you to do it this way!
27 "My Father has entrusted everything to me. No one truly knows the Son except the Father, and no one truly knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."
28 Then Jesus said, "Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you. Let me teach you, because I am humble and gentle at heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy to bear, and the burden I give you is light."
## NOTES
11:25-26 **Jesus prayed.** At 11:25 things take a striking turn from rebuke to a prayer, not of lament but of thanksgiving. The prayer is evidently public.
**hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike.** In the midst of increasing conflict and rejection, Jesus rested in the Father's sovereignty in hiding "these things" (perhaps the eschatological significance of the miracles) from those who "think themselves wise and clever" and revealing himself to the "childlike" (cf. 13:10-17; Luke 10:21-22). A similar contrast was made previously between those who thought themselves to be healthy and those who were ill (9:12-13). Here the contrast is not between the brilliant and the stupid but between the proud and the humble. The former refuse to humble themselves under God's authority and to repent when they are confronted with the gospel of the Kingdom. The latter respond to the Kingdom message by repenting, humbly acknowledging their childlike dependence upon the heavenly Father. Matthew speaks rather frequently of the followers of Jesus as poor, little, or child-like (cf. 5:3; 10:42; 18:6; 21:16; 25:40; Luke 10:21-22).
11:27 **no one truly knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.** Jesus affirmed his unique messianic status as sole revealer of the Father. The Father has delegated all things to the Son (cf. 28:18), with whom he shares a unique reciprocal intimate knowledge. Only through the Son can humans receive the knowledge of the Father. The high Christology of these words reminds one of the Gospel of John (1:14, 18; 3:35; 14:6-9; 17:1-8).
11:28-30 **I will give you rest.** Jesus turns from taking solace in God's sovereignty to an invitation for people to come to him. It is only through Jesus that people come to know the Father, so it is fitting for Jesus to invite them to come to _him_ and to promise that _he_ will give them rest as they take _his_ yoke upon them. Here Jesus takes on the role of God in fulfilling the OT promises of rest (Exod 33:14; cf. Deut 12:10; 25:19; Josh 1:13; 22:4; 2 Sam 7:11; Isa 14:3; 28:12; Heb 3:11, 18; 4:1-11). This broader concept of rest is based on God's rest after creation as the model for Israel's rest on the Sabbath (Gen 2:2; Exod 35:2). The invitation is stated in a twofold manner: Jesus invites people (1) to come to him (cf. 4:19; 22:4) and (2) to take his yoke upon them and learn from him. Both invitations are followed by promises of rest (an allusion to Jer 6:16), and there is additional incentive provided in the description of Jesus' yoke and burden in 11:30. But in reality there is only one invitation, and it is to a life of discipleship, one of following Jesus' teaching and example of humility and gentleness (cf. 5:5), symbolized by the yoke.
Jesus promised rest to those who were weary because his yoke was easy to bear and his burden was light. This language echoes the way wisdom (cf. 11:19; 23:34) was characterized in the intertestamental book of Sirach (Sir 6:23-31; 24:19; 51:23-27), which seems to develop the personification of wisdom in Prov 8:1–9:6. It is likely that there is an implied contrast to the yoke (cf. Acts 15:10; Gal 5:1) and burden (cf. 23:4; Luke 11:46) of Pharisaism here. It is not that the Torah is a heavy burden that Jesus will remove but that the Pharisaic traditions have encumbered those who wish to obey the Torah. Jesus, as the definitive interpreter of Torah (5:17-20), fulfilled the role of wisdom and was the sole agent who could provide rest for the people of God. (See Laansma 1997 for a penetrating analysis of this passage.)
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this passage Jesus responds in two ways to growing opposition. First, he finds comfort and strength in the sovereignty of God, his Father (11:25-27). Second, he continues to invite people to follow him (11:28-30). It is striking that both of these responses follow the announcement of doom upon the towns that rejected Jesus' Kingdom message. We can find no better response to opposition than that modeled by Jesus. When people reject the gospel of Christ, we can only rest in God's sovereignty and continue to offer God's grace. People come to faith in Christ for two reasons, ultimately because of God's purpose in election and immediately because they have heard the gospel. We can continue today to rest in the sovereignty of God and the sufficiency of the gospel to bring people to faith.
With the end of Matthew 11 we have come to the end of the first of three sets of two passages on unbelief (11:2-19; 11:20-24) followed by a passage on belief (11:25-30; see the analysis of chs 11–12 in the commentary on 11:1-6 above). Opposition to the Messiah and his messengers has been increasingly alluded to as Matthew's story continues (2:16; 3:7; 4:1; 5:10-12; 7:6; 8:20, 34; 9:3, 11, 34; 10:14-39). But as Matthew 11 unfolds, the situation is unmistakably grim. The Messiah's forerunner was in prison, and even he was beginning to have doubts about Jesus' ministry (11:1-3). Jesus pointed to the unmistakable signs of the Kingdom's presence in word and work (11:4-6) and extolled John's unsurpassed greatness. However, the Kingdom was being violently attacked by people who arrogantly and obstinately refused its authority (11:12, 16-24). Nevertheless, the Father was revealed (and continued to be revealed) by the Son to certain "childlike" people whose weariness compelled them to find the rest Jesus offered in Kingdom discipleship (11:25-30; cf. 10:42; 18:1-10; 25:40). Those who are wise in their own eyes increasingly reject this humbling message as Matthew's narrative unfolds the second (12:1-21) and third (12:22-50) sets of unbelief and belief passages (cf. 9:11; 12:2, 10, 24; 18:6; 25:45).
The Father and Son. The unique relationship of the Father and the Son in the redemption of God's people is described with unparalleled clarity in 11:25-27. Matthew has prepared the reader for this quintessential statement by means of previous declarations about the Son. Immanuel, the Son miraculously born to Mary, signifies the unique saving presence of God with his people (1:23). Matthew's narrative of Jesus' baptism mentions the pleasure the Father takes in the Son in words echoing Isaiah 42:1 (3:17; cf. 17:5). Satan was unable to shake the Son from his resolve not to test the Father (4:1-11). Jesus did miracles to show that the Father had given the Son of Man authority to forgive sins on the earth (9:6). In times of persecution, the disciples must confess the Son if they wish the Son to confess them to the Father (10:32-33, 40). Further comments on the grandeur of the Son will occur, culminating in the "great commission" being predicated on the Son's unique authority (28:18-20). But one would be hard pressed to speak of the Son in terms more exalted than those used in 11:27, which bluntly yet elegantly says that saving knowledge of God the Father comes only through the selective revelation of Jesus, the exclusive mediator of salvation.
The reader of Matthew 11:25-30 may be surprised at the way in which the sovereignty of God (11:25-27) is joined to the appeal for human decision (11:28-30) in this passage. The history of the church has often witnessed polarization on these two areas of its doctrine, with some emphasizing the sovereignty of God and others human responsibility. But since biblical texts often speak of these matters side by side (see Gen 50:20; Acts 2:23; 13:48; 2 Tim 2:10), it seems foolish to attempt to separate them. It is only due to the sovereign grace of God that sinners repent and believe in Jesus. And that sovereign grace operates only through the message of the gospel of Jesus. The church must rest in the sovereignty of God if it is to gain strength for its labor of inviting people all over the world to believe in Jesus.
It is also important to note how Jesus spoke of discipleship here. The mention of a yoke is in keeping with Jewish metaphors of discipleship, but in what sense was Jesus' yoke easy and his burden light? It was light because Jesus did not endorse the oral traditions of the Pharisees, which threatened to obscure the weightier matters of the law (cf. 15:3-9; 23:16-24). But Jesus' yoke should not be viewed as less rigorous than that of the Pharisees, since he stated that the righteousness he required surpassed that of the Pharisees (5:20). Jesus' yoke of discipleship is light compared to that of the Pharisees, but it is still a yoke. Jesus is the sole revealer of the Father and he, not the Pharisees, is the definitive teacher of the Torah (5:17-48). He is gentle and humble, while they are proud and ostentatious (6:1-18; 23:1-7). Their traditions obscure and even transgress the obligations demanded by the Torah (15:3, 6), but Jesus goes to the heart of the Torah by stressing its weightier matters. Paradoxically, his focus on weightier matters leads to a lighter yoke (cf. 1 John 5:3).
## TEXT [Commentary]
E. Controversy about the Sabbath (12:1-8; cf. Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-5)
1 At about that time Jesus was walking through some grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry, so they began breaking off some heads of grain and eating them. 2 But some Pharisees saw them do it and protested, "Look, your disciples are breaking the law by harvesting grain on the Sabbath."
3 Jesus said to them, "Haven't you read in the Scriptures what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4 He went into the house of God, and he and his companions broke the law by eating the sacred loaves of bread that only the priests are allowed to eat. 5 And haven't you read in the law of Moses that the priests on duty in the Temple may work on the Sabbath? 6 I tell you, there is one here who is even greater than the Temple! 7 But you would not have condemned my innocent disciples if you knew the meaning of this Scripture: 'I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.'[*] 8 For the Son of Man[*] is Lord, even over the Sabbath!"
## NOTES
12:1-2 **At about that time.** Matthew places the events of 12:1-8 during the days of opposition narrated in ch 11 (cf. Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-5).
**they began breaking off some heads of grain and eating them.** It was not against the law of Moses to pick a few heads of grain as one walked through a field, but one was not allowed to use a sickle (Deut 23:25).
**some Pharisees saw them do it and protested.** The Pharisees objected because in their view this amounted to work (harvesting grain) on the Sabbath (cf. Exod 20:10; 34:21; Deut 5:12-15; Isa 56:2, 4, 6). Perhaps their oral traditions spoke to this matter (cf. _m. Shabbat_ 7:2).
12:3-4 **Haven't you read in the Scriptures?** Jesus' two questions (12:3, 5) imply that he was surprised at the Pharisees' ignorance of the law. Both questions "turn the tables" and put the burden on the Pharisees. They had read, but they had not understood and obeyed. Jesus' first question alludes to 1 Sam 21:1-6 (cf. Lev 24:8), the account of the sorry incident in which David was famished while fleeing from Saul and lied to the priest Ahimelech, which resulted in Saul's executing all the priests at Nob. The argument is from lesser to greater, as is explicitly stated in 12:6. Evidently, the Pharisees did not object to David's technically illegal behavior of eating the sacred bread (cf. Lev 24:5-9) with the permission of the priest Ahimelech, but they objected to Jesus' hungry disciples doing what was permitted by Deut 23:25. It is implied that Jesus is greater than David (cf. 12:6, 8, 41, 42; 22:41-46).
12:5-6 **Haven't you read in the law of Moses that the priests on duty in the Temple may work on the Sabbath?** Jesus' second question relates to the priests' "work" in the Temple on the Sabbath. Technically their work broke the law, but the priests were guiltless in that they were instructed to do this work on the Sabbath, evidently because this obligation overrode the normal Sabbath law (Lev 24:8; Num 28:9-10; cf. John 7:23). Thus, the "work" of the Temple took precedence over the "rest" of the Sabbath. The Pharisees did not object to this "work" by the priests, but they objected to Jesus, who is greater than the Temple and its sacrificial ministry. As with the previous question, the point is that there are legitimate exceptions to the general rules of Sabbath observance.
12:7-8 The remaining verses of this section bring it to a conclusion and get to the heart of Jesus' differences with the Pharisees. Two major problems surface here: the Pharisees did not interpret the OT as Jesus did and they did not recognize his position as Lord of the Sabbath.
**I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.** For the second time (cf. 9:13), Jesus cited Hos 6:6 to the effect that the Pharisees' harsh approach to the Sabbath contradicted God's compassionate purposes for his people.
**the Son of Man is Lord, even over the Sabbath!** This is the third such superiority statement. Already he had stated that he is greater than David (implicitly in 12:3; cf. 22:41-45) and the Temple (12:6).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage describes a controversy that occurred when the Pharisees objected to Jesus' disciples' innocently (12:7; Deut 23:25) picking and eating grain as they walked through a field (12:1-2). In response, Jesus referred to King David, the Temple, and the Sabbath, with the upshot that he is greater than each of them (12:3-8). The argument from David's activities (12:3-4) was problematic enough for the Pharisees, but the clear affirmation of Jesus as greater than the Temple and as Lord of the Sabbath was viewed as outrageous, even blasphemous.
Key to understanding Jesus' differences with the Pharisees is seeing their contrasting ways of interpreting the OT. The Pharisees began with the institution of the Sabbath and viewed it as all important—it overrode the humanitarian concerns behind the legislation of Deuteronomy 23:25, which permitted the picking and eating of grain as one walked through a field. By contrast, Jesus began with God's concern for his people, which overrides the institution of the Sabbath on certain occasions. "The Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, and not people to meet the requirements of the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27). As Hagner (1993:328) points out, Jesus' argument is both _haggadic_ (analogy drawn from a narrative passage about David) and _halakhic_ (precept drawn from a legal passage about the priests). As Lord of the Sabbath (12:8), he provides the ultimate authoritative interpretation of its role in the life of God's people (cf. 5:17-48). Jesus promised his disciples rest, an easy yoke, and a light burden (11:29-30). His approach to the Sabbath is a clear example of how his promise is fulfilled. But far more than mere interpretive skill distinguishes Jesus from the Pharisees. His interpretive prowess is due to his supreme position as one greater than David, the Temple, and the Sabbath. Davidic promises, priestly activities, and Sabbath rest all find fulfillment in him.
## TEXT [Commentary]
F. Healing on the Sabbath in the Synagogue (12:9-14; cf. Mark 3:1-6; Luke 6:6-11)
9 Then Jesus went over to their synagogue, 10 where he noticed a man with a deformed hand. The Pharisees asked Jesus, "Does the law permit a person to work by healing on the Sabbath?" (They were hoping he would say yes, so they could bring charges against him.)
11 And he answered, "If you had a sheep that fell into a well on the Sabbath, wouldn't you work to pull it out? Of course you would. 12 And how much more valuable is a person than a sheep! Yes, the law permits a person to do good on the Sabbath."
13 Then he said to the man, "Hold out your hand." So the man held out his hand, and it was restored, just like the other one! 14 Then the Pharisees called a meeting to plot how to kill Jesus.
## NOTES
12:9-12 **Does the law permit a person to work by healing on the Sabbath?** The Sabbath conflict intensified when Jesus healed a deformed (lit., "withered" or paralyzed) hand in the synagogue in response to the Pharisees' question about its legality (cf. Mark 3:1-6; Luke 6:6-11).
**so they could bring charges against him.** The Pharisees wanted to have an accusation against Jesus, so they asked him whether it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath (12:10; cf. Luke 13:14; John 5:7-10). The NLT's translation expands this somewhat to bring out the Pharisees' assumption that the healing would amount to work and would break the Sabbath. If the tradition later codified in the Mishnah around AD 200 was current in Jesus' day, the Pharisees themselves would have evidently permitted healing when life was in danger ( _m. Yoma_ 8:6).
**the law permits a person to do good on the Sabbath.** Jesus responded (12:11-12) that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath, even when an emergency constitutes a technical violation. He referred to a practice the Pharisees would evidently permit—removing a sheep from a "well" (more likely a cistern or pit; cf. Deut 22:4; Prov 12:10). Again the argument is from lesser to greater, since healing a needy person is more necessary than getting a sheep out of a cistern (cf. 6:26-30; 10:31).
12:13-14 The theological argument of the previous verses was concluded by Jesus doing what the Pharisees considered to be unlawful—he commanded the man to stretch out his hand, and as he did so, it was restored to normal function.
**to plot how to kill Jesus.** That the Pharisees would decide to kill Jesus is not a surprise to the attentive reader of Matthew (cf. 3:7; 9:11, 34; 12:24; 15:7, 12; 16:6, 21; 17:10, 12, 22; 20:18; 21:45-46; 22:15, 34; 23:29-32; 26:2-5, 14-16).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage reinforces the basic impasse between Jesus and the Pharisees, which is evident in 12:1-8. They were at loggerheads over the relation of Sabbath law to deeds of compassion. The Pharisees evidently interpreted the Sabbath law strictly and made no exceptions for instances of compassion like those involved in Jesus' healings, but Jesus pointed out an inconsistency in their approach. They had no problem with a sheep being rescued from a cistern on the Sabbath, yet they condemned him for healing a person, who is much more valuable to God than a sheep. Theoretically, they might have responded to Jesus that the healing of the man's hand was not a matter of life or death, and could have waited until the next day, but Matthew's narrative ends with this rejoinder of Jesus. Jesus showed that the written Torah was not violated by such healing.
The legal dispute is one thing, but it led the Pharisees to take steps to end the dispute by eliminating Jesus. At first glance, this seems to be a rather draconian solution to a religious dispute. Perhaps the Pharisees were simply planning to enforce Exodus 31:14, but baser motives were probably at work. Evidently, Jesus was perceived as a threat to the status quo, so jealousy could also be involved, since an increase in Jesus' popularity and influence would inevitably mean a decrease in that of the Pharisees (cf. 27:18). Additionally, the Pharisees may have feared that Jesus' followers would become a riotous mob, which the Roman authorities would view as a threat to their rule over Judea (cf. 26:4). At any rate, it is not a little ironic that a dispute over the finer points of Sabbath law led the Pharisees to plan to break the sixth commandment, "you shall not murder."
## TEXT [Commentary]
G. Jesus, the Servant of the Lord (12:15-21)
15 But Jesus knew what they were planning. So he left that area, and many people followed him. He healed all the sick among them, 16 but he warned them not to reveal who he was. 17 This fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah concerning him:
18 "Look at my Servant, whom I have chosen.
He is my Beloved, who pleases me.
I will put my Spirit upon him,
and he will proclaim justice to the nations.
19 He will not fight or shout
or raise his voice in public.
20 He will not crush the weakest reed
or put out a flickering candle.
Finally he will cause justice to be victorious.
21 And his name will be the hope
of all the world."[*]
## NOTES
12:15-16 **Jesus knew what they were planning. So he left that area.** By some means, Jesus became aware of the Pharisees' conspiracy and made a strategic withdrawal to another area (cf. 2:12-14, 22; 4:12; 14:13; 15:21).
**many people followed him.** As usual, crowds followed Jesus, and there were many healings.
**he warned them not to reveal who he was.** Jesus' warnings that those healed should not make him known (cf. 8:4; 9:30; 17:9) seem to be due to his desire not to pander to the crowd's thirst for the spectacular. Any wave of popular enthusiasm for Jesus would clearly precipitate intensified Pharisaic opposition.
12:17-18 **my Servant, whom I have chosen.** Jesus' desire to keep a low profile in the face of Pharisaic opposition and popular enthusiasm was in keeping with Isa 42:1-4, which, as cited here, is the longest OT passage in Matthew. This text, already alluded to in the Father's endorsement at Jesus' baptism (3:17; cf. 17:5), speaks of the Lord's beloved servant as one who is enabled by the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations (12:18). This reference to the Gentiles ("nations") is significant, given the opposition Jesus was receiving from the Jews. It anticipates the positive responses from Gentiles to Jesus and the Kingdom that follow (cf. 15:28; 27:54).
12:19-21 **He will not fight or shout.** The Spirit led the Servant away from the type of ministry that might please the carnal desires of the crowd. The Servant's ministry is not characterized by fighting, shouting, or rhetoric calculated to incite the crowd.
**He will not crush the weakest reed or put out a flickering candle.** He will handle weak people, pictured as bruised reeds and flickering candles, with gentleness and compassion.
**his name will be the hope of all the world.** Lit., "the Gentiles will hope in his name." Thus, his proclamation of justice to the Gentiles (12:18), characterized by compassionate deeds rather than inflammatory words (12:19-20), will be successful (12:21).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 11–12 comprises a block of narrative material stressing the increasing opposition to Jesus and the Kingdom. The threefold structure of this narrative block has been discussed previously in the commentary on 11:1-6. This structure involves three sets of passages, each containing two passages stressing unbelief followed by a passage stressing belief. With Matthew 12:21 we have come to the end of the second of these three sets, with 12:1-8 and 12:9-14 stressing unbelief and 12:15-21 stressing belief.
The citation of Isaiah 42:1-4 here serves three purposes. First, it explains why Jesus withdrew from conflict with the Pharisees and why he urged the people whom he had healed not to reveal who he was. Jesus' ministry would not be characterized by conflict and by loud words spoken to incite the masses. Instead, he would prove to be gentle and merciful in his ministry to the weak (cf. 5:5, 7; 11:29). Second, Isaiah 42:1-4 indicates that the Servant would have a ministry to the Gentiles. Although Jesus was being increasingly rejected by many of "the sons of the Kingdom" (cf. 8:12), Matthew has gradually been making it clear that certain Gentiles were receptive to the Kingdom (cf. 1:3, 5-6; 2:1-2, 11; 4:15-16; 8:10-12; 15:28; 27:54) and that the followers of Jesus must widen their horizons for a worldwide ministry to all the nations (22:9; 24:14; 25:32; 28:18-20). Third, Isaiah 42:1 stressed that the Servant's ministry would be Spirit-empowered. This lays the background for Jesus' response to the slander that his powers of exorcism were demonic. Thus, the Pharisees' charge in 12:24 is found to be anti-Scriptural, and amounts to an unforgivable slander of the Spirit of God (12:31-32).
It is paradoxical that the power of Jesus and the Kingdom is found in service born out of humility and compassion (cf. 11:29). The Messiah used his power not to gain control over people but to serve them. Jesus did not attempt to extend the Kingdom by selfish quarrels involving inflammatory rhetoric. His ministry would eventually bring justice to victory (12:20), but even John the Baptist had doubts about the way in which this was being accomplished. Certainly Christians today have a great deal to learn from their Lord on this matter. Their course of life is likewise to be that of sacrificial service (cf. 16:21-25; 20:25-28).
## TEXT [Commentary]
H. Jesus and the Prince of Demons (12:22-37; cf. Mark 3:20-30)
22 Then a demon-possessed man, who was blind and couldn't speak, was brought to Jesus. He healed the man so that he could both speak and see. 23 The crowd was amazed and asked, "Could it be that Jesus is the Son of David, the Messiah?"
24 But when the Pharisees heard about the miracle, they said, "No wonder he can cast out demons. He gets his power from Satan,[*] the prince of demons."
25 Jesus knew their thoughts and replied, "Any kingdom divided by civil war is doomed. A town or family splintered by feuding will fall apart. 26 And if Satan is casting out Satan, he is divided and fighting against himself. His own kingdom will not survive. 27 And if I am empowered by Satan, what about your own exorcists? They cast out demons, too, so they will condemn you for what you have said. 28 But if I am casting out demons by the Spirit of God, then the Kingdom of God has arrived among you. 29 For who is powerful enough to enter the house of a strong man and plunder his goods? Only someone even stronger—someone who could tie him up and then plunder his house.
30 "Anyone who isn't with me opposes me, and anyone who isn't working with me is actually working against me.
31 "So I tell you, every sin and blasphemy can be forgiven—except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which will never be forgiven. 32 Anyone who speaks against the Son of Man can be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come.
33 "A tree is identified by its fruit. If a tree is good, its fruit will be good. If a tree is bad, its fruit will be bad. 34 You brood of snakes! How could evil men like you speak what is good and right? For whatever is in your heart determines what you say. 35 A good person produces good things from the treasury of a good heart, and an evil person produces evil things from the treasury of an evil heart. 36 And I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak. 37 The words you say will either acquit you or condemn you."
## NOTES
12:22-23 The healing of a demon-possessed, blind, and mute man produced opposing reactions from onlookers (cf. Mark 3:20-30; Luke 11:14-23; 12:10). The healing is mentioned only briefly; the focus is on the following controversy. Jesus had previously healed blind people and mute people, but this is the only place in the Gospels where Jesus is said to have healed a person who had both maladies. The reaction of the crowd is in stark contrast to that of the Pharisees.
**Could it be that Jesus is the Son of David, the Messiah?** The crowds were amazed and wondered whether Jesus was the Son of David. The NLT adds "the Messiah" to bring out the messianic significance of the expression "son of David" (cf. the discussion in the Christology section of "Major Themes" in the Introduction and 1:1, 20; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15; 22:41-45).
12:24 **no wonder he can cast out demons. He gets his power from Satan, the prince of demons.** The Pharisees viewed Jesus not as messianic but as demonic, essentially repeating a charge originally made in 9:34. The NLT handles the charge of the Pharisees in 12:24 rather freely. The Gr. text does not have the expressions "no wonder" or "power" and the word translated as "Satan" is lit. "Beelzeboul" (see NLT mg), as in 10:25. Taken lit., the Pharisees counter the popular interpretation of Jesus' miracle with the idea that "he does not cast out demons except by Beelzeboul, prince of the demons." Beelzeboul probably means "lord of the house" or "lord of the heights." The Pharisees did not deny the reality of Jesus' miracles but attributed them to Satan, not to God.
12:25-28 **if Satan is casting out Satan, he is divided and fighting against himself.** Jesus' answer to the Pharisees contains two rhetorical questions that address their false interpretation of his exorcism, followed by a statement of its true interpretation. He first asked whether Satan would work against himself (12:25-26), then asked whether the Pharisees' own exorcists were empowered by Satan (12:27).
**I am casting out demons by the Spirit of God.** Jesus stated the real power behind his works: the Spirit of God empowers the words and works of the Kingdom (12:28).
The first question is based on common sense observations about the need for unity in any kingdom, city, or household. It shows that the Pharisees' view of Jesus is untenable because it is illogical and contrary to experience. Jesus reduced the Pharisees' charge to absurdity. The second question is _ad hominem_ , based on the fact that evidently there were Pharisees who practiced exorcisms (cf. Acts 19:13-14). It shows that the Pharisees' view of Jesus was untenable because it was inconsistent—the Pharisees themselves practiced exorcism but slandered Jesus for doing the same thing. After showing that the Pharisees' charge of collaboration with demons was nonsensical and false, Jesus affirmed the real power behind his miracles. Far from being demonic, it was divine. The same Holy Spirit of God who was active in Jesus' conception (1:18, 20) had been empowering him for ministry since his baptism in fulfillment of Isa 42:1 (3:16–4:1; 12:18). Thus, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn from the Spirit-empowered miracles of Jesus—the saving power of God's Kingdom has arrived among Jesus' contemporaries (cf. 3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 24:14). This is probably the strongest statement of the presence of the Kingdom in Matthew.
12:29 **who is powerful enough to enter the house of a strong man like Satan and plunder his goods? Only someone even stronger.** This pictures the presence and advance of the Kingdom upon Satan's domain as the tying up of a strong man and the looting of his house. So Jesus' preaching, teaching, and miraculous deeds were encroaching upon Satan's territory (see 11:1, 5, 21-23; 12:13, 18, 22; cf. 1 John 3:8).
12:30 **Anyone who isn't with me opposes me.** In light of this, opposition to Jesus (9:3, 11, 34; 10:25; 12:2, 10, 24) is unthinkable, and neutrality is impossible, since the one who does not actively support Jesus and the Kingdom opposes him. Perhaps these words were intended to warn the wondering crowd more than the Pharisees, whose minds were made up.
12:31-32 **blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which will never be forgiven.** Here Jesus moves from defense to offense, from explanation to warning (Davies and Allison 1991:344). In these verses Jesus tells the Pharisees in no uncertain terms that their slanderous charges (cf. 9:34; 10:25; 12:24) are unforgivable. The two verses are roughly parallel, with 32a and 32b expanding the positive and negative statements of 31a and 31b. If the Pharisees had merely spoken against Jesus, their sin might have been forgiven. But they spoke against the Spirit and attributed the work of the Spirit to the prince of the demons. Since the power of the Spirit was the source of Jesus' works (12:28), it is really the Spirit who was being slandered, not Jesus. For similar sins, see Isa 63:10 and Acts 7:52. The consequences of such sin are eternal; it will not be forgiven in the present or the world to come (cf 13:22, 39, 40; 24:3). One may slander Jesus without slandering the Spirit, since one can slander Jesus without being aware of the Spirit's empowerment of Jesus. This may be forgiven. But to slander the Spirit is to look at the miraculous works of the Spirit present in Jesus' ministry and ascribe these works to Satan. This will not be forgiven.
12:33 **If a tree is good, its fruit will be good.** The rejoinder to the Pharisees continues with a new metaphor, that of a tree and its fruit (cf. 3:7-10; 7:16-20). The Pharisees must make a consistent decision. They must either view Jesus (the tree) and its fruit (his words and deeds) as worthless, or they must view them as good. Jesus' good fruit demonstrates that he is good, but the Pharisees attribute the good deeds to a demonic source. When the Pharisees speak, their words are like the worthless fruit of a worthless tree because they speak from an evil heart (12:34-35; cf. 15:11, 19).
12:34 **brood of snakes!** Jesus' depiction of the Pharisees as a brood of snakes recalls 3:7 and anticipates 23:33. The words of the Pharisees are therefore suggestive of their ultimate destiny. Evil words spoken from the treasury of an evil heart portend eschatological doom. These words spoken against the Spirit will ultimately condemn the Pharisees. On the other hand, good people will speak good words that will ultimately acquit them.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Pharisaic opposition to Jesus comes to a head in this section. The healing of a blind, mute, demon-possessed man results in antithetical responses. The crowd wondered whether Jesus was the Messiah, but the Pharisees, perhaps in response to both the miracle and the crowd's openness to Jesus, slandered Jesus (and, more importantly, the Spirit) with the charge of collaborating with the prince of the demons (12:22-24). Jesus' response comprises the rest of the passage (12:25-37). In it he argues convincingly against the Pharisees' view of his ministry and affirms that his ministry must be understood as nothing less that the arrival of the Kingdom by the power of God's Spirit (12:25-28). Then he likens the advance of the Kingdom into Satan's domain to the binding of a strong man and the looting of his household and warns his listeners that neutrality is impossible when it comes to the work of the Kingdom (12:29-30). The Pharisees' slander amounts to an unforgivable blasphemy—not merely of Jesus but of the Spirit of God who empowers him (12:31-32). Further, their slanderous words betray their evil hearts and portend their eschatological doom, just as worthless fruit proves that a tree is worthless (12:33-37).
The Coming(s) of Jesus and the Binding of Satan. Most expositors (Toussaint 1980:163-164 is an exception) acknowledge that Matthew 12:28-29 teaches the presence of the Kingdom, and that God's saving power began to encroach upon the domain of Satan during the life and ministry of Jesus. Generally, this encroachment or binding is linked in some way to the description of the binding of Satan in the abyss in Revelation 20:1-10. Theologians who hold an amillennial view generally argue that Satan has been bound by the first coming of Christ so that he can no longer deceive the nations (cf. Rev 20:3). Those who hold to premillennialism, especially dispensational premillennialism, take an opposite view, stressing that the binding of Satan in Revelation 20 is a yet future event that will happen only at the second coming of Christ to the earth. It appears that one must find some truth in both of these views. Dispensationalists must make room for the decisive defeat of Satan at Jesus' first coming, and amillennialists must not underestimate the extent to which Satan's limited power can still injure the church. Satan's power to claim any true victory has been shattered in Christ's first coming, yet he remains a sinister enemy who must be resisted by all the means of grace (Eph 6:11-18; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8-9). Only in the future will he be totally incapacitated (Rev 20:1-10). Believers can rejoice that the power of the gospel of Jesus already overcomes the enemy (John 12:31; 16:11; Acts 26:18; Eph 2:1-6; Col 1:13), and that God will eventually fully destroy Satan's evil work so that in the new earth only righteousness will dwell (Rev 21–22).
The Unforgivable Slander of the Holy Spirit. The solemn words of 12:31-32 ought to be taken to heart by all readers of Matthew. But the question remains as to the precise nature of "the unpardonable sin." Well-meaning but over-zealous preachers have at times used this verse to threaten their listeners that to disbelieve the gospel message is to commit the unpardonable sin. In ministry, one may encounter individuals who are under the impression that there is no hope for them because they have "sinned away their day of grace." Theologians tend to interpret the unpardonable sin as the generic sin of unbelief, linking this Matthean passage to such texts as John 3:18; 16:9; 1 John 5:16. But as serious as general disbelief in Jesus is, those who take this passage as a reference to it are mistaken.
The specific situation in Matthew 12 involves the Spirit-empowered miracles of Jesus, which ought to have been viewed as evidence of his messianic status (12:23) and his authority to forgive sins on earth (9:6). Far from simply disbelieving this, the Pharisees slandered the ministry of the Spirit through the Messiah by accusing Jesus of collaborating with the very forces his ministry was overpowering (12:29). Therefore, it would be wise for expositors to exercise caution in the broad application of this text to unbelief in general. To be sure, ultimate unbelief in Jesus is unforgivable, but the point of this text is to underline not only unbelief in the face of clear evidence that Jesus is the Messiah, but also the slanderous perversion of this messianic evidence into demonic evidence. Today people are accountable to believe the gospel when they hear it, but this hardly warrants the notion that those who do not immediately accept Jesus have entered an unalterable state of unforgivable doom.
## TEXT [Commentary]
I. The Sign of Jonah (12:38-45)
38 One day some teachers of religious law and Pharisees came to Jesus and said, "Teacher, we want you to show us a miraculous sign to prove your authority."
39 But Jesus replied, "Only an evil, adulterous generation would demand a miraculous sign; but the only sign I will give them is the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40 For as Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights.
41 "The people of Nineveh will stand up against this generation on judgment day and condemn it, for they repented of their sins at the preaching of Jonah. Now someone greater than Jonah is here—but you refuse to repent. 42 The queen of Sheba[*] will also stand up against this generation on judgment day and condemn it, for she came from a distant land to hear the wisdom of Solomon. Now someone greater than Solomon is here—but you refuse to listen.
43 "When an evil[*] spirit leaves a person, it goes into the desert, seeking rest but finding none. 44 Then it says, 'I will return to the person I came from.' So it returns and finds its former home empty, swept, and in order. 45 Then the spirit finds seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they all enter the person and live there. And so that person is worse off than before. That will be the experience of this evil generation."
## NOTES
12:38 **One day.** In the Gr. this is lit. "then"; it need not imply the beginning of a separate event. It is best to understand 12:38 as a response by the Pharisees to Jesus' previous rejoinder (12:25-37) to their accusation that he had cast out demons by the power of the prince of the demons (12:22-24).
**Teacher, we want you to show us a miraculous sign.** Those who call Jesus "teacher" in Matthew are not believers in him (cf. 8:19; 9:11; 17:24; 22:16, 36). Jesus' solemn words about the Pharisees' accountability for their accusation led them to ask him to prove himself with a sign (16:1, 4; 24:3, 30; cf. Mark 8:11-12; Luke 11:16, 29-32). But Jesus had performed many miracles before the Pharisees, and his last miracle led them to slander the Holy Spirit. So why should he perform an especially significant miracle, a "sign" ( _sēmeion_ [TG4592, ZG4956]; cf. John 6:30)? Although there was precedence for Israel's leaders to perform signs (Exod 4:30-31), Jesus simply answered that this evil and adulterous generation (cf. 11:16-19; 16:4; 17:17; 23:29-36; 24:34) would see no more signs except that of the prophet Jonah (cf. 16:4).
12:39 **an evil, adulterous generation.** Jesus' description of his contemporaries as adulterous uses a common biblical metaphor for sin (Deut 32:5; Jer 2:23; Ezek 16; Jas 4:4). This incident is similar to that of 16:1-4.
12:40 **Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights.** The reference to Jonah 1:17 provides a cryptic prophecy of the death of Jesus. Jonah himself is the sign—his three days and nights in the belly of the great fish are to be compared to Jesus' three days and nights in the earth. This language need not mean that Jesus would be in the grave for seventy-two hours, since in Jewish reckoning any part of a day could count as a day (cf. Gen 42:17-18; 1 Kgs 20:29; Esth 4:16-5:1). Thus, the traditional passion week chronology of Jesus' death on Friday and resurrection on Sunday is not necessarily challenged. This appears to be the first time Jesus hints at his upcoming death in Matthew (cf. 16:21; 17:9, 22-23).
12:41 **The people of Nineveh will stand up against this generation.** The allusion to Jonah continues with Jesus' unfavorable comparison of his contemporaries to Jonah's audience. In language reminiscent of 11:21-24, Jesus underlines the severity of their sin—the Ninevites repented when Jonah preached (Jonah 3:2), but Jesus' contemporaries would not repent when one greater than Jonah preached (cf. 12:6).
12:42 **The queen of Sheba.** Lit., "the queen of the south." She came from a distant land to hear Solomon's wisdom (1 Kgs 10:1-10; 2 Chr 9:1-9), but Jesus' contemporaries would not accept the wisdom of one greater than Solomon. Compare the implicit comparison with David in 12:3. Thus, both the Ninevites and the queen of Sheba will condemn Jesus' contemporaries on the day of judgment.
12:43-45 **When an evil spirit leaves a person.** This parabolic passage about the activities of an unclean spirit (cf. Matt 10:1 and several texts in Mark and Luke) returns to the matter of exorcism with which Jesus' debate with the Pharisees began (12:22). The spirit leaves its human abode for the desert and later returns with seven other spirits to the man, who has become a more attractive abode (cf. Isa 13:21; 34:14 concerning spirits inhabiting the desert). Now inhabited by the original spirit and seven others, the man becomes thoroughly dominated by them, much worse off than he was before the first spirit left. Evidently, nothing good came into the man to fill the vacuum left when the first spirit left. For various views of this enigmatic passage, see Davies and Allison (1991:359-362).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 12:38-45 contains two parts, both of which stress the gravity of the unbelief of Jesus' contemporaries. In fact, Jesus' words in this section begin and end by mentioning "this evil generation," and there are two additional references to it (12:39, 41-42, 45). The first part contrasts the Pharisees' unbelief with notable and surprising cases of belief in the OT (12:38-42). The second part portrays this unbelief parabolically, evidently to point out that Israel would be worse off after not believing in Jesus than it was before he came. It seems to be a cryptic warning against superficial repentance and a veiled prophecy of the eschatological doom of Jesus' contemporaries (cf. Luke 11:24-26).
This passage underlines the evils of hardened unbelief as do few others. After the Pharisees had seen Jesus do many miracles, instead of believing, they outrageously attributed the miracles to Satan. When they were shown the untenability of that position, they responded not with belief but with an evidently insincere request for another miracle. Their unbelief in the face of overwhelming evidence is contrasted with the belief of the Ninevites and the queen of the south in the face of relatively little evidence. Thus, they provide a grim illustration of what Jesus spoke of in 11:25—that God had hidden the message of the Kingdom from those who were wise and clever in their own estimation and had revealed it to those who were childlike. No amount of further signs would avail for such people, not even the resurrection of Jesus from the dead (12:40; cf. 28:11-15; Luke 16:27-31; 1 Cor 1:22). This passage also illustrates why Jesus did miracles. Miracles were deeds of power done with compassion for those in need, not spectacular feats designed to convince those already hardened in skepticism. For hearts not hardened in rebellion, comparatively little evidence was needed, as in the case of Nineveh and the queen of Sheba.
The parable of 12:43-45 is enigmatic. The mere absence of evil spirits does not accomplish redemption. The house has been cleaned, but a good tenant has not taken up residence. Perhaps this refers to the response of Jesus' contemporaries to John's and Jesus' ministries. Some repented, but many did not, with the result that there was no genuine national repentance, and bleak prospects for the future (23:36).
## TEXT [Commentary]
J. The True Family of Jesus (12:46-50; cf. Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21)
46 As Jesus was speaking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. 47 Someone told Jesus, "Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, and they want to speak to you."[*]
48 Jesus asked, "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" 49 Then he pointed to his disciples and said, "Look, these are my mother and brothers. 50 Anyone who does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother!"
## NOTES
12:46-50 **these are my mother and brothers.** As Jesus continued to speak to the crowd, his mother and brothers (cf. 1:16, 18; 13:55-56) appeared outside and wanted to speak with him (cf. Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21). Perhaps they were concerned over the intensifying conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees. The absence of Joseph is generally taken to indicate that he had died by this time. When Jesus is told of their presence and desire to speak with him, he finds a "teachable moment" and speaks of his true family, those who do the will of his Father in heaven. Jesus teaches by means of a question (12:48), an answer (12:49), and an explanation (12:50). Other NT passages make it clear that Jesus' family was not always in complete sympathy with his messianic mission (Mark 3:21; John 7:1-5). It is perhaps significant that Matthew says that Jesus' mother and brothers were "outside." If so, Jesus' disciples, who do the will of his Father in heaven, are "inside," and are his true family. His disciples are his brothers (cf. 28:10). The mention of Jesus' brothers in this passage (and sisters in 13:56) makes the notion of Mary's perpetual virginity difficult to maintain.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 11–12 comprises a block of narrative material stressing the increasing opposition to Jesus and the Kingdom. The threefold structure of this narrative block has been discussed already in the commentary on Matthew 11:1-6. This structure involves three sets of passages, each containing two passages stressing unbelief followed by a passage stressing belief. With Matthew 12:50 we have come to the end of the second of these three sets, with 12:22-37 and 12:38-45 stressing unbelief and 12:46-50 stressing belief.
In this passage the mood turns from unbelief to belief, from a negative to a positive perspective. Jesus' own family becomes a warning against superficial discipleship. Elsewhere Jesus affirms the family (15:1-9; 19:19; John 19:27), so the point here is not disrespect for them but allegiance to those whose lives are ordered by the values of the Kingdom. Davies and Allison (1991:364) put it well: "The words do not dissolve family bonds but rather relativize them." Jesus' disciples may have to leave their families behind (19:29), and they may even face betrayal by the members of their own families (10:21; 12:35-37). When confronted by the urgent demands of discipleship, they cannot make excuses. Everyday family duties (cf. 4:22; 8:22) cannot take precedence over one's loyalty to the Messiah and his Kingdom. Christians today must follow Jesus' example in the area of family loyalties. It is not at all unusual for Christians to treat their brothers and sisters in Christ in a harsh manner, which is totally inconsistent with Kingdom values and their relationship in the family of God (cf. 23:8). There is great need for a renewed appreciation of the truth portrayed in Matthew 12:46-50.
Summary of Matthew 11–12 and Transition to Matthew 13. In chapters 11–12 Matthew gradually makes his readers aware of the rising opposition and rejection that Jesus experienced. He has previously alluded to the issue that erupts into unforgivable blasphemy in this chapter (12:24-32; cf 9:34), but chapter 12 amounts to a total rift between Jesus and the religious leaders. The chapter records increasing conflict as Jesus confronted the Pharisees over two Sabbath issues (12:1-8, 9-14). Aware of their murder plot, Jesus withdrew (cf. 4:12; 14:13; 15:21; 16:4) to an unnamed location where he healed many (12:15-21). His counsel that those who were healed should remain silent was disregarded, but it served to fulfill Isaiah 42:1-4. The healing of a demonized deaf and mute man precipitates the climactic conflict (12:22-37), which was followed by Jesus' condemnation of that evil generation (12:38-46). The chapter concludes with an incident that shows that even the members of Jesus' own family were not necessarily his real family. Overall, the chapter makes it clear that Jesus' approach to the OT law (cf. 5:17-32) was totally at variance with that of the Pharisees, who ominously planned to murder the one who was greater than David, the Temple, the Sabbath, Jonah, and Solomon (12:3, 6, 8, 41-42). As this opposition by the evil and adulterous generation escalated, Jesus delivered more of his speeches in the form of parables, by which he communicated with his disciples and at the same time obscured the truth from his enemies, who refused to acknowledge the coming of the Kingdom.
## TEXT [Commentary]
V. Parables of the Kingdom of Heaven (13:1-53)
A. The Parable of the Sower (13:1-9; cf. Mark 4:1-9; Luke 8:4-8)
1 Later that same day Jesus left the house and sat beside the lake. 2 A large crowd soon gathered around him, so he got into a boat. Then he sat there and taught as the people stood on the shore. 3 He told many stories in the form of parables, such as this one:
"Listen! A farmer went out to plant some seeds. 4 As he scattered them across his field, some seeds fell on a footpath, and the birds came and ate them. 5 Other seeds fell on shallow soil with underlying rock. The seeds sprouted quickly because the soil was shallow. 6 But the plants soon wilted under the hot sun, and since they didn't have deep roots, they died. 7 Other seeds fell among thorns that grew up and choked out the tender plants. 8 Still other seeds fell on fertile soil, and they produced a crop that was thirty, sixty, and even a hundred times as much as had been planted! 9 Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand."
## NOTES
13:1-2 **A large crowd soon gathered.** The setting of the third discourse is similar to that of the first (cf. 5:1); in both cases Jesus was surrounded by crowds. Jesus apparently paid little attention to his mother and brothers who wanted to speak with him (12:46; 13:1) and shortly left the house where he had been teaching for the nearby Sea of Galilee, where he spoke to the crowd standing by the shore (cf. Mark 4:1-9; Luke 8:4-8) while seated in a boat (cf. 5:1; 24:3). In 13:36, Matthew reports Jesus' move from the seashore back to the house.
13:3 **parables.** Though Matthew's narrative of Jesus' teaching has already included occasional parabolic elements (7:24-27; 9:15-17; 11:16-19; 12:29, 33, 43-45), the word "parable" ( _parabolij_ [TG3850, ZG4130]) occurs here for the first time as Jesus speaks to the multitudes (13:3, 10, 13, 18, 24, 33-36, 53; 15:15; 21:33, 45; 22:1; 24:32). The word "parable" in the NT is related semantically to the word _mashal_ [TH4912, ZH5442] in the OT (see Num 23:7, 18; 1 Sam 10:12; Ezek 17:2; 24:3), and both may be used to describe a proverb, an enigma, a riddle, a taunt, a simile, or an allegorical story. In all of these nuanced meanings, the common denominator is the use of analogy to illumine or obscure. From 13:3 one would assume that Jesus told many parables, and that Matthew selects representative stories that reflect the main themes of Jesus' teaching that Matthew viewed as most relevant for his community.
**A farmer went out to plant some seeds.** The picture is of a farmer scattering seed by hand (cf. Ps 126:5-6; Isa 55:10-11; 2 Esdr 4:26-32; 8:41; 9:31-37; 1 Cor 3:6-9).
13:4-8 Jesus spoke of four places where the scattered seed fell. It is not clear whether the practice was to plow the ground before or after the seed was sown. In the first three cases, the seed did not produce a crop because it was eaten by birds, fell on shallow soil, or was choked by thorns (cf. Job 31:40). In the fourth case, however, the seed fell on fertile ground and produced various levels of crops, the least of which would be quite remarkable by ancient standards (13:8; cf. Gen 26:12). In 13:4, the seed should probably be understood as falling on the packed soil beside the path, not the packed soil of the path itself (cf. "on a footpath," NLT). In 13:5-6 the problem is an underlying shelf of bedrock, not multiple rocks in the soil. Such soil warms rapidly, and the seed sprouts quickly, but the plant wilts as the soil soon loses moisture (cf. Jas 1:11).
13:9 **Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand.** Jesus' affirmation in 13:9 (cf. 11:15; 13:43; cf. Mark 4:23; Luke 14:35; Rev 2:7; 13:9) underlines the importance of the crowd's grasping the meaning of the parable. His interpretation of the parable (13:18-23) shows its relevance to the crowd's relationship to the message of the Kingdom.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
After briefly mentioning the setting (13:1-2), Matthew narrates Jesus' third major discourse (13:3-52; cf. the first discourse in Matt 5–7 and the second in Matt 10). The discourse can be seen as having two sections of four parables each if 13:51-52 is interpreted (correctly) as a parable. The first section is addressed to the crowds (13:3-33) and the second to the disciples (13:36-52). In both of these sections, Jesus answers a question from the disciples about parables (13:10-17, 36-43). Between the two sections is Matthew's comment on the parables as prophetic fulfillment (13:34-35). It is also interesting to note that a pair of similar short parables concludes the first section and begins the second section (13:31-33, 44-46). Though some (see Hagner 1993:362-364) doubt that there is any symmetrical structure in the discourse, at least two proposals have some merit.
Wenham 1979 presents a structure involving chiasmus or introverted parallelism:
A. Parable of the Sower: Hearing the word of the Kingdom (13:1-9)
B. Disciples' Question and Jesus' Answer with Interpretation of the Sower (13:10-23)
C. Parable of the Tares: Good and evil (13:24-30)
D. Parables of the Mustard Seed and Leaven: Growth (13:31-33)
E. Explanation of parables and Interpretation of the Tares (13:34-43)
D'. Parables of Treasure and Pearl: Sacrifice (13:44-46)
C'. Parable of the Net: Good and evil (13:47-50)
B'. Jesus' Question and Disciples' Answer about Understanding Parables (13:51)
A'. Parable of the Homeowner: Trained for the Kingdom (13:52)
Wenham's analysis notes the two halves of the discourse well. It also is correct in seeing the symmetry or the short paired parables of mustard seed/leaven and treasure/pearl. But it is not as convincing in its non-symmetrical placement of Jesus' two interpretations of parables (13:10-17, 34-43).
Davies and Allison (1991:370-371) suggest a three part structure with each part beginning with a parable and containing both an interpretation of a parable and discussion of the parables:
1a. Parable of the Sower (13:1-9)
1b. Discussion of Parables with Scriptural Citation (13:10-17)
1c. Interpretation of the Sower (13:18-23)
2a. Parables of Tares, Mustard Seed, and Leaven (13:24-33)
2b. Discussion of Parables with Scriptural Citation (13:34-35)
2c. Interpretation of the Tares (13:36-43)
3a. Parables of the Treasure, Pearl, and Net (13:44-48)
3b. Interpretation of the Net (13:49-50)
3c. Discussion of Parables (13:51-52)
This approach has obvious strengths, but it tends to break down in section 3, where the order of discussion and interpretation is reversed.
The Interpretation of Parables. Davies and Allison (1991:378-382) present a brief, very helpful excursus on this matter. The history of the church and the experience of many Christians both testify to the prevalence of imaginative interpretations of Jesus' parables. If a parable is "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning," multitudes of such "heavenly" meanings have been superimposed upon the parables. The patristic transformation of the parable of the Good Samaritan into the story of Adam's fall and redemption is probably the most notorious example of this allegorizing approach, which tends to atomize the parables and ignore their literary contexts. In recent years, a very different approach, reader-response criticism, yields results that frequently have only a tangential relationship to the historical and literary context of the parables. Over a hundred years ago, in reaction to the excesses of the allegorizers, A. Jülicher ( _Die Gleichnisreden Jesu_ , 1899) and many others since him have argued that Jesus' parables, unlike allegories, have only one main point. But this narrow approach seems contrary to Jesus' own interpretations of his parables (13:18-23, 37-43), let alone the polyvalence or flexibility of meaning inherent in the use of stories by skilled speakers and authors.
Therefore, it seems best to look at each parable in its own context in order to determine the degree to which its "earthly" details convey a "heavenly" meaning (Blomberg 1990:68-69; Ryken 1984:145-153, 199-203). Parables are indeed allegories, but they must not be allegorized. Their imagery must be understood in terms of their own ancient historical and literary conventions, not in terms of extraneous categories superimposed upon them by allegorizers. Since the imagery of Jesus' parables is drawn from first-century Palestine, an understanding of the historical context is crucial. It is also important to note the literary context. At times, the preceding context provides the key since the parabolic imagery corresponds to key characters and issues in the narrative. Also, at times there is a concluding general comment that applies the parabolic imagery to a contextual matter.
The Interpretation of Matthew 13. Reading Matthew 13 in its context seems to indicate that Jesus intended his parables to reveal truths of the Kingdom to his disciples and to conceal those truths from the enemies of the Kingdom (13:10-15). The primary focus of the parables is reflection upon the varied responses to the Kingdom message (13:19). Thus, the primary background for the parables of Matthew 13 is the increasing opposition to Jesus and his message, which has been narrated in Matthew 11–12. The parables help the disciples understand this opposition. Classical dispensationalism is mistaken in its attempt to understand the parables as primarily referring to the future millennial kingdom, or as teaching the "mystery" of the offered, rejected, and postponed kingdom (Toussaint 1980:170-176; Walvoord 1974:96-97). The Kingdom was already inaugurated, according to Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 12:28 (cf. the discussion of the Kingdom in the Major Themes section of the Introduction), and the parables are about its present progress in the ministry of Jesus and his disciples, as well as its future glories (13:43). Of course, application may be drawn from this historical context to modern contexts in which the message of the Kingdom is still being proclaimed. Ultimately, the disciples continue the mission of Jesus (24:14; 28:19), and their ministry continues until the end of the age (13:39, 43, 49; 24:14; 28:18-20).
Exposition of Matthew 13:1-9. Since the conclusion of the second discourse (11:1), Matthew has stressed the repeated rejection and opposition that Jesus experienced. The disciples would continue to experience the same trials in their mission as well (10:18, 24-25). Even John, whose doubts begin this section of the narrative (11:1-6), and Jesus' own family, who occupy a position "outside" that of Jesus' disciples as the narrative closes (12:46-50), were not fully in step with the proclamation of the gospel of the Kingdom. The Pharisees' murder plot (12:14) indicates the implacable opposition of the religious leaders to Jesus' ministry. Thus, the third discourse heavily stresses the mixed response to the Kingdom message and indicates that this will continue until the end of the age (13:23, 30, 40-43, 49-50), when God will punish those who reject the Kingdom and reward those who receive it.
Jesus spoke to the crowd in 13:2-33, and his parables directly addressed this crowd as a "mixed multitude" representing different responses to the message of the Kingdom. The parable of the sower becomes the predominant parable of this discourse, as it occasions the disciples' question about the purpose of parables (13:10) and is given a detailed interpretation by Jesus (13:18-23). Many will not genuinely receive the message (13:19-23), and some who seem to receive it will ultimately turn out to be satanic counterfeits (13:24-30, 36-43). The parables will conceal the Kingdom from such unbelievers (13:10-17), but they will also reveal the glorious destiny of those who believe the message (13:43). Although this parable is usually called the parable of the sower, its interpretation by Jesus indicates that it is really about the soil, which pictures the varying responses to the message of the Kingdom. The parable amounts to an explanation of the opposition to the Kingdom proclaimed in the words of Jesus and exemplified by his deeds.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. The Reason for Parables (13:10-17)
10 His disciples came and asked him, "Why do you use parables when you talk to the people?"
11 He replied, "You are permitted to understand the secrets[*] of the Kingdom of Heaven, but others are not. 12 To those who listen to my teaching, more understanding will be given, and they will have an abundance of knowledge. But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them. 13 That is why I use these parables,
For they look, but they don't really see.
They hear, but they don't really listen or understand.
14 This fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah that says,
'When you hear what I say,
you will not understand.
When you see what I do,
you will not comprehend.
15 For the hearts of these people are hardened,
and their ears cannot hear,
and they have closed their eyes—
so their eyes cannot see,
and their ears cannot hear,
and their hearts cannot understand,
and they cannot turn to me
and let me heal them.'[*]
16 "But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. 17 I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, but they didn't see it. And they longed to hear what you hear, but they didn't hear it."
## NOTES
13:10 **Why do you use parables when you talk to the people?** As Jesus spoke to the crowd, his disciples asked him why he was speaking to them in parables (cf. Mark 4:10-12; Luke 8:9-10).
13:11 **You are permitted to understand the secrets of the Kingdom.** Jesus' answer to the question implies that this manner of speaking was due to the rejection of his message by many of his listeners. But this was ultimately due to God's sovereign purpose in revealing the secrets of the Kingdom (lit. "mysteries"; cf. Dan 2:28; Mark 4:11; Luke 8:10) to whom he chooses (cf. 11:25-27). These secrets evidently amount to the Kingdom truths signified in the parables of this chapter. God permits (lit. "gives") some to understand these secrets, but he does not give this understanding to others.
13:12 **To those who listen to my teaching, more understanding will be given. . . . But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them.** These solemn words confront Jesus' disciples with God's sovereignty in graciously revealing himself to some and in justly withholding that revelation from others.
13:13-15 Jesus' language in 13:13 echoes Isa 6:9-10, and in 13:14-15 he goes on to directly cite those verses from Isaiah as an OT pattern now fulfilled in his own ministry (cf. John 12:39-40; Acts 28:26-27). Isaiah 6 describes a well-known vision of God in all his holiness that led Isaiah to confess the sinfulness of his people and himself. God cleansed Isaiah of his sin and called him to ministry to his sinful people. But the commission involved the awesome and awful responsibility of confronting the people with their rebellious unbelief of God's message. They had revelatory opportunities, but they did not understand what they heard or perceive what they saw. Due to their hardened hearts, they were unable to respond with believing ears and eyes in turning to God so that he might heal them (cf. Jer 5:21-23). By analogy, the rebellious response to Jesus' announcement of God's rule led to judicial hardening through further enigmatic teaching, which those on the outside were not able to grasp. But God is sovereign over the initial rebellious response, as well as over the further hardening. Mark 4:11 makes an even stronger statement about the use of parables to conceal truth.
13:16-17 **many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see.** The disciples not only see what the crowds do not, but their blessedness also exceeds that of many OT worthies, both prophets and righteous people, who longed to hear and see what the disciples heard and saw. They were privileged by God's grace to experience the climactic eschatological words and deeds of Jesus that inaugurated the Kingdom. The OT luminaries could only anticipate these things (cf. 11:11-13; Heb 11:39-40; 1 Pet 1:10-12), but Jesus' disciples witnessed them and received Jesus' private explanations of their significance (13:18-23, 36-43).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The fact that the disciples asked Jesus why he was speaking in parables implies that this was something relatively new in his ministry. Yet some commentators take this too far, holding the view that the Jews had decisively rejected the offer of the Kingdom and that in response, Jesus would now speak of the postponed Kingdom exclusively in mysterious language (Toussaint 1980:168; Walvoord 1974:96). In fact, Jesus had previously used some parabolic imagery (7:24-27; 9:15-17; 11:16-19; 12:29, 33, 43-45), and he would continue to speak plainly (without parables) to unbelievers as the narrative proceeds (see 15:3-7; 16:2-4; 19:4-9, 17-22; and most of chs 21–23). There is a sense in which Matthew 13 marks a transition in Jesus' ministry. Opposition has indeed come to a head in Matthew 12, but the parabolic discourse of Matthew 13 is neither an entirely novel method of teaching or a new teaching about a postponed Kingdom. Jesus' parables describe the present response of Israel to his Kingdom message. When his disciples take up that message after Jesus' death and resurrection, the parables will just as accurately describe the response of the nations to the preaching of the church until the end of the age. My disagreement with Toussaint's and Walvoord's views on this is not so much over the decisive nature of Matthew 13 as it is over the presence of the Kingdom.
The Sovereignty of God. Finite creatures will never, even after their glorification, fully understand the interplay of God's sovereignty and human responsibility. Matthew 13:11-15, with its citation of Isaiah 6:9-10, is one of the most abrupt affirmations in the Bible of God's prerogative to reveal himself to whomever he wishes. Yet this statement is not as striking as the previous one in 11:25-27, which speaks even more bluntly of God's "hiding" the Kingdom message from those who reject it. Matthew 11:27 also goes further than 13:11-15 in affirming that Jesus shares the divine prerogative of revealing the Father to whomever he wills. Be that as it may, one can only respond to these affirmations of divine sovereignty with a spirit of awe and worship. One must remember that in the Bible, if not in every Christian theology, the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of God's creatures go hand in hand. This is clear when Matthew 11:25-27 is compared with 11:28-30, and when Peter willingly makes a true confession of Jesus, but God has revealed this truth to him (16:15-17). It is also clear that those whom God sovereignly rejects are those who willfully reject God. God does not throw his pearls before pigs (7:6). The doctrine of God's sovereign election, as the saying goes, comforts those afflicted by sin and afflicts those comfortable with sin. It also provides assurance that the preaching of the Kingdom message will be attended with God's blessing in bringing people to faith. God will bring his people to himself.
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. Jesus Explains the Parable of the Sower (13:18-23)
18 "Now listen to the explanation of the parable about the farmer planting seeds: 19 The seed that fell on the footpath represents those who hear the message about the Kingdom and don't understand it. Then the evil one comes and snatches away the seed that was planted in their hearts. 20 The seed on the rocky soil represents those who hear the message and immediately receive it with joy. 21 But since they don't have deep roots, they don't last long. They fall away as soon as they have problems or are persecuted for believing God's word. 22 The seed that fell among the thorns represents those who hear God's word, but all too quickly the message is crowded out by the worries of this life and the lure of wealth, so no fruit is produced. 23 The seed that fell on good soil represents those who truly hear and understand God's word and produce a harvest of thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times as much as had been planted!"
## NOTES
13:18 **listen to the explanation.** This section (13:18-23) is an example of the disciples' getting more understanding of the Kingdom, as Jesus promised in 13:11-12. After speaking of the blessedness of those who heard what the disciples heard, Jesus began to explain the parable of the sower by telling them to "hear" it (cf. Mark 4:13-20; Luke 8:11-15). The NLT's "listen" tends to obscure this play on words. The following verses simply lay out the four types of soil in order and explain their spiritual significance as portraying four responses to the message about the Kingdom.
13:19 **The seed that fell on the footpath.** This is the seed beside the path that was eaten by birds; it represents a superficial hearing of the Kingdom message that is thwarted by the evil one, Satan (cf. _Jubilees_ 11:11-12).
13:20-21 **The seed on the rocky soil.** The seed that sprouted in shallow soil and withered in the sun represents a fickle hearing of the message, where initial enthusiasm turns to apostasy (24:10) due to problems or persecution (cf. 5:11-12; 10:16-25; 23:34-36; 24:9-13).
13:22 **The seed that fell among the thorns.** The seed that sprouted and grew but was choked by thorns represents a promising hearing of the message that ends due to competition from secular concerns, especially greed (cf. 6:19-34). Each of the first three types of soil successively represents more growth, from the seed snatched before it sprouts to the wilted sprouts to the choked plants, but in none of them is there any fruit.
13:23 **The seed that fell on good soil.** Only the fourth soil produces fruit, which in Matthew signifies genuine discipleship (3:8-10; 7:16-20; 12:33; 21:19, 34, 41, 43). It is significant that fruit is borne only when there is understanding of the message (21:19, 23). As pointed out in 13:13-15, such understanding (or the lack of it) is a matter of both God's sovereignty and human responsibility.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
As noted above in the introduction to Matthew 13, Jesus' detailed interpretation of the parable of the sower invalidates the popular idea that a parable has only a single point of reference to reality. Although the central point is clearly the reception of the Kingdom message, several signifying details add depth and detail to this central point. Apparently Jesus himself is the sower, but the parable has immediate application to the disciples' ministry and further application to the church's proclamation.
The first three types of soil successively outline three factors that hinder the reception of the Kingdom message: Satan, persecution, and greed. Satanic opposition is pictured as effective when the seed falls on the hard ground beside the path, which probably represents hearts hardened by both human sin and divine abandonment (13:15; cf. 9:4; 12:34; 15:8, 18, 19; 24:48). Persecution is effective when there is an immediate joyful reception of the message, evidently a solely emotional response, lacking the "root" of intellectual understanding (13:21). Greed and secular concerns are also effective in thwarting the reception of the Kingdom message, evidently when the demands of discipleship confront a materialistic lifestyle (13:22; cf. 6:19-34; 16:24-26; 19:23). In light of this, preachers of the gospel will do well to warn their listeners of the eternal danger of having a heart hardened to God and pliable to Satan. Similarly, a heart open to shallow, emotional influences but closed to deep understanding of the Kingdom easily turns from God when troubles arise. Finally, a heart that is easily attracted to worldly concerns and wealth is a heart that is soon distracted from the message of the Kingdom.
Another crucial question here is whether only the good ground (13:23) represents a genuine disciple of the Kingdom or whether others who bear no fruit should be viewed as genuine, though unproductive, disciples. This is the so called "Lordship salvation" debate. There are those whose belief in "eternal security" leads them to conclude that any reception of the gospel, even that eventually thwarted by Satan, persecution, or worldliness, amounts to a genuine reception that infallibly leads to eternity with God. But this will not do for Matthew, who teaches consistently that "fruit" is a test of genuine discipleship (3:8-10; 7:16-20; 12:33; 21:19, 34, 41, 43). However, it is also important to note that there are degrees of fruitbearing (13:23), a factor that should lead those who stress discipleship to avoid legalism and perfectionism. One cannot set up human standards for discipleship and authoritatively condemn would-be disciples as unbelievers. Neither can one expect mature discipleship overnight, as it were, since godliness, like fruitbearing, involves a growing season before there can be a harvest.
In the flow of Matthew's narrative, 13:1-23 provides an explanation for the rejection experienced by Jesus in Matthew 11–12 (Davies and Allison 1991:402-403). The message has come to many, but relatively few have received it and borne fruit. The very next parable and its interpretation (13:24-33, 36-43) make it clear that this mixed response to the Kingdom will continue until the end of the age. This is explained in part by the wickedness and unbelief of humans but is still ultimately attributed to God's mysterious and sovereign purpose.
## TEXT [Commentary]
D. Jesus Tells Three More Parables (13:24-33; cf. Mark 4:30-34)
24 Here is another story Jesus told: "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a farmer who planted good seed in his field. 25 But that night as the workers slept, his enemy came and planted weeds among the wheat, then slipped away. 26 When the crop began to grow and produce grain, the weeds also grew.
27 "The farmer's workers went to him and said, 'Sir, the field where you planted that good seed is full of weeds! Where did they come from?'
28 "'An enemy has done this!' the farmer exclaimed.
"'Should we pull out the weeds?' they asked.
29 "'No,' he replied, 'you'll uproot the wheat if you do. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. Then I will tell the harvesters to sort out the weeds, tie them into bundles, and burn them, and to put the wheat in the barn.'"
31 Here is another illustration Jesus used: "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seed planted in a field. 32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but it becomes the largest of garden plants; it grows into a tree, and birds come and make nests in its branches."
33 Jesus also used this illustration: "The Kingdom of Heaven is like the yeast a woman used in making bread. Even though she put only a little yeast in three measures of flour, it permeated every part of the dough."
## NOTES
13:24-26 **the Kingdom of Heaven is like.** This or a similar formula appears many times in Matthew (13:31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52; 18:23; 20:1; 22:2; 25:1). This parable, like the first, leads to the disciples' request for interpretation (13:36-43). The basic imagery of the second parable is the same as the first—a farmer plants good seed. But here the resemblance ends since this story involves the nefarious act of an enemy (cf. 22:44) who plants weeds among the wheat one night while everyone is asleep. So, as the wheat grows, so do the weeds. But evidently the weeds are indistinguishable from the wheat until the point in the growing season when the wheat plants form heads of grain. This may be a picture of false disciples as opposed to unbelievers in general (Gundry 1994:261-262), although nothing is made of it in Jesus' later interpretation (Davies and Allison 1991:408-409).
13:27-30 **farmer's workers.** Lit., "landowner's slaves." They notice the weeds growing together with the wheat, so they inform the landowner of this problem, and ask him how his good seed has produced weeds. He correctly surmises that an enemy was responsible. He tells his slaves not to attempt to root out the weeds at this point since this would also damage the wheat. Instead, the weeds will be gathered and burnt at harvest time, when the wheat is gathered into the barn or granary (cf. 3:12). This portrayal of final judgment will be explained in 13:36-43.
13:31-32 **illustration.** The parables of the mustard seed (13:31-32) and yeast (13:33) are much shorter than the previous parables of the sower and the weeds (cf. Mark 4:30-32; Luke 13:18-21). The NLT calls both of these "illustrations" because they are too short to be called "stories," as in 13:3, 18, 24. But the Gr. word throughout this chapter is _parabolē_ [TG3850, ZG4130] "parable," (13:3, 10, 18, 24, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 53). Both parables are introduced with the formula first noted in 13:24, and both seem to have a similar point—the growth of the Kingdom.
**the smallest of all seeds.** Some quibble with the scientific accuracy of Jesus' statement that the mustard seed is the smallest seed, but it must be taken in its context as affirming only that the mustard seed was the smallest herb seed commonly planted in Palestine. The mustard seed emphasizes how the Kingdom grows from an insignificant beginning ("the smallest of all seeds") into the largest of garden shrubs, suitable for nesting birds (cf. Ps 104:12; Ezek 17:23; 31:6; Dan 4:12).
13:33 **yeast in three measures of flour, it permeated every part of the dough.** The yeast pictures the tangible but subtle influence of the Kingdom as it permeates the world. The amount of flour leavened by the yeast is three _satas_ [TG4568, ZG4929]. This is surprisingly large, amounting to 21.6 pints, 35 liters, or nearly a bushel of flour, enough to feed around 150 people (BDAG 917; Hagner 1993:390). These two parables, unlike the first two, are not interpreted by Jesus, so there is less agreement among scholars as to their meaning. The major question is whether the symbolism portrays the spread of evil within Christendom, or the spread of the rule of God in the world through the words and works of Jesus and his disciples. For reasons given in the commentary below, I favor the second view.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Parable of the Wheat and Weeds. The parable of the weeds (13:24-30) is yet to be interpreted (cf. 13:36, but the attentive reader is already drawing tentative conclusions about it from its similarities to the parable of the sower, which Jesus had interpreted already. These similar motifs include sowing, seed, and mixed results. We will see in 13:37-43 that one would be mistaken to identify the significance of the respective sowers and seeds in the two parables. The parable of the weeds has a different thrust and contains new elements: the enemy, the weeds (but see the thorns in 13:7, 22), the landowner, the workers, the harvest and harvesters, the fire, and the barn. Nonetheless, the developing dualism between the landowner and his enemy, the good seed/wheat and the weeds, the barn and the fire, can already be seen as portraying an ominous battle between the cosmic forces of good and evil.
The Parables of the Mustard Seed and Yeast. There is much debate over the meaning of these two short parables. Most classical dispensationalists believe that the imagery of the parables is meant to portray the presence of evil within professing Christendom. This is due primarily to an understanding of the Kingdom of Heaven as a "mystery" encompassing Christendom, understood as organized or nominal Christianity. Christendom as a whole contains evil elements mixed with the good, so both parables are usually viewed as picturing that evil. The birds nesting in the mustard tree are unbelievers (Walvoord 1974:101); Toussaint (1980:181) disagrees, viewing the mustard tree as portraying the Kingdom positively. It is also pointed out that yeast is often a symbol of evil (Exod 12:15, 19; Matt 16:6, 11-12; 1 Cor 5:6-8; Gal 5:9; but see Lev 7:13-14; 23:17) and asserted that the parable of the yeast portrays the growth of evil within Christendom (Walvoord 1974:103-104; Toussaint 1980:182). This view of the parables is often held in conscious opposition to postmillennialism, which understands the images of the growth of the Kingdom in the two parables as indicating the ultimate conversion of the world to Christianity before Christ returns.
There is good reason to disagree with the classic dispensational position. First, its understanding of the Kingdom of Heaven as the mystery of evil within Christendom between the two advents of Jesus is doubtful. Rather, the Kingdom in Matthew is the rule of God, inaugurated through the words and works of Jesus and consummated at his return. Second, it is very doubtful that straightforward statements that compare the Kingdom of God to leaven or to mustard seed should be understood as a portrayal of evil. After all, it is the growth of God's rule, not Satan's, which is being portrayed. One need not assume that birds or yeast must always be viewed as biblical symbols for evil—consider that the imagery of a lion portrays Satan in one context and Jesus in another (1 Pet 5:8; Rev 5:5). The parables of the mustard seed and the yeast speak of the deceptively subtle yet dramatically significant growth of God's Kingdom. Despite frequent fruitless responses to the Kingdom message, it does bear much fruit in many cases (13:23). Even John the Baptist may doubt its advance, but it is advancing just the same (11:1-6). The strong man is being bound, and his goods are being plundered (12:29).
While postmillennialists may view this advance of the Kingdom over-optimistically, classic dispensationalists view the present age too pessimistically because they do not acknowledge that the Kingdom was inaugurated and began its advance during the earthly ministry of Jesus. It may presently seem as insignificant as a mustard seed, but it will eventually be the largest tree in the garden. Its growth may be as imperceptible as the influence of yeast in a loaf of bread, but in the end it will be pervasive throughout the earth. The use of humble symbols like mustard seeds and yeast is appropriate for God's humble servant who does not cry out in the streets (12:19) and who rides into Jerusalem on a donkey, not a stallion (21:1-5). Davies and Allison (1991:415) are correct that these parables portray a contrast between the present reality and the ultimate destiny of the Kingdom. That which is now humble will be glorious. The realization that God is already at work and that there is a unity of the ultimate with the present should give all believers hope.
## TEXT [Commentary]
E. Matthew Explains Why Jesus Told Parables (13:34-35)
34 Jesus always used stories and illustrations like these when speaking to the crowds. In fact, he never spoke to them without using such parables. 35 This fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet:
"I will speak to you in parables.
I will explain things hidden since the creation of the world.[*]"
## NOTES
13:34-35 **I will speak to you in parables.** These verses provide a transition from Jesus' parables to the crowd, spoken from the boat (13:2-33), to his parables to his disciples, spoken in the house (13:36-50). By moving into the more private setting, Jesus turned from those who for the most part did not understand to those who did (13:11-12). Matthew's editorial insertion states that Jesus' customary way of speaking to the crowds at this time was through parables. Furthermore, Matthew asserted that Jesus' parabolic speech fulfilled what the prophet said in Ps 78:2 (cf. Mark 4:33-34; John 6:31). In this lengthy Psalm, Asaph the seer (1 Chr 25:2; 2 Chr 29:30) recounted the history of Israel for the next generation (Ps 78:4), stressing Israel's unbelief (Ps 78:8, 11, 17-22, 32-33, 36-37, 39-42, 56-58), which led to God's punishment (Ps 78:21, 31-34, 59-64). In spite of Israel's rebellion and God's judgment, the continuing faithfulness of God to his people was manifested in mighty works of power (Ps 78:4-7, 12-16, 23-29, 38-39, 42-55) and in choosing David to shepherd them (Ps 78:65-72). In Matthew's view, Jesus is the Son of David who fulfills the role of Israel's ultimate shepherd (1:1; 9:36). His parables, like those of Asaph, portray Israel's unbelief and God's judgment, but more importantly, they stress God's ongoing faithfulness to Israel through the words and deeds of the Kingdom.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
These verses contain the second fulfillment citation of the Old Testament in the discourse. According to Jesus, the unbelief of most of the Jews who saw his deeds and heard his words was not unprecedented. The pattern of unbelief that occurred in the days of Isaiah was recurring in the days of Jesus. Israel as a whole did not believe Isaiah's warnings of impending invasion, and neither did they believe Jesus' Kingdom message (13:14-15; Isa 6:9-10). Now Matthew inserts his own commentary on the discourse he was narrating, citing Psalm 78:2 as the pattern being fulfilled by Jesus. Asaph characterizes Psalm 78 at its opening as parabolic and hidden, but as the psalm unfolds, one reads a narrative of God's faithfulness to a rebellious people under his discipline, not a mysterious discourse full of enigmatic sayings.
Two key questions need to be answered. The first concerns why Asaph described his historical narrative as parabolic and enigmatic in Psalm 78:2. He did this first because matters well known to his own generation were as yet ancient secrets to the coming generation. Thus, he employs a bit of poetic hyperbole: To coming generations (Ps 78:4) this recounting of God's mighty acts might seem like secrets hidden since ancient times (78:2), but in reality these were matters known by Asaph's generation because they were told them by their ancestors, and Asaph, in turn, passed on these ancient secrets to the next generation. Asaph's psalm is also parabolic in the sense that his recounting of the past reveals the profound pattern that may be discerned from the bare historical events (Carson 1984:321). Asaph did not merely recount but also interpreted Israel's story as the story of God's faithfulness to his people in spite of their sin and deserved punishment. This faithfulness is manifested in his mighty acts of redemption (Ps 78:4, 7, 11-12, 32, 42-43). By his interpretation of Israel's history in this manner, Asaph revealed to a new generation the profound truth of God's redeeming grace.
The second question concerns why Matthew cited Asaph's words in Psalm 78. On the surface, we have the connection of the key word "parable," but Matthew appears to be taking the psalm out of context. While it may be granted that the psalm is not a prediction of Jesus, we observe that Matthew often finds patterns in the literature and history of the Old Testament and points to their ultimate significance in Jesus. That his view of the Old Testament is frequently typological was seen earlier in the infancy narrative of Matthew 1–2. Here, Matthew finds in Asaph's words a precedent for a pattern that Jesus fulfilled. As Asaph uttered profundities for a new generation, so Jesus revealed the ultimate secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven to his own generation (13:11; cf. 12:39, 41-42). As Asaph discerned the pattern of God's faithfulness to his people overarching their disobedience and his consequent discipline, so Jesus' parables presented the pattern of the reception and rejection of the growing Kingdom until the day of ultimate judgment and reward (13:19, 39-43). As Asaph's reflection on the "old days" brought out truth for a new generation, so Jesus' parables equip his disciples to bring out of their treasure things new and old in their own teaching (13:51-52). What was new in Asaph's day is now a part of what is old in the disciples' treasury, but what they have learned from Jesus will remain new as they teach all nations, accompanied by Jesus' presence until the end of the age (28:19-20; cf. Carson 1984:322-323).
## TEXT [Commentary]
F. Jesus Explains the Parable of the Weeds and Wheat (13:36-43)
36 Then, leaving the crowds outside, Jesus went into the house. His disciples said, "Please explain to us the story of the weeds in the field."
37 Jesus replied, "The Son of Man[*] is the farmer who plants the good seed. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed represents the people of the Kingdom. The weeds are the people who belong to the evil one. 39 The enemy who planted the weeds among the wheat is the devil. The harvest is the end of the world,[*] and the harvesters are the angels.
40 "Just as the weeds are sorted out and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the world. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will remove from his Kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 And the angels will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in their Father's Kingdom. Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand!"
## NOTES
13:36-39 **explain to us the story of the weeds in the field.** Following Matthew's editorial comment on Jesus' parables as fulfillment of Psalm 78:2, the narrative picks up again. After telling the parable of the weeds, Jesus left the boat and returned to the house, reversing the movement of 13:1-2. He was no longer speaking to the crowds, where there would be many to whom the secrets of the Kingdom would not be revealed, but to the disciples, to whom these mysteries were revealed (13:10-13). In response to the disciples' question, Jesus explained the parable of the weeds. His explanation of this parable is just as detailed as his earlier explanation of the parable of the sower (13:18-23), with seven key details interpreted. Put briefly, Jesus (the sower) is responsible for the people (lit. "sons"; cf. 8:12) of the Kingdom (the good seed) who are in the world (the field), and the devil (the enemy) is responsible for the people who belong to him (the weeds). This expression is lit. "the sons of the evil one" (cf. 5:37; 6:13; John 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1 John 3:10). At the end of the world (the harvest), the angels (the harvesters; cf. 24:31; 25:31-33) separate Satan's people from Jesus' people (the wheat grown from the good seed), throwing the former into the fiery furnace or hell (the fire; cf. 3:12; 5:22; 18:8-9; 2 Esdr 7:36) and gathering the latter into the Kingdom (the barn; cf. 3:12).
13:40 **they will remove from his Kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.** The judgment at the end of the world is portrayed as the removal of sinners from God's Kingdom, not the removal of saints from the world, which is then destroyed (13:41). The people of Satan are further characterized as lawless ones who cause sin (cf. Zeph 1:3), and the pain of their judgment is vividly described (13:41-42, 50; cf. 8:12; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30). Matthew frequently stresses lawlessness as at the heart of sin (7:23; 23:28; 24:12).
13:43 **the righteous will shine like the sun in their Father's Kingdom.** In an allusion to Dan 12:3, the glorious bliss of Jesus' disciples, the righteous ones (10:41; 13:49; 25:37, 46), is portrayed as the shining of the sun (cf. 17:2). The importance of this explanation is underlined by the solemn encouragement to listeners found at the end (cf. 11:15; 13:9).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' interpretation of his parable of the weeds has a more dualistic and eschatological tone than that of the sower. Instead of speaking in general terms about people (soils) who do and do not bear fruit, this second parable stresses in vivid terms the destinies of the two groups. The contrasting ethical qualities (lawlessness versus righteousness) that lead to these opposite destinies are also brought out (13:41-43). There is also the contrast between the role of Jesus (13:37) and that of the devil (13:39; but see 13:19), the two ultimate figures behind the cosmic struggle and the contrasting people, ethics, and destinies found in the parable. The imagery of Jesus as the sower of the good seed—the people of the Kingdom (13:38)—is specially noteworthy, since it is a picturesque way of putting something that Jesus had stated previously: he is the sole revealer of the Father (11:27). The enemy, Satan, like the wolves who wear sheep's clothing (7:15), also sows seed, and the resulting weeds are difficult to distinguish from the wheat. Satan is the great imitator.
Matthew's narrative frequently stresses the end of the age and the judgment to follow. John the Baptist spoke of this in vivid language, which anticipates Jesus' words in this passage (3:12). Jesus spoke of himself as the eschatological judge in the Sermon on the Mount (7:22-23), and there he stressed the bliss of the future Kingdom on earth as the reward for faithful discipleship (5:3, 5, 10; 6:10; 7:21). Unexpectedly, many Gentiles will share in the eschatological banquet with the patriarchs (8:11-12). Confessing Jesus and aiding his messengers will result in reward (10:32-33, 41-42). The peril of the towns that did not believe Jesus will be worse than the notorious towns of the Old Testament when the judgment comes (11:22, 24; 12:41). Those who slander the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, even in the world to come (12:32). With this background, the reader of Matthew is not surprised at the vivid portrayal of the end of the age in this parable. Of course, much additional teaching on this matter is yet to come (13:49; 16:27; 17:10-11; 18:8-9; 19:27-30; 22:1-13, 30-32; 24–25; 26:29, 64; 28:20).
It is also worth mentioning here that this parable should not be cited as supporting a casual attitude on the part of Christians toward the matter of church discipline (Gundry 1994:262). No doubt, there are false disciples in the church, but Jesus stated that the field is the world, not the church (13:38; Davies and Allison 1991:428). This again points to the eventual global mission of the church (24:14; 28:19). Other texts in Matthew make it clear that God does not take the sin of professing Christians lightly (7:21-23; 18:15-17, 21-35; 22:11-14). It is not an easy task to maintain a pure church, but it is a mandatory task for those who take Jesus' call to discipleship seriously.
## TEXT [Commentary]
G. Jesus Tells the Parables of the Hidden Treasure, the Pearl, and the Fishing Net (13:44-50)
44 "The Kingdom of Heaven is like a treasure that a man discovered hidden in a field. In his excitement, he hid it again and sold everything he owned to get enough money to buy the field.
45 "Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a merchant on the lookout for choice pearls. 46 When he discovered a pearl of great value, he sold everything he owned and bought it!
47 "Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a fishing net that was thrown into the water and caught fish of every kind. 48 When the net was full, they dragged it up onto the shore, sat down, and sorted the good fish into crates, but threw the bad ones away. 49 That is the way it will be at the end of the world. The angels will come and separate the wicked people from the righteous, 50 throwing the wicked into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
## NOTES
13:44 **the Kingdom of Heaven is like a treasure that a man discovered hidden in a field.** The first parable speaks of a man who sells all that he has so that he may buy a field in which he has discovered a hidden treasure (cf. Prov 2:4; Sir 20:30).
13:45 **the Kingdom of Heaven is like a merchant on the lookout for choice pearls.** The second describes a merchant who similarly sells all he has so that he might purchase a pearl of great value (cf. 7:6; Job 28:18; Prov 3:13-15). In Jesus' day pearls were evidently regarded much like diamonds are regarded today. Pearls were often associated with gold (1 Tim 2:9; Rev 17:4; 18:12, 16; cf. Origen _Commentary on Matthew_ 10:7).
13:47-50 **the Kingdom of Heaven is like a fishing net.** The parable of the dragnet is immediately explained as a picture of eschatological judgment. It uses the imagery of fishing to convey a message similar to that of the parable of the weeds (13:24-30, 36-43). The net here is not the small one used by modern anglers to bring individual fish into a boat, but a large net or seine with weights on the bottom and floats on the top that encircles many fish. Such a net could contain hundreds of fish and require a great deal of effort to haul in (cf. Luke 5:4-11; John 21:5-7, although a different Gr. word for net is used in these passages). In view of the parabolic formula found in 13:52, this parable should not be viewed as the last one in Matthew 13 (contra Hagner 1993:398).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Parables of the Hidden Treasure and the Pearl. In both of these parables, a person sacrifices everything to acquire one highly valuable, intensely desired object. Although some interpret both parables as pictures of the redemption of the church by God through Jesus, this tends to neglect the context and read Pauline theology into Matthew. Although Matthew did speak of Jesus as a ransom for many (20:28; cf. 26:28), another approach better fits the context. Throughout Matthew 13, Jesus is speaking parabolically of the mixed response to his Kingdom teachings and deeds. One may trace positive responses to the Kingdom as well as negative responses. As to positive responses, in the parable of the sower there was good soil that produced fruit (13:8, 23). The secrets of the Kingdom were revealed to the disciples (13:11). The parable of the wheat and weeds speaks of the glorious future of the righteous as good seed gathered into a barn (13:43), and this is reinforced by the parable of the fishing net (13:48). The parables of the mustard seed and yeast speak of the almost imperceptible growth of the Kingdom from insignificance to greatness (13:31-33).
It seems very likely that the parables under consideration here fit into this pattern of positive response to the Kingdom. The Kingdom is portrayed as a hidden treasure and a valuable pearl, and it is pursued by men who sell all they have in order to gain it. Surely this fits the picture of discipleship one finds throughout Matthew. Jesus' first disciples left their families and fishing gear to follow Jesus (4:20, 22; cf. 9:9). Following Jesus entails the sacrifice of losing one's life for Jesus and thereby finding it (16:25-26). The rich young ruler would not sell all he had to follow Jesus (19:21-22), but all who do make such a sacrifice will be richly rewarded (19:27-29). Thus, these parables present both the sacrifice required in following Jesus and the disciples' joy (13:44; cf. 2:10; 28:8; for temporary joy see 13:20) in the present possession of the Kingdom as well as its future rewards. Despite the lure of wealth (13:22) and the many distractions of life in this world, millions continue to follow Jesus at great cost in the present life but with greater prospects for the future.
The Parable of the Fishing Net. The message of the parable of the fishing net is obviously similar to that of the parable of the weeds. Among the differences between the two is the presence of "fish of every kind" in this parable, as opposed to only two kinds of plants, wheat and weeds, in the previous parable. Perhaps this is a subtle reminder of the universality of the Kingdom mission, which is mandated to "all the nations" (28:19). The net does not discriminate as it gathers the fish, and neither should disciples of the Kingdom as they fish for people (cf. 4:19; 22:9-10).
According to this parable, the angels (fishermen) separate (sort the contents of the net) the wicked people (bad fish) from the righteous people (good fish). They throw the bad fish away into the fiery furnace (or hell). In this parable, unlike the parable of the weeds, there is no emphasis on the glory and bliss of the righteous disciples, but there is a similar description of the punishment of the wicked (13:49-50).
## TEXT [Commentary]
H. Jesus Tells the Parable of the Homeowner (13:51-52)
51 "Do you understand all these things?"
"Yes," they said, "we do."
52 Then he added, "Every teacher of religious law who becomes a disciple in the Kingdom of Heaven is like a homeowner who brings from his storeroom new gems of truth as well as old."
## NOTES
13:51 **Do you understand all these things?** Previously, the disciples implicitly acknowledged a lack of understanding when they asked Jesus twice about his parables (13:10, 36), so it is not surprising that Jesus now asks them whether they have finally grasped his parabolic teaching. Evidently "all these things" refers to the growth of the Kingdom despite the mixed reception of its message.
13:52 **is like a homeowner.** When the disciples affirmed that they had indeed understood, Jesus responded with what should be understood as the eighth and final parable of Matthew 13, since it is introduced with the characteristic formula "is like" (cf. 13:24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47).
The parable likens disciples of the Kingdom to a homeowner (cf. 20:1; 21:33) who brings both new and old things from his storeroom (cf. 12:35). Jesus surprisingly uses the term "teacher of religious law" (lit. "scribe"; cf. 2:4; 5:20; 7:29; 8:19; 9:3; 12:38; 15:1; 16:21; 17:10; 20:18; 21:15; 23:2, 13-15, 34; 26:57; 27:41; cf. Sir 39:2-3). He calls the disciples he has trained "scribes of the Kingdom" because their ministries will entail teaching the Kingdom message as they draw upon what Jesus has taught them and teach their own disciples new truths tied to old truths (cf. 5:17-20; 9:16-17; 11:11-13).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Many of Jesus' hearers in the "crowds" of Matthew 11–13 did not understand the Kingdom message (13:13), and the animosity of the Jewish religious leaders toward Jesus and his message was becoming potentially lethal (12:14). Even Jesus' disciples were slow to grasp what his parables meant (13:10, 36). Jesus was teaching that the Kingdom would have a mixed reception all the way to the end of the age. The Kingdom's growth would be real, though imperceptible, and its humble beginnings would eventually lead to a substantial entity. The sacrifice required to enter it is great, but those who abandon everything else to follow Jesus will be greatly rewarded. All this was stated parabolically and mysteriously, however, and even though three of the parables had been interpreted, it was not certain that the disciples had understood. So Jesus put that question to them, and they answered it in the affirmative. Thus, the parables were (and are) an effective means of communication to those to whom it has been given to understand the secrets of the Kingdom (13:11).
Since the disciples affirmed that they understood Jesus' parabolic teaching (but see 15:15), Jesus concluded the third discourse with yet another parable. It is a short one, more of a simile than a story, and like the two previous pairs of short parables it was not interpreted (cf. 13:31-33, 44-46). It is a bit surprising that Jesus spoke of his disciples as being "scribes" (NLT, "teacher of religious law") since the scribes were consistently among Jesus' enemies, according to Matthew. But in their teaching capacity, the disciples will function in Matthew's Christian Jewish community like the scribes functioned in the larger Jewish community (cf. 23:34; Cope 1976; Orton 1989). Their role is compared to that of a homeowner who uses both new and old resources in managing his household. (NLT's "new gems of truth" is a bit expansive but probably right on track.) It would seem that the reference to new and old things should be understood in light of Jesus' teaching that he had come not to cancel but to fulfill the law and the prophets (5:17ff). Thus, Israel's pre-Christian Scriptures were not old in the sense of being decrepit, outdated, or obsolete, since they are still part of the Kingdom scribe's resources, but the new things, the ultimately definitive teachings of Jesus about the Kingdom, are to be used first as the scribe's primary resources. Matthew makes much of the teachings of Jesus, featuring them in five major discourses (Matt 5–7; 10; 13:1-52; 18; and 24–25). This Gospel concludes with Jesus' mandate that all nations be discipled and that new disciples be taught all that Jesus had commanded. Kingdom scribes must now manage God's household with the resources Jesus provided, his new definitive teachings about the eschatological inauguration of God's reign, which fulfill the old Scriptures of Israel. Hagner is correct that Christians "must represent a Christianity encompassing both Testaments" (1993:402).
## TEXT
VI. Opposition to the Kingdom Continues (13:53–18:35)
A. Various Responses to the Son of God (13:53–17:27)
1. Jesus rejected at Nazareth (13:53-58; cf. Mark 6:1-6; Luke 4:16-30)
53 When Jesus had finished telling these stories and illustrations, he left that part of the country. 54 He returned to Nazareth, his hometown. When he taught there in the synagogue, everyone was amazed and said, "Where does he get this wisdom and the power to do miracles?" 55 Then they scoffed, "He's just the carpenter's son, and we know Mary, his mother, and his brothers—James, Joseph,[*] Simon, and Judas. 56 All his sisters live right here among us. Where did he learn all these things?" 57 And they were deeply offended and refused to believe in him.
Then Jesus told them, "A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his own family." 58 And so he did only a few miracles there because of their unbelief.
## NOTES
13:53 **When Jesus had finished telling.** With his characteristic transitional statement (cf. 7:28; 11:1; 19:1; 26:1), Matthew's story of Jesus moves from the third discourse to a new narrative block (13:53–17:27). Jesus departed the house (evidently in Capernaum; 13:1, 36) and came back to his hometown, Nazareth (4:13; cf. Mark 6:1-6; Luke 4:16-30).
13:55 **He's just the carpenter's son.** Since the people of Nazareth were aware of Jesus' humble family origins, they did not understand how he had become so formidable. The problem is a matter of frame of reference, such that the extraordinary words and deeds of Jesus were explained away by associating them with Jesus' familiar past (Davies and Allison 1991:455). Joseph is traditionally viewed as a carpenter, but the word commonly translated "carpenter" can also refer to a stonemason.
**his mother, and his brothers . . . his sisters.** His brothers and mother are mentioned in 12:46, but in this passage the brothers are named and sisters are also mentioned.
13:56 **Where did he learn all these things?** Perhaps they were referring to Jesus' lack of a rabbinical education (cf. John 7:15).
13:57 **they were deeply offended and refused to believe.** This translates one Gr. word, _skandalizoomai_ [TG4624A, ZG4997], which is variously translated "to stumble," "to take offense," "to fall into sin," or "to cause to sin." The word occurs rather frequently in Matthew to describe serious sin, unbelief, and even apostasy (cf. 5:29, 30; 11:6; 13:21; 18:6, 8, 9; 24:10; 26:31, 33). So the residents of Nazareth sadly fell into the same sin as did the residents of Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum (cf. 11:20-24), and the recently told parable of the sower sadly fits yet another situation.
**A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown.** Jesus' response to their unbelief is proverbial, reflecting on the common human experience that well-known people are often not highly regarded by those who knew them before they achieved fame.
13:58 **only a few miracles.** In such circumstances where unbelief reigned supreme, Jesus did not do many miracles.
## COMMENTARY
Matthew 13:53–17:27, the narrative block between the third (ch 13) and fourth (ch 18) discourses, may be the most difficult section of this Gospel to analyze as to structure. The conventional wisdom among scholars who believe that Matthew was depending on Mark (cf. the discussion of the synoptic problem in the "Literary Style" section of the Introduction) is that at this point Matthew ceases his distinctive topical or thematic arrangement of Jesus' traditions and begins to follow the order of Mark (Davies and Allison 1991:451; Hagner 1995:410). Although Matthew's structuring of the material in this narrative block may not be as meticulous as it was previously, it is clear that he wanted his story of Jesus to convey the ever-increasing polarization of the responses to Jesus and the Kingdom. In what is perhaps the crucial text in this section, 16:13-28, the contrast between the false and true views of Jesus (16:13-16) and of discipleship (16:21-26) is made clear, and Jesus' fate at the hands of the religious leaders in Jerusalem is foretold (16:21; cf. 17:9, 12, 22-23; 20:17-19; 21:39).
There are approximately sixteen episodes in the narrative block of Matthew 13:53–17:27 (cf. the outline of Matthew at the end of the Introduction). Of these, at least six emphasize a negative, unbelieving response to Jesus and the Kingdom (13:53-58; 14:1-12; 15:1-20; 16:1-12, 21-28; 7:22-23). Four clearly stress a positive, believing response (15:21-28, 29-31; 16:13-20; 17:1-13), and the remainder are mildly positive yet ambiguous since they contain no clear affirmation of faith (14:13-21, 22-33, 34-36; 15:32-39; 17:14-20, 24-27). These episodes generally highlight a miracle or teaching of Jesus but do not clearly portray an ethical response to it.
Another clear theme of this material, which is not often highlighted, is the development of the "little faith" of the disciples. This theme occurs in negative, positive, and ambiguous episodes, as Jesus uses every opportunity to strengthen his disciples (often with Peter at the forefront) for their future ministries in his absence. Examples of Jesus strengthening the disciples' faith in negative passages include 15:12-20; 16:5-12, 22; and 17:23. Examples of this in positive texts include 15:28; 17:4-6; and 17:10-13. Examples in ambiguous texts include 14:15, 31; 15:33; 17:16, 19-20; and 17:25. Although deficiencies in the disciples' faith have already been noted (8:26), it is fair to say that this theme comes into its own in this narrative block. Therefore, despite the relative absence of triadic patterns and other structural devices that mark his other sections, Matthew's crucial concerns emerge once again as he narrates the continuing polarization in the responses to Jesus and the Kingdom.
Jesus Rejected at Nazareth. Although a naive reader might expect otherwise, Jesus' reception at Nazareth was not a warm one. His ministry in the synagogue produced astonishment and skepticism as to the source of his wisdom and power instead of praise to God for its blessings.
Unbelief is always a sad thing, but in this case it was especially pathetic. It does not take a great deal of imagination to think that Jesus, like most people who return home, arrived with fond memories and wishes to renew old acquaintances. But in this case it was not to be, for Jesus' former associates refused to accept his messianic status and mission because they remembered his humble beginnings. Perhaps there was an element of jealousy here—the townspeople could not accept a small town boy who made good. All that aside, they were not merely quibbling over the anomaly of Jesus' humble, ordinary pedigree and his special, powerful ministry; they were rejecting the Kingdom of God. The saying "familiarity breeds contempt" is applicable here, and the consequences were devastating. In a sense, the unbelief of Nazareth typifies that of Israel as a whole. Jesus was dishonored by the Jews, but he would be held in high esteem by the Gentiles. Yet this must not be pressed, since some among Israel—and some from Nazareth, eventually including Jesus' family—believed in Jesus and became the Kingdom's messengers to the Gentiles.
Jesus' lack of miracles in Nazareth should not be viewed as a matter of inability but as a matter of choice. It is not that Jesus' power was hindered by unbelief but that he did not resort to loud tactics and perform miracles simply to please skeptics (cf. 12:19, 38-39). The sower is parabolic but also prophetic. As soon as Jesus told this parable and the others, he saw its truth in his own hometown. People before whom and with whom he'd grown up simply could not grasp his Kingdom mission, even though they acknowledged his wisdom and power (13:54, 56). They simply did not understand—as such, they are to be identified with the case of the seed sown on the packed soil beside the path, devoured by birds (Satan) before it can even sprout (13:4, 19).
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. The death of John the Baptist (14:1-12; cf. Mark 6:14-29; Luke 9:7-9)
1 When Herod Antipas, the ruler of Galilee,[*] heard about Jesus, 2 he said to his advisers, "This must be John the Baptist raised from the dead! That is why he can do such miracles."
3 For Herod had arrested and imprisoned John as a favor to his wife Herodias (the former wife of Herod's brother Philip). 4 John had been telling Herod, "It is against God's law for you to marry her." 5 Herod wanted to kill John, but he was afraid of a riot, because all the people believed John was a prophet.
6 But at a birthday party for Herod, Herodias's daughter performed a dance that greatly pleased him, 7 so he promised with a vow to give her anything she wanted. 8 At her mother's urging, the girl said, "I want the head of John the Baptist on a tray!" 9 Then the king regretted what he had said; but because of the vow he had made in front of his guests, he issued the necessary orders. 10 So John was beheaded in the prison, 11 and his head was brought on a tray and given to the girl, who took it to her mother. 12 Later, John's disciples came for his body and buried it. Then they went and told Jesus what had happened.
## NOTES
14:1 **Herod Antipas, the ruler of Galilee.** Lit., "Herod the tetrarch" (cf. NLT mg). "Tetrarch" describes a ruler of one fourth of Herod the Great's former kingdom. Antipas ruled over Galilee and Perea, the area east of the Jordan, from 4 BC to AD 39 (cf. Luke 3:1). He was a minor figure of history compared to his father Herod the Great (2:1). For details see Hoehner (1972:110-171). At about the time when Jesus was rejected in Nazareth, his ministry came to the attention of Herod the Tetrarch (cf. Mark 6:14-29; Luke 9:7-9).
14:2 **This must be John the Baptist raised from the dead!** Antipas's superstitious explanation for Jesus' miraculous powers (cf. 13:54) evidently stemmed from a guilty conscience, given the story recorded in 14:3-12. But his erroneous theory for Jesus' powerful works served Matthew's literary purpose to link John's mission and destiny to that of Jesus (11:18-19; 17:12). As 14:3-12 makes clear, it must have been terrifying for Antipas to think that John had been raised from the dead. Antipas was evidently not the only one to think that Jesus was John the Baptist (see 16:14).
14:3-4 **Herod had arrested and imprisoned John.** Matthew 14:3-12 is a flashback that fills in the grisly details of the death of John the Baptist, mentioned in 14:2.
**his wife Herodias (the former wife of Herod's brother Philip).** Antipas had divorced his first wife in order to marry Herodias, who was formerly married to his half brother, Philip. This was illegal according to Lev 18:16; 20:21, which forbids sexual intercourse with one's brother's wife. For additional details see Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.116-119, 136-137.
14:5 **he was afraid of a riot.** This interprets a clause that lit. reads, "he was afraid of the crowd." Antipas was afraid of the crowd's response to the execution of a man they believed to be a prophet (cf. 11:9; 21:26). However, as 14:6-9 explains, political expedience eventually gave way to something more powerful.
**all the people believed John was a prophet.** The mention of John's status as a prophet and his maltreatment by Antipas links him to the previous context and Jesus' saying about his own rejection at Nazareth (13:57). Further, Antipas's fear of the crowd anticipates the fear of the religious leaders to arrest Jesus later in Jerusalem (21:46).
14:6-7 Antipas's concern for political expedience was trumped by the greater concern of trying to appease his second wife. No doubt, Herodias held a grudge against John for denouncing her marriage to Antipas, and she found a way to be rid of John when her daughter's dance at Antipas's birthday party led to his rash promise. This unnamed daughter may have been Salome, Herodias' daughter by her former husband Philip (Antipas's half brother). Or, according to some manuscripts of Mark 6:22, she could have had the same name as her mother, Herodias. The girl's dance so enthralled Antipas that he foolishly vowed to give her anything she wanted.
14:8-10 **I want the head of John the Baptist on a tray!** Herodias prompted her daughter to ask for a grotesque present, John's head on a platter (cf. Mark 6:19).
**because of the vow he had made in front of his guests.** Antipas regretted his rash promise but granted the request because he did not want to lose face with his palace guests. So John was executed without a trial, and the macabre scene at the birthday party played out. Herodias avenged herself of John, but Antipas's guilty conscience led him to fear that Jesus was John brought back to life. See Hoehner (1972:124-165) for a detailed discussion of Josephus and the Gospels on this matter.
14:11 **his head was brought on a tray and given to the girl.** The word describing Herodias' daughter in this verse is _korasion_ [TG2877, ZG3166], which indicates a young girl, perhaps around twelve years of age. This word and the silence of the text otherwise make it unlikely that the dance that so enthralled Antipas was erotic.
14:12 **John's disciples came for his body and buried it.** John's ignominious end was a terrible atrocity, yet his disciples maintained their loyalty to him to the bitter end, caring for his body and properly burying it. Devout Jews were extremely concerned for proper burial of corpses, as the intertestamental book of Tobit shows. After the burial, John's disciples informed Jesus of John's horrific demise (cf. 9:14; 11:2). This links Jesus' withdrawal of 14:13-21 to 14:1-12. Since Jesus' ministry began when John was imprisoned (4:12), John's death was also significant for Jesus (17:12).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The violent history of the Herodian dynasty continues. Herod the Great's evil deeds are well chronicled in ancient history and in Matthew 2. Here Antipas proved to be his father's son, although he was smitten in conscience for the evil that his rash promise had caused him to do. Antipas was a weak, pathetic, despicable figure, whose evil caprice was prompted by his vengeful wife's suggestion to her daughter. Plumptre's (1957) oft-cited remark deserves repeating: "Like most weak men, Herod feared to be thought weak." Instead of humbly acknowledging the error of his rash promise, he saved his own face by destroying God's prophet. His palace guests were shown a blatant example of corrupt power in action, and Herod took his place in the list of evil rulers who have rejected and destroyed God's messengers.
In Matthew's narrative, the execution of John by Antipas follows the rejection of Jesus by the people at Nazareth. The two consecutive episodes stress unbelief in two different situations, but the unifying theme is the rejection of God's messengers (11:18-19). This motif of the rejection of the prophets had been mentioned previously (5:12) and will be greatly stressed in Jesus' woes against the religious leaders in Matthew 23. Israel's rejection of her own prophets was well known from the Old Testament (see 2 Chr 36:16; Dan 9:6, 10), but for Matthew the rejection of the prophets culminates in the rejection of Jesus, the ultimate prophet (23:32).
As Jesus said, there was no greater human than John the Baptist (Matt 11:11). John fearlessly and faithfully fulfilled his role as the one who prepared the way for Jesus. Antipas may have been "king" at his birthday party when he ordered John's execution, but one day he will stand before the King of kings and give account for his atrocious treatment of the King's forerunner. Since this section of Matthew intentionally stresses how Jesus develops the faith of his disciples (this is explained in the commentary on 13:53-58), the action of John's disciples in properly burying their master should be read as a lesson for Jesus' disciples. John's death anticipates the death of Jesus (17:12), and the action of John's disciples here is exemplary for disciples of Jesus (27:57-61). Even Antipas's reluctance to behead John may anticipate Pilate's reluctance to crucify Jesus (14:9; 27:18-24). The similarities between John and Jesus are almost uncanny, leading Davies and Allison (1991:476) to remark that Matthew 14:1-12 is a Christological parable.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Jesus feeds five thousand (14:13-21; cf. Mark 6:31-44; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15)
13 As soon as Jesus heard the news, he left in a boat to a remote area to be alone. But the crowds heard where he was headed and followed on foot from many towns. 14 Jesus saw the huge crowd as he stepped from the boat, and he had compassion on them and healed their sick.
15 That evening the disciples came to him and said, "This is a remote place, and it's already getting late. Send the crowds away so they can go to the villages and buy food for themselves."
16 But Jesus said, "That isn't necessary—you feed them."
17 "But we have only five loaves of bread and two fish!" they answered.
18 "Bring them here," he said. 19 Then he told the people to sit down on the grass. Jesus took the five loaves and two fish, looked up toward heaven, and blessed them. Then, breaking the loaves into pieces, he gave the bread to the disciples, who distributed it to the people. 20 They all ate as much as they wanted, and afterward, the disciples picked up twelve baskets of leftovers. 21 About 5,000 men were fed that day, in addition to all the women and children!
## NOTES
14:13-14 **he left in a boat to a remote area.** As John's imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus' ministry (4:12), so John's death prompted Jesus to withdraw to a remote place. John's demise hinted at the demise of Jesus (17:12), and at this strategic time Jesus withdrew by boat to the less inhabited region east of the Sea of Galilee. Why Jesus left is not stated, but perhaps it was to grieve and pray (14:23), to avoid Antipas's interest and hostility (14:1-2), or to teach his disciples privately.
**the crowds heard where he was headed and followed . . . he had compassion on them and healed their sick.** When the press of the needy crowds did not permit private reflection, Jesus responded with compassion and healed the sick. The description of Jesus as a compassionate healer recalls 4:23-24; 9:35-36 and anticipates 15:30-32. It contrasts with the less concerned, more pragmatic view of the disciples in 14:15; 15:33.
14:15 The feeding of the five thousand is found in all four Gospels (cf. Mark 6:32-44; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-13), though the later, similar feeding of the four thousand is found only in 15:32-39 and Mark 8:1-9.
**Send the crowds away.** The disciples wanted to be rid of the hungry crowd, and maintained that their food resources were inadequate when Jesus told them to feed the people.
14:18 **Jesus took the five loaves and two fish, looked up toward heaven, and blessed them.** Jesus took what little food the disciples had, five loaves of bread and two fish (evidently dried), looked up to heaven (cf. 1 Esdr 4:58), blessed the bread, and broke it into pieces. The "blessing" of the bread involved praise to God for supplying it. The blessing used by Jesus may have been similar to the traditional Jewish prayer dating back to the Mishnah ( _m. Berakhot_ 6:1), "Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the world, who brings forth bread from the earth." Bread and fish were evidently staples of the diet of Jews in Galilee (cf. 7:9-10; John 21:9-10).
14:19-21 **distributed it.** Jesus gave the pieces to the disciples, who then gave the pieces to the crowd. Amazingly, there was enough to go around, with much more left over (twelve full baskets) than the little there had been to begin with. Five thousand men were fed, not to mention the women and children who accompanied them.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
One might naturally conclude from Matthew 4:13-21 that Jesus fed the five thousand out of compassion for hungry people. The miracle also demonstrated Jesus' Kingdom authority and challenged people to believe in him. But in addition to this straightforward interpretation of the miracle, a number of approaches have been suggested. Barclay (1975:102-103) suggests that the "miracle" should be understood as a spontaneous sharing of the food that had been brought by individuals, due to the power of Jesus' example. Jesus takes the meager stores that the disciples have brought and begins to distribute them, others follow suit, and there is more than enough to go around. Thus, the miracle is a matter of selfishness being overcome by generosity as everyone follows Jesus' example. Despite the wholesome lesson derived by this interpretation, it cannot be sustained exegetically. It is clear from the passage that the meager stores of the disciples, five loaves and two fish, were somehow miraculously multiplied to feed a crowd of perhaps twenty-thousand people. There is no mention of others bringing out additional food, or any comment about selfishness being turned into generosity. This is a miracle story, not a fable about generosity.
Another interpretation stresses the Eucharistic overtones in the passage, viewing it as "an allegory of the Eucharist" (Davies and Allison 1991:481). Indeed, there are so many clear verbal parallels between Matthew 14:13-21 and 26:20-29 that some connection between the two seems inevitable. But it seems to be a stretch to read the story of the Last Supper and subsequent Christian sacramental practice back into this story of hungry people being miraculously fed. It is more likely that Matthew intended his readers to view this story as reminiscent of the miraculous feeding of the Israelites with manna in the wilderness (Exod 16; Deut 8:3; Neh 9:20; Ps 78:24; John 6:30-59) and as anticipatory of the eschatological messianic banquet alluded to in 8:11 and 26:29 (cf. Rev 2:17). Matthew may have also intended the reader to hear echoes of the ministries of Elijah (1 Kgs 17:9-16) and Elisha (2 Kgs 4:42-44). Just as God had miraculously met the needs of his people in former days through Moses, Elijah, and Elisha, so he met their needs ultimately through his beloved Son, the definitive prophet and teacher of Israel, Jesus (cf. Ps 132:13-18). While the number of loaves and fishes seem intended only to show the inadequacy of the disciples' resources, the detail that there were twelve baskets of leftover food is probably significant (16:9-10; 19:28). In Jesus there is _shalom_ [TH7965, ZH8934] (peace, wholeness), an abundance of messianic blessings for Israel.
In this passage, Jesus continues to strengthen and develop the faith of his disciples. They learn two lessons from Jesus: compassion and faith. When they coldly wanted to dismiss the multitudes, Jesus compassionately chose to feed them. When they viewed their meager resources as inadequate for the need, Jesus nevertheless commanded them to meet the need. They learned to model their ministries after the compassionate model of Jesus and to believe in his power to multiply their resources.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus walks on water (14:22-36; cf. Mark 6:45-56; John 6:16-21)
22 Immediately after this, Jesus insisted that his disciples get back into the boat and cross to the other side of the lake, while he sent the people home. 23 After sending them home, he went up into the hills by himself to pray. Night fell while he was there alone.
24 Meanwhile, the disciples were in trouble far away from land, for a strong wind had risen, and they were fighting heavy waves. 25 About three o'clock in the morning[*] Jesus came toward them, walking on the water. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the water, they were terrified. In their fear, they cried out, "It's a ghost!"
27 But Jesus spoke to them at once. "Don't be afraid," he said. "Take courage. I am here "
28 Then Peter called to him, "Lord, if it's really you, tell me to come to you, walking on the water."
29 "Yes, come," Jesus said.
So Peter went over the side of the boat and walked on the water toward Jesus. 30 But when he saw the strong[*] wind and the waves, he was terrified and began to sink. "Save me, Lord!" he shouted.
31 Jesus immediately reached out and grabbed him. "You have so little faith," Jesus said. "Why did you doubt me?"
32 When they climbed back into the boat, the wind stopped. 33 Then the disciples worshiped him. "You really are the Son of God!" they exclaimed.
34 After they had crossed the lake, they landed at Gennesaret. 35 When the people recognized Jesus, the news of his arrival spread quickly throughout the whole area, and soon people were bringing all their sick to be healed. 36 They begged him to let the sick touch at least the fringe of his robe, and all who touched him were healed.
## NOTES
14:22 **Jesus insisted that his disciples get back into the boat.** As soon as the miraculous meal was over, Jesus sent the crowd away and had the disciples take the boat back to the other side of the lake, evidently retracing the voyage mentioned in 14:13 (cf. Mark 6:45-51; John 6:15-21).
14:23 **he went up into the hills by himself to pray.** He stayed on the east side of the Sea of Galilee and found a place in the hills for prayer. Matthew only recounts Jesus praying here, in 11:25-26, and in the garden of Gethsemane (26:36-45; but see Luke 5:16; 9:18, 28-29; 11:1). One would assume that this was his original goal in 14:13, but that it was hindered by the crowds. Now alone in the hills, he prays on into the night, evidently for several hours.
14:24 **the disciples were in trouble far away from land.** As Jesus prayed alone, the disciples were also alone, away from him, struggling with the wind-blown waves on the lake (cf. 8:23-27 for a similar story). The NLT's "far away from land" renders an expression lit. translated "many stadia." A _stadion_ [TG4712A, ZG5084] was around 192 meters or just over 600 feet in length, and the Sea of Galilee is up to 5 miles wide, so the disciples were evidently miles from shore (cf. John 6:19).
14:25 **About three o'clock in the morning.** Lit., "in the fourth watch of the night." This apparently reflects the custom of dividing the night, from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., into four watches of three hours each (cf. the Gr. of 24:43).
**Jesus came toward them.** At this point, after the disciples had rowed for several hours (14:13, 22) under terrifying conditions in the dark, Jesus suddenly appeared, miraculously walking on the water.
14:26 **It's a ghost.** But the disciples did not recognize him and cried out that a ghost or disembodied spirit had appeared to them.
14:27 **Take courage.** Jesus' words evidently identified him to the disciples. He told them not to fear (cf. 17:7; 28:5, 10) but to take courage (cf. 9:2, 22), since he was there.
**I am here.** Lit., "I am." This may be an allusion to Exod 3:14 (cf. 22:32)—as in NLT mg: "The 'I AM' is here."
14:28 **Lord, if it's really you, tell me to come to you, walking on the water.** Peter proposed a sort of test—if it was really Jesus, would he command Peter to come to him on the water? Blomberg (1992:235) views Peter's words as a request to imitate Jesus' miracle in terms of the commission to ministry in 10:1, 8.
14:29-30 **Peter . . . walked on the water.** When Jesus agreed, Peter indeed walked on the water toward Jesus, but only briefly. He was distracted and terrified by the wind and waves, so as he began to sink he cried out for Jesus to rescue him (cf. the disciples' cry in 8:25). In view of the discipleship context of the previous storm miracle (8:23-27), it is not mistaken to view Peter's faith and doubt in the face of danger as exemplary of the trials of discipleship.
14:31 **You have so little faith.** Jesus rescued Peter by grasping him with his hand, but his words were aimed at rescue on another level. He pointed out Peter's weak faith and asked why Peter doubted him (cf. 6:30; 8:26; 16:8).
14:32 **the wind stopped.** When Peter and Jesus climbed into the boat, the storm ceased. There was no command as in 8:26 for the storm to stop; this time all that was needed was the presence of Jesus.
14:33 **You really are the Son of God!** When they realized that Jesus had walked on the storm-tossed sea and stopped the storm, the disciples worshiped him and uttered a ringing confession of his unique, divine sonship.
14:34-36 **they landed at Gennesaret.** This was about three miles southwest of Capernaum on the west shore of the Sea of Galilee (cf. Mark 6:53-56). Perhaps the boat was blown off its probable course to Capernaum by the storm. Once again Jesus is beset by crowds of needy people when news of his arrival spreads, and once again many are healed (cf. 14:13-14).
**all who touched him were healed.** An added detail this time was that people who merely touched the fringe of Jesus' robe were healed (cf. 9:20-21). These verses provide the kind of summary that is by now familiar to the reader of Matthew (cf. 4:23-24; 8:16; 9:35; 14:14; 15:30-31).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' appearance to the disciples during the storm in the middle of the Sea of Galilee follows on the heels of the feeding of the five thousand. These two consecutive stories focusing on Jesus' messianic powers provide a welcome contrast to the two previous episodes, which stress unbelief (13:53-58; 14:1-12). Jesus' messianic powers must be seen against the background of the Old Testament. To walk on the sea and to still a storm are prerogatives that belong only to God (Job 26:11-12; Pss 65:7; 89:9-10; 107:29; Jonah 1:15; Sir 43:23). These actions of Jesus should be understood as evidence of a status equal to that of which Jesus spoke in 11:25. The worship and testimony of the disciples to Jesus' divine sonship in 14:33 is a direct response to the divine acts he performed.
According to Matthew, Jesus was "worshiped" several times, by such people as the Magi, a leper, a synagogue official, a Canaanite woman, the mother of Zebedee's sons, and the disciples (2:2, 8, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9, 17). The Greek word _proskuneō_ [TG4351, ZG4685] may describe only a respectful bow to a superior, not the religious worship of deity (18:26), but in the overall Christological context of Matthew, the translation "worship" is frequently warranted. According to 14:33, the disciples worshiped Jesus and confessed that he is really the Son of God. This confession of Jesus' divine sonship should also be viewed in the highest sense, given other passages on the matter (2:15; 3:17; 4:3, 6; 8:29; 16:16; 17:5; 22:45; 26:63; 27:40, 43, 54; 28:19), and it should be noted as anticipating 16:16; 26:63-64; 27:54; 28:19. One who has made claims such as those in 11:25 and who has done such deeds as those narrated in Matthew 14 must be worshiped as the Son of God. (See the discussion of Jesus as Son of God in the "Major Themes" section of the Introduction.)
Although the disciples' faith was implicitly challenged in the feeding miracle (14:15, 17), the storm miracle directly challenged them, reinforced their need for stronger faith, and provided the occasion for their stirring confession (14:33). Davies and Allison (1991:512-513) state it well: "So often the First Evangelist, while addressing Christological themes with his right hand, is at the same time delivering teaching on discipleship with his left." This second storm miracle, just like the first (8:23-27), should be read as a picture of discipleship in the midst of the trials of life. This miracle also portrays Peter as the model disciple, the first among equals (14:28-30). Peter's actions led to the disciples' confession (14:33), which anticipates 16:16, where Peter alone confesses that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Blomberg (1992:235) is correct to note Matthew's distinctive positioning of Peter in this section (cf. 15:15; 16:16-19; 17:24-27; 18:21). Peter's failure due to lack of faith—even more than his success due to faith—is exemplary for growing disciples of Jesus, both then and now. See Turner 1991 for a detailed discussion.
Summary of Matthew 14. Matthew 13:53 marks the transition from Jesus' third discourse to a narrative of the next stage of Jesus' ministry. He arrived in Nazareth where his ministry was not honored (13:57). News of Jesus came to Herod, who mistakenly took Jesus as John _redivivus_ (14:2). When Jesus heard of John's martyrdom, he withdrew to a lonely place but was followed by multitudes whom he miraculously fed (14:19). This is followed by the second storm incident (14:22-33) and many healings in Gennesaret (14:36).
One theme that continues to characterize Matthew's narrative is Jesus' rejection, which now occurs even in Nazareth (13:54-58). Another blow comes from John's grisly martyrdom, which caused Jesus to withdraw from the public eye. Yet he could not avoid the multitudes who were clamoring for healing. Jesus' disciples continued to exercise "little faith" when they were tested by another storm (14:22-32), but they repeated the affirmation that Jesus is God's Son (14:33). In general, one can conclude that in the midst of growing opposition, the Kingdom was still growing through Jesus' miracles and through the weak but genuine and maturing faith of the disciples.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Conflict over the tradition of the elders (15:1-20; cf. Mark 7:1-23)
1 Some Pharisees and teachers of religious law now arrived from Jerusalem to see Jesus. They asked him, 2 "Why do your disciples disobey our age-old tradition? For they ignore our tradition of ceremonial hand washing before they eat."
3 Jesus replied, "And why do you, by your traditions, violate the direct commandments of God? 4 For instance, God says, 'Honor your father and mother,'[*] and 'Anyone who speaks disrespectfully of father or mother must be put to death.'[*] 5 But you say it is all right for people to say to their parents, 'Sorry, I can't help you. For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you.' 6 In this way, you say they don't need to honor their parents.[*] And so you cancel the word of God for the sake of your own tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you, for he wrote,
8 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 Their worship is a farce,
for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God.'[*]"
10 Then Jesus called to the crowd to come and hear. "Listen," he said, "and try to understand. 11 It's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you; you are defiled by the words that come out of your mouth."
12 Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you realize you offended the Pharisees by what you just said?"
13 Jesus replied, "Every plant not planted by my heavenly Father will be uprooted, 14 so ignore them. They are blind guides leading the blind, and if one blind person guides another, they will both fall into a ditch."
15 Then Peter said to Jesus, "Explain to us the parable that says people aren't defiled by what they eat."
16 "Don't you understand yet?" Jesus asked. 17 "Anything you eat passes through the stomach and then goes into the sewer. 18 But the words you speak come from the heart—that's what defiles you. 19 For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, all sexual immorality, theft, lying, and slander. 20 These are what defile you. Eating with unwashed hands will never defile you."
## NOTES
15:1 **Pharisees and teachers of religious law.** The last mention of these groups was in 12:38; here they accuse Jesus' disciples of ignoring traditional teaching about washing hands before a meal (cf. Mark 7:1-23).
15:2 **Why do your disciples disobey our age-old tradition?** Lit., "traditions of the elders." It is significant that the Pharisees and scribes come all the way to Galilee from Jerusalem, perhaps as part of an official inquiry stemming from earlier conflicts (cf. Mark 3:22; John 1:19). It is not clear why they accused the disciples instead of Jesus. Evidently, if the disciples did not practice this tradition, neither did Jesus (cf. Luke 11:38).
**they ignore our tradition of ceremonial hand washing.** The complaint does not directly concern the violation of OT ritual purity (Exod 30:17-21), since this was prescribed for the priests, not the common folk. But the Pharisees had evidently extrapolated the laws of priestly purity to themselves and—theoretically—to all Jews (Neusner 1973:83). Jesus' disciples were accused of transgressing the oral "law" which had grown up to protect the OT ( _m. Avot_ 1:1-3; _m. Yadayim_ ; Josephus _Antiquities_ 13.297; 17.41; Gal 1:14). The Pharisees believed that God had revealed to Moses not only the written law but also the oral law, which further expounded and applied the written law. The oral law was transmitted from generation to generation and could be deduced from the written law with proper interpretive methodology. This oral law was eventually edited in written form as the Mishnah by Rabbi Judah haNasi (the Patriarch) around AD 200. The massive rabbinic commentary ( _Gemara_ ) that grew around the Mishnah for the next three or four centuries became the Babylonian Talmud.
15:3 **why do you, by your traditions, violate the direct commandments of God?** Jesus' answer directly confronts the Pharisees with a parody of their own question to him. The term used in both questions has to do with willful transgression or violation of known standards of conduct. Jesus brushed aside the specific matter of violation of the tradition on hand washing with the general charge that by such traditions the Pharisees violated God's command.
15:4-5 **Honor your father and mother.** Jesus cited the fifth commandment on the respect due one's parents (Exod 20:12; 21:17; Lev 20:9; Deut 5:16) and asserted that the tradition of the elders on gifts to God (15:5) had invalidated the true intent of the law.
**I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you.** This refers to the practice of _qorban_ [TH7133, ZH7933] (cf. _korban_ [TG2878A, ZG3168]), which involved the pledging of funds to the Temple (Num 30:3-5; Deut 23:21-23; Mark 7:11; _m. Nedarim_ 1:2-4; 3:11; 5:6; 9:1, 7). Evidently, such funds were not transferable to others, such as one's parents, but were still accessible to the one who pledged them. A person could claim that he was unable to meet a charitable obligation because he had already given his money to God, when in fact no money had yet changed hands.
15:6 **you cancel the word of God for the sake of your own tradition.** Jesus juxtaposed God's word and human traditions, and concluded that the scribes and Pharisees had allowed human traditions to nullify God's word. It is significant that Jesus twice refers to the tradition as "your" tradition (15:3, 6). It is clear that he did not view these traditions as coming from God.
15:7-9 **Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you.** Here Jesus' accusation went beyond the matter of behavioral violation of the law to the more serious matter of the heart: the religious leaders from Jerusalem were hypocrites whose seeming obedience to the law was mere pretense, a mask for disobedience (6:1-2, 5, 16; 23:13-36) Isaiah had prophesied about them (Isa 29:13; cf. Ps 78:36-37). Isaiah's critique of the hypocritical situation in his own day also fit the situation in Jesus' day.
**they teach man-made ideas as commands from God.** Isaiah and Jesus both dealt with the hypocritical human traditions that set aside the authority of God's word and resulted in empty worship. The _korban_ [TG2878A, ZG3168] practice amounted to a false piety that excused the genuine impiety of neglecting one's parents. Human traditions could engage the lips in religious activities, but only the word of God could engage the heart (cf. Col 2:22; Titus 1:14). Jesus made a similar point about futile worship in 9:13 and 12:7, where he cited Hos 6:6. Portions of Isa 29:13-16 are also cited in Rom 9:20; 11:8; 1 Cor 1:19.
15:10-11 The conflict with the Pharisees provided an opportunity for Jesus to teach the crowd and then the disciples (15:12-20).
**It's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you; you are defiled by the words that come out of your mouth.** True purity is not a matter of a ritual that protects one from unclean things outside one's body but a matter of the things inside one's heart that are expressed in one's words. Jesus changed the subject from a specific oral tradition about ritual hand washing to a general ethical maxim about true defilement. Many think that Jesus was revoking the OT dietary laws here. This is spelled out explicitly in the parallel passage, Mark 7:19.
It is clear from 15:15 (cf. the note on that passage) that the teaching of Jesus to the crowd in 15:11 was viewed as difficult or enigmatic. In keeping with the principle Jesus enunciated in 13:11-12, this confusing public teaching was augmented by private explanation to the disciples. It should be noted that Jesus' stress on inner purity was not novel; similar teaching is found in the OT and in other Jewish literature (Exod 20:17; 2 Chron 30:18-20; Pss 24:3-4; 51:2-3, 6, 10, 16-17; 1QS 3:6-9; 5:13-14; Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.117).
15:12 **you offended the Pharisees.** The opposition of the Pharisees could only be fueled by Jesus' scathing words, and the disciples were concerned about it. Jesus did not share the disciples' concern that the Pharisees were offended (cf. 11:6; 13:57).
15:13 **Every plant not planted by my heavenly Father will be uprooted.** His negative description of the Pharisees as uprooted plants alludes to Isa 60:21; 61:3, which speak positively of plants God has planted (cf. Jer 32:41). This imagery also recalls the parable of the weeds (13:24-30, 37-43). The Pharisees had not been planted by God, so they would be uprooted in judgment. This seems to contrast with the mentality of the Mishnah, which seems to assume that all Israelites are God's "planting" and will have a part in the world to come ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 10:1).
15:14 **blind guides leading the blind.** Jesus' bitingly sarcastic language about blind guides anticipates 23:16, 24 (cf. Luke 6:39). The mention of falling into a ditch or pit might hearken back to the disagreement with the Pharisees in 12:11 (cf. Ps 7:15; Prov 26:7; ). It was Jesus' counsel that the disciples ignore the Pharisees or leave them alone. Jesus either regarded their opposition as so hardened that he could not spend time being concerned with it (cf. 7:6), or he was subtly alluding to the parable of the weeds, in which the weeds are to be left alone until harvest.
15:15 **Peter said to Jesus, "Explain to us the parable."** Peter characteristically spoke up for the group (cf. 16:16) and asked what Jesus had meant by the statement in 15:11.
15:16 **Don't you understand yet?** This recalls 13:51 but casts the disciples' degree of understanding in a negative light (cf. 13:13-15; 15:10). The question implies a rebuke—by now they should have understood the teaching.
15:17-18 **Anything you eat passes through the stomach.** Whatever goes into the mouth, whether it is "clean" or "unclean," passes from the body as waste and is disposed of.
**the words you speak come from the heart—that's what defiles you.** What one says originates in the heart, the source of ethical defilement (5:8, 28; 18:35). Jesus' teaching was not new. That the heart is central to ethics is taught in the OT (e.g., Gen 8:21; Deut 6:5; 10:16; 30:6; 1 Sam 16:7; Ps 51:10, 17; Prov 4:23; Joel 2:13).
15:19 This enumeration of seven sins that come from the heart begins with a general statement about evil thoughts and goes on to list behavioral sins. These sins, for the most part, are drawn from the second table of the Ten Commandments. Jesus' "inside-out" ethic clashes primarily with the Pharisees' externalism, not the OT. Nevertheless, Jesus seems to treat the OT ritual purity laws in the same way he previously treated the laws on vows and vengeance (5:33-42). The editorial comment in Mark 7:19 makes this explicit.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The structure of Matthew 15:1-20 develops from the Pharisees' question (15:1-2), which is answered by Jesus in 15:3-9. Then Jesus turns to the crowd and addresses them parabolically, evidently in the presence of the Pharisees (15:10-11). Finally, in response to two questions from the disciples, Jesus first denounces the Pharisees (15:12-14) and then explains the enigmatic saying of 15:11 to the crowd (15:15-20). The movement is from (1) Jesus' enemies, the Pharisees, to (2) the crowd, which views Jesus in a very superficial manner, to (3) the disciples, whose understanding of Jesus is genuine though flawed. The passage is an example of _inclusio_ as it begins and ends with the matter of eating with unwashed hands (15:2, 20).
Jesus' Response to the Oral Traditions and Written Torah. This passage is crucial in understanding Jesus' view of the oral and written law and the relationship of his teaching to the traditions of the Pharisees and the law of Moses. Jesus clearly set aside the "traditions of the elders" as at cross purposes with God's Word (15:3-6), but did he do the same with the dietary laws of the OT (Lev 11; Deut 14)? Those who answer this question in the affirmative (see Beare 1981:338; Blomberg 1992:239; Meier 1978:100-104) stress 15:11, 17 to the effect that Jesus categorically denied that food can defile a person. They also note that whatever is left in doubt in Matthew is made clear by the editorial comment "he declared all foods clean" in the parallel text, Mark 7:19. But in view of Matthew 5:17, it seems a bit simplistic and presumptuous to think that Matthew would present Jesus as dismissing a key OT law in such an abrupt and facile manner.
Others argue that Matthew does not present Jesus as annulling the OT dietary laws (see Davies and Allison 1991:528-531; Overman 1996:226-227). Such scholars, assuming the priority of Mark, argue that Matthew toned down Mark's version of this incident, mainly by omitting Mark 7:19b, "he declared all foods clean." Another argument is that Matthew 15:11 is hortatory and its antithesis is a rhetorical strategy, not a prosaic proposition. It is also pointed out that Matthew's stress is on Jesus' disagreement with the Pharisees, not the law itself. This is shown by the _inclusio_ of 15:2, 20, which denies the validity of the Pharisaic tradition on washing hands, not the dietary laws themselves. Another noteworthy factor is that the enigmatic saying of 15:11, often taken as annulling the dietary laws, is not interpreted by Jesus in terms of dietary law but in terms of the Pharisaic traditions. Granted, Jesus did say that whatever food (clean or unclean) enters the mouth is eliminated and that what comes out of the mouth is the real problem (5:17-18). But in his final comment, he contrasts the sins that defile with eating with unwashed hands (15:20)—not with eating unclean foods. Thus, there is reason to doubt that Matthew intended for his readers to conclude that Jesus was simply annulling the dietary laws.
Carson (1984:352) is correct in pointing to Matthew 5:17-48 as the key to the interpretation of 15:1-20. Jesus had come not to destroy but to fulfill the law and prophets. In so doing, he definitively taught the law and thus accomplished its purpose. Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament dietary laws by pointing out that ultimately, defilement is a matter of the heart. It is helpful to frame the issue here in terms of the six contrasting structures found in 5:21-48. Davies and Allison (1991:530) take this tack and compare Matthew 15:11 to Matthew 5:27-28 on adultery. If this is analogous, Jesus was not permitting adultery/eating unclean food (5:27; 15:17) so much as forbidding lust/evil thoughts (5:28; 15:19). But it might be a closer analogy to make the comparison to 5:33-34 on vows or 5:38-39 on vengeance. If Jesus' teaching on vows is analogous, Jesus would be saying that vows/dietary restrictions (5:33-34; 15:17) are unnecessary when one puts the priority on integrity/the heart (5:37; 15:19). In this case, the continuing role of vows or dietary laws might be as a cultural preference, not a revelatory duty. Or dietary laws might be viewed as the tithing of garden herbs—as lighter matters that should still be done but should not eclipse the weightier matters of the law (23:23).
Eventually the apostolic church will deal with the implications of Matthew 15:11 for the Old Testament dietary laws (cf. Acts 10:10-16, 28; Rom 14:2-3, 6, 14-15; Col 2:16-17). But at this point, Matthew narrates the teaching of Jesus for his Christian Jewish community in an implicit, cryptic manner (rather than drawing a full conclusion as Mark 7:19 does). The principle of putting the priority on internal ethical matters rather than on Pharisaic hand washing traditions is clear. Nonetheless, Matthew's community would probably go on practicing the OT dietary laws as reminders of the deeper ethical concerns voiced by Jesus, the ultimate teacher of Torah.
A larger issue raised by this passage concerns the relationship of later ecclesiastical traditions to the express teaching of the original canonical Scriptures. The root of the problem in this passage is identified by Jesus in the words of Isaiah 29:13 ("they replace God's commands with their own man-made teachings"). Protestants may be quick to think of this only as a problem with Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity, but Protestant groups are also prone to elevating their various traditions to a position of functional authority over Scripture. The church must always remember that the Scriptures possess authority over all ideas and practices developed by the church in the exercise of its ministry.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Faith of a Gentile woman (15:21-28; cf. Mark 7:24-30)
21 Then Jesus left Galilee and went north to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Gentile[*] woman who lived there came to him, pleading, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! For my daughter is possessed by a demon that torments her severely."
23 But Jesus gave her no reply, not even a word. Then his disciples urged him to send her away. "Tell her to go away," they said. "She is bothering us with all her begging."
24 Then Jesus said to the woman, "I was sent only to help God's lost sheep—the people of Israel."
25 But she came and worshiped him, pleading again, "Lord, help me!"
26 Jesus responded, "It isn't right to take food from the children and throw it to the dogs."
27 She replied, "That's true, Lord, but even dogs are allowed to eat the scraps that fall beneath their masters' table."
28 "Dear woman," Jesus said to her, "your faith is great. Your request is granted." And her daughter was instantly healed.
## NOTES
15:21 **Jesus left Galilee.** Blomberg's view (1991:242) that Jesus withdrew from Israel ideologically in 15:1-20 and geographically in 15:21-28 is debatable. Certainly Jesus had withdrawn from Pharisaic traditionalism, but one could argue that it was the Pharisees, not Jesus, who had withdrawn from Israel. This was Jesus' fourth strategic withdrawal from conflict (cf. 2:12-14, 22; 4:12; 12:15; 14:13).
**the region of Tyre and Sidon.** Cf. 11:22; a journey of perhaps fifty miles to the north (cf. Mark 7:24-30). Jesus' previous statements about true purity (15:10-20) were immediately put into practice in ministry to unclean Gentiles.
15:22-24 **Jesus gave her no reply.** At first, Jesus uncharacteristically ignored the Gentile (lit. "Canaanite") woman's request that he have mercy on her and help her demon-possessed daughter (cf. 4:24; 9:32; 12:22). But the woman's surprising reference to Jesus as "Lord" (3:3; 7:21-22; 8:2, 6, 8, 25; 9:28; 12:8; 14:28, 30; etc.) and "Son of David" (1:1, 20; 9:27; 12:23; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15; 22:42) implies that she had genuine insight into his identity and mission.
**tell her to go away.** The disciples urged Jesus to send the woman away, once again showing insensitivity about ministry to needy people (cf. 14:15; 15:32-33).
**I was sent only to help God's lost sheep—the people of Israel.** Jesus told the woman that the lost sheep of Israel were his sole mission priority (cf. 9:36; 10:6). It is possible that 15:23-24 should be understood a bit differently, with the disciples implying that Jesus should heal the woman in 15:23 and him answering them, not her, in 15:24.
15:25 **she came and worshiped him.** Undaunted, the woman persisted, this time bowing before Jesus. It is likely that Matthew intended the reader to view this as worship in the strongest sense of the word (cf. 14:33).
15:26 **It isn't right to take food from the children and throw it to the dogs.** Jesus' reply metaphorically reflects the Jews' special covenant relationship with God (the children's food) and the Gentiles' lack of such a relationship (dogs under the master's table). The "children" of 15:26 are "God's lost sheep—the people of Israel" in 15:24. Such language is offensive to modern sensibilities even when one notes that the word "dogs" ( _kunarion_ [TG2952, ZG3249]) is a word which might be understood as house dogs or pets and might imply affection, not the more common word that often implies wild scavengers ( _kuōn_ [TG2965, ZG3264]; cf. Matthew 7:6; Luke 16:21; Phil 3:2; 2 Pet 2:22; Rev 22:15).
15:27 **even dogs are allowed to eat the scraps that fall beneath their masters' table.** Despite the pejorative nature of Jesus' response, the woman amazingly persisted in yet a third plea for her daughter. This time she even adapted Jesus' metaphor to her own needs and extended it, accepting her place as a dog but requesting his mercy nevertheless as a dog might beg for table scraps.
15:28 **your faith is great.** Jesus commended the woman for her great faith and immediately healed her daughter. Thus, the woman's faith truly was great (cf. 9:22, 29). She had persisted through three rebuffs from Jesus, and her remarks manifest an amazing understanding of Jesus' identity, power, and mission.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this dialogue, Jesus responds three times to the pleas of the Canaanite woman, and once to his disciples. The request of the disciples comes after Jesus' first response to the woman, when he ignores her (15:22-23). His second response may be to the disciples more than to the woman, and in it he flatly denies that his mission concerns her (15:24). His third response to the woman, whose pleas this time are underlined by her bowing before him, uses blunt, even harsh language to compare the woman to a dog that cannot have the children's bread (15:25-26). The woman's final plea exhibits amazing humility and insight, asking Jesus to permit her a scrap from the children's bread. He responds by commending her great faith and granting her request (15:27-28). The repeated requests and responses induce a dramatic anticipation in the reader, as each time Jesus places an additional obstacle in front of the woman. Seen in this light, the woman's faith is all the more remarkable.
Jesus and the Gentiles. It is already clear in Matthew that Jesus and his disciples ministered only to the lost sheep of Israel (9:35-36; 10:5-6). However, there has already been at least one notable exception to this rule, the healing of the Roman officer's servant (8:5-13). It is noteworthy that both the previous and the present cases of ministry to Gentiles center around exceptional faith (8:10; 15:28). Both cases involve a request for another person, the Roman officer's servant and the Canaanite woman's daughter (8:6, 8; 15:22). Both cases also speak of blessing in terms of table fellowship (8:11; 15:26-27), which is then applied to the primacy of Israel. The Roman official may look forward to sitting down at a table with the Jewish patriarchs, and the woman may have scraps of the children's bread. The language of the table is clearly eschatological in 8:11 and is implicitly so here in Matthew 15, since the woman received blessings flowing from the presence of the Kingdom (12:28). Jesus' language at the Last Supper also has an eschatological context (26:29). Thus, every meal among Christians and, even more so, every Christian Eucharist service anticipates the eschatological feast with Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 11:26). Seen in this light, the miracle meals of Jesus are also powerful anticipations of the _shalom_ [TH7965, ZH8934] that will one day come to his disciples from Israel and all the nations. "What a blessing it will be to attend a banquet in the Kingdom of God" (Luke 14:15).
Davies and Allison (1991:557) are correct when they say that this passage "makes it abundantly plain that the biblical doctrine of Israel's election must be taken seriously." As Jesus said to the Samaritan woman, "salvation comes through the Jews" (John 4:22). The world mission of the church that concludes Matthew (28:18-20) is couched in language that echoes Daniel 7:13-14. This world mission does not contradict the earlier mission to Israel but expands it. Matthew would agree with Paul that through Jesus the Gentiles have been brought near to Israel's covenant promises (Eph 2:11-19; Rom 11:17; 15:7-12). The covenantal language from which both Matthew's and Paul's views arise is evidently Genesis 12:3—"All the families on earth will be blessed through you [Abraham]." (For further discussion, see the commentary on Matthew 10:5-6 and Levine 1988.)
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. Miracles by the Sea of Galilee (15:29-39; cf. Mark 7:31-8:10)
29 Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee and climbed a hill and sat down. 30 A vast crowd brought to him people who were lame, blind, crippled, those who couldn't speak, and many others. They laid them before Jesus, and he healed them all. 31 The crowd was amazed! Those who hadn't been able to speak were talking, the crippled were made well, the lame were walking, and the blind could see again! And they praised the God of Israel.
32 Then Jesus called his disciples and told them, "I feel sorry for these people. They have been here with me for three days, and they have nothing left to eat. I don't want to send them away hungry, or they will faint along the way."
33 The disciples replied, "Where would we get enough food here in the wilderness for such a huge crowd?"
34 Jesus asked, "How much bread do you have?"
They replied, "Seven loaves, and a few small fish."
35 So Jesus told all the people to sit down on the ground. 36 Then he took the seven loaves and the fish, thanked God for them, and broke them into pieces. He gave them to the disciples, who distributed the food to the crowd.
37 They all ate as much as they wanted. Afterward, the disciples picked up seven large baskets of leftover food. 38 There were 4,000 men who were fed that day, in addition to all the women and children. 39 Then Jesus sent the people home, and he got into a boat and crossed over to the region of Magadan.
## NOTES
15:29 **Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee.** Jesus left the region of Tyre and Sidon. He climbed a hill in Galilee (cf. 5:1) overlooking the Sea of Galilee (cf. Mark 7:31-37). It is impossible to track this movement precisely because the language is vague. (The town of Magadan mentioned in 15:39 is also obscure and cannot be located with confidence.) However, many expositors (Blomberg 1992:245; Carson 1984:356-357) believe it is most likely that the area intended here is northeast of the Sea of Galilee in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31; cf. Matthew 8:28-34). It is argued that seeing the feeding of the four thousand as a miracle meal for Gentiles better fits the parallel passage in Mark 7, as well as the praise of "the God of Israel" and the description of the place as a "wilderness" (15:31, 33). This view will be evaluated in the commentary that follows.
15:30-31 **he healed them all.** The general statement about many miracles in 15:30-31 is similar to those found elsewhere in Matthew (4:23-24; 9:35; 14:34-36). Once again, Jesus healed all who were afflicted with a plethora of diseases. If this occurred in a Gentile region, as many argue, the receptivity of the Canaanite woman and these Gentiles to Jesus' works contrasts with his rejection by the residents of Nazareth and the Pharisees (13:54-58; 15:1-9).
15:32-33 Jesus' second miracle meal (cf. Mark 8:1-9) resembles the first in many details (cf. 14:13-21). The resemblance has led some scholars to view it as an unhistorical "doublet" or a second version of the same event (Hagner 1995:449-450), but see Blomberg (1987:146-148) for a response.
**They have been here with me for three days.** Jesus was surrounded by needy people who had been with him for three days, so he told the disciples that he felt compassion for their hunger and did not want to send the crowd away hungry (cf. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34).
15:33-34 **Where would we get enough food?** The disciples' response indicates that they thought Jesus wanted them to feed the multitudes; they stated that their resources were inadequate. But Jesus used these resources: "seven loaves, and a few small fish."
15:37-38 **There were 4,000 men who were fed that day, in addition to all the women and children.** If this miracle is to be understood as occurring in Gentile territory, Matthew's purpose in including a second miracle meal story is evidently to demonstrate Jesus' concern for the Gentiles and to underline the theme of Gentile world mission with which the Gospel concludes.
15:39 **crossed over to the region of Magadan.** After the miracle, Jesus crossed over the Sea in a boat and arrived at Magadan. This is an obscure town, perhaps to be identified with Magdala on the west side of the Sea of Galilee. At any rate, Jesus was clearly now in Jewish territory and thus available for the Pharisees' official inquisition (16:1).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Davies and Allison (1991:563-564) lay out a convenient summary of the reasons many scholars view the feeding of the four thousand as a miracle meal for Gentiles, which balances the previous feeding of five thousand Jews. This is quite convenient theologically but cannot be proven. The geographical language is too vague and obscure to prove that Jesus was in Gentile territory. The statement that the crowd that witnessed the healing "praised the God of Israel" (15:31) is fitting in the mouths of Gentiles, but it also is a common phrase in the Old Testament for Israel's worship (1 Kgs 1:48; 1 Chr 16:36; Pss 41:13; 59:5; 68:35; 69:6; 72:18; 106:48; Luke 1:68). Therefore, neither the geography nor this key phrase prove that the meal was for Gentiles, and one must make the case for this from the context in which the meal occurs. Jesus had recently gone to an area bordering Israel and had healed a Canaanite woman's daughter. It would fit this emphasis on ministry to believing Gentiles if the healings and miracle meal narrated in Matthew 15:32-39 were done for Gentiles. Similarly, one might even view the four thousand people as symbolic of Gentiles from the four corners of the earth and the seven baskets of leftover food as symbolic of the completeness or universality of Jesus' Kingdom ministry, but this is mere speculation that fits a preconceived theory. In fact, the context probably speaks against the view that four thousand Gentiles were fed because it indicates that Jesus' ministry to the Canaanite woman was exceptional (15:24; Hagner 1995:446). Up to this point in Matthew, the Gentiles to whom Jesus ministered have exercised unusually great faith. There is no indication of such exceptional faith on the part of the four thousand. Thus, it is quite unlikely that this was a miracle for Gentiles.
If the feeding of the four thousand should not be regarded as a miracle for Gentiles, why did Matthew include it? For one thing, if Matthew was following Mark, he would have encountered this second story (Mark 8:1-10). But Matthew likely has a theological motive, not just a historical one. Donaldson (1985:122-135) argues that several elements of the passage combine to fit "Zion eschatology," which portrays the gathering of scattered Israel to Mount Zion for healing, a great feast, and many other blessings (cf. Isa 35:5-6). In other words, Matthew has crafted his narrative of this miracle to connect it with Old Testament prophetic images of God's eschatological blessing upon his people. Davies and Allison (1991:238-242) add to this imagery the likelihood of linkage with Moses, finding in the "mountain" and the miraculous meal echoes of Sinai and manna from heaven.
Matthew's story reminds those who are familiar with the Old Testament of God blessing his people, both in the past blessings through Moses and the future blessings foreseen by the prophets. This is to be expected in a Gospel that stresses the role of Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of the law and the prophets. But one would also expect to find a reason for the second miracle meal in the narrative of Matthew itself. It seems probable that Matthew included a second miracle meal to emphasize the lessons his readers should learn from it (such as the compassion of Jesus and his power to do great things with meager resources) and to foreshadow the eschatological feast with Jesus. Yet another lesson will soon be taught based on the two meal miracle stories—see 16:5-11, in which the disciples' "little faith" will once again be confronted with their preoccupation with physical needs instead of Kingdom truths.
Lessons for the Disciples. In each of the main sections of Matthew 15, Jesus addresses the genuine but flawed faith of the disciples. In 15:1-20, the story of the controversy over purity, the disciples were evidently slow to perceive that the rift between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders was irreversible. They were overly concerned that the Pharisees were offended by Jesus' teaching, but Jesus' response to their concern makes it quite plain that these leaders were blind to the Kingdom because they were not God's "plants" (15:12-14). The disciples were also slow to understand Jesus' teaching that genuine purity comes from within. Jesus' reply to their question makes it clear that the disciples should have understood what he meant (15:15-16). This passage shows that the disciples' response in 13:51 should not be taken totally at face value. No doubt they thought they understood the Kingdom well, but their genuine knowledge needed considerable deepening.
In the other two sections of Matthew 15, the disciples appear to be impatient with the needs of people. They asked Jesus to dismiss the Canaanite woman because her repeated pleas bothered them (15:23), and they were incredulous that Jesus wanted to feed the four thousand because they had inadequate provisions (15:33). The disciples had forgotten Jesus' merciful response to a previous request from another Gentile (8:5-13), and his ability to feed a previous crowd even larger than this one (14:13-21). From the lack of compassion and short memories of the disciples, Matthew's readers learn that they must have Christ-like compassion on the needy as they trust Jesus to use their meager resources to meet the needs of others. In the very next section of Matthew, the "little faith" of the disciples is once again exposed (16:8), and Matthew's readers are once again reminded of the power of the Kingdom.
Summary of Matthew 15. The events of 13:53–14:36 serve to illustrate the mixed response to the gospel that Jesus stressed in the parables of 13:1-52. However, opposition in this section (13:57; 14:1-12) does not come from the Pharisees, whose ultimate slander was stressed in 12:1-45. Even though the murder of John anticipates that of Jesus (12:14; 17:12), the absence of the Pharisees in chapters 13–14 reduces the tension to just below the level it reached in chapter 12. With chapter 15, the Pharisees return to criticize Jesus' disciples for not obeying their "age-old tradition." After answering their charge (15:3-20), Jesus withdraws to Gentile territory and heals the daughter of a remarkable Canaanite woman (15:21-28). He then moves into territory near the Sea of Galilee, performing additional miracles of healing (15:29-31) and another miraculous feeding (15:32-39).
The events of this chapter not only portray the continuing obduracy of the Pharisees but also further our understanding of Jesus as the fulfiller of the law (cf. 5:17-20). As he confronted the Pharisees (15:1-9), taught the multitudes (15:10-11), and explained the teaching to the disciples (15:12-20), Jesus was, in effect, repeating the formula of 5:21ff—emphasizing a righteousness exceeding that of the scribes and Pharisees. Though this righteousness was not appreciated by the Pharisees, it was welcomed by the Canaanite woman, who hungrily took the crumbs from the meal the Pharisees refused to eat. Her great faith (15:28) reminds us of that of the centurion (8:10), who would participate in the Kingdom meal. The ensuing miracles and meal continue the story of Jesus as compassionate miracle worker and patient teacher. The Kingdom was forcefully advancing, but violent people were attacking it (11:12).
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. The demand for a sign (16:1-4; cf. Mark 8:11-13)
1 One day the Pharisees and Sadducees came to test Jesus, demanding that he show them a miraculous sign from heaven to prove his authority.
2 He replied, "You know the saying, 'Red sky at night means fair weather tomorrow; 3 red sky in the morning means foul weather all day.' You know how to interpret the weather signs in the sky, but you don't know how to interpret the signs of the times 4 Only an evil, adulterous generation would demand a miraculous sign, but the only sign I will give them is the sign of the prophet Jonah.[*]" Then Jesus left them and went away.
## NOTES
16:1 **One day the Pharisees and Sadducees came to test Jesus, demanding that he show them a miraculous sign from heaven to prove his authority.** For the second time, the religious leaders ask Jesus for a sign (cf. 12:38; Mark 8:10-12; 1 Cor 1:22). The NLT's "one day" tends to obscure the close connection between this episode and the previous chapter. The leaders' demand that Jesus prove his authority amounts to "testing" him with the assumption that he will fail (cf. 4:1, 7; 22:18, 35).
16:2-3 The words of Jesus in verses 2b and 3 are textually dubious (see NLT mg) because they are not found in many early manuscripts, such as B syrc, s copsa and manuscripts known to Jerome. The verses were likely borrowed from Luke 12:54-56 (for further discussion see Metzger 1994:33; Comfort 2007:[Matt 16:2].
16:4 **Then Jesus left them and went away.** At this point Jesus walked away from the Pharisees and Sadducees. Perhaps this physical act demonstrates Jesus' rejection of the leaders of Israel.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Pharisees were associated with the Sadducees here and in other places in Matthew, evidently because these two normally disparate groups had found a common enemy in Jesus (3:7; 16:1, 6, 11, 12). Their request for a sign was motivated by a desire to test Jesus, which put them in the company of Satan (4:1, 7). That they asked for a sign "from heaven" perhaps refers to something so spectacular that it could not be denied. But again, Jesus had just fed more than four thousand people with seven loaves of bread and a few small fish. What more could be done? Jesus did signs to help the needy, not to soften hardened hearts. Seeing does not necessarily cause believing (Luke 16:31; Davies and Allison 1991:583-584).
In these verses, Jesus contrasted the Pharisees' ability to discern meteorological signs with their culpable inability to discern that his miracles demonstrated the messianic significance of his ministry (cf. 9:6-8; 12:28). They could discern the signs of clear and stormy weather depending on the color of the sky in the morning or the evening, but they were unable to discern the signs of the times—that is, the significance of Jesus' epiphany as the Son of God on earth.
The second request for a sign was met with the same enigmatic answer here as in the first request, "Only an evil, adulterous generation would demand a miraculous sign, but the only sign I will give them is the sign of the prophet Jonah." However, the answer here is not explained, as it was in 12:40ff (see comments there).
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. The leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16:5-12; cf. Mark 8:14-21)
5 Later, after they crossed to the other side of the lake, the disciples discovered they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6 "Watch out!" Jesus warned them. "Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees."
7 At this they began to argue with each other because they hadn't brought any bread. 8 Jesus knew what they were saying, so he said, "You have so little faith! Why are you arguing with each other about having no bread? 9 Don't you understand even yet? Don't you remember the 5,000 I fed with five loaves, and the baskets of leftovers you picked up? 10 Or the 4,000 I fed with seven loaves, and the large baskets of leftovers you picked up? 11 Why can't you understand that I'm not talking about bread? So again I say, 'Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.'"
12 Then at last they understood that he wasn't speaking about the yeast in bread, but about the deceptive teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
## NOTES
16:5-6 **Later, after they crossed to the other side of the lake.** The movements of Jesus and the disciples are not easy to follow. If 15:39 implies that Jesus left the disciples behind when he took the boat trip to Magadan, then the disciples evidently rejoin him at this point. This approach is implied by the NASB and NLT, and seems most likely overall (Hagner 1994:454-459). Another approach would be to take 15:39 as indicating a trip of Jesus and the disciples to Magadan and 16:5 as a return trip, as implied by the NIV (Blomberg 1992:248).
**Watch out!** The disciples' memory lapse in forgetting to bring bread serves as a springboard for Jesus' warning about the "yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees" (cf. Mark 8:13-21). In view of the many disagreements between the Pharisees and Sadducees, this yeast (cf. 13:33) must represent their shared opposition to Jesus and the Kingdom (see note on 16:12).
16:7 **they began to argue with each other because they hadn't brought any bread.** It is difficult to know exactly how 16:7 relates to 16:6, but in light of 16:8-12, it seems that the disciples thought Jesus was angry with them because they had forgotten to bring bread, or that he was warning them not to buy bread from Pharisees and Sadducees.
16:8-11 **Don't you understand even yet?** The disciples' preoccupation with their material needs rendered them insensitive to the more vital issue of the conflict between Jesus and the religious leaders. Their misunderstanding of Jesus' yeast metaphor showed their dullness to spiritual things.
**Don't you remember the 5,000 I fed. . . . Or the 4,000?** The disciples lacked faith in Jesus' ability to provide bread for their needs. This lack of faith is all the more amazing in view of the two miraculous feedings in which the disciples had recently participated. Five loaves had fed more than five thousand people, with much left over, and seven loaves fed more than four thousand, again with leftovers. But somehow the disciples obtusely concluded that Jesus had a problem with their lack of food. (For the theme of the disciples' "little faith," see also 6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 17:20.)
16:12 **the deceptive teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.** Finally the disciples understood that Jesus' concern was the anti-Kingdom teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees, not their literal yeast. In view of their obvious differences on such matters as the validity of the oral law and the existence of an afterlife (cf. 15:1-2; 22:23-32), it is surprising that the Pharisees and Sadducees were lumped together here. Their common opposition to Jesus, his Kingdom, and his definitive teaching of the Torah must be in view.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage does not present the disciples at one of their better moments. Although they had affirmed that they understood Jesus' parabolic teaching about the Kingdom (13:51-52), their thinking did not manifest Kingdom values. They forgot Jesus' recent warning about the blindness of the Pharisees (15:13-14), not to mention the two astounding examples of his ability to provide food in a miraculous fashion (14:13-21; 15:32-38). Their first memory lapse desensitized them to the danger posed by the Pharisees and Sadducees, so they did not pick up on Jesus' metaphor about yeast. Since the spiritual conflict between Jesus' Kingdom and the religious leaders did not occupy their thinking at this time, they were primarily occupied with temporal matters like bread. Since they had somehow forgotten to bring bread, they freely yet mistakenly associated Jesus' yeast metaphor with their empty stomachs rather than the growing controversy with the religious leaders (15:1-14) and the mortal danger the leaders posed to Jesus (12:14).
Once again Jesus patiently but firmly dealt with the "little faith" of the disciples. When he realized that they had misunderstood his yeast metaphor, he improved their understanding by prodding their memory. If they could recall how he twice miraculously fed thousands of people with more leftover than he had to start with, they would realize that food was not the problem. Rather, they must be occupied with the message of the Kingdom, which was being increasingly and intensively opposed. They needed to watch out for the teaching of the religious leaders. If they did that, the food problem would take care of itself. Jesus' rebuke of the disciples is appropriate for his disciples today whose preoccupation with temporal and material concerns renders them dull and forgetful of eternal Kingdom values. Today, as then, disciples need to have their memories of God's faithful, even miraculous, provision for their needs refreshed. Such a reminder, coupled with a renewed awareness of the spiritual battle being waged against the Kingdom (cf. 11:12), should sharpen the mental and spiritual focus of God's people.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. Peter's confession and Jesus' promise (16:13-20; cf. Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21)
13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"[*]
14 "Well," they replied, "some say John the Baptist, some say Elijah, and others say Jeremiah or one of the other prophets."
15 Then he asked them, "But who do you say I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah,[*] the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus replied, "You are blessed, Simon son of John,[*] because my Father in heaven has revealed this to you. You did not learn this from any human being. 18 Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means 'rock'),[*] and upon this rock I will build my church, and all the powers of hell[*] will not conquer it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you forbid[*] on earth will be forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit[*] on earth will be permitted in heaven."
20 Then he sternly warned the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.
## NOTES
16:13-14 **Caesarea Philippi.** This was located at the headwaters of the Jordan River about twenty-five miles north of the Sea of Galilee. As noted previously, it is unclear exactly where Jesus was when he began this trip (15:39; 16:5).
**Who do people say that the Son of Man is?** Jesus' first query of the disciples concerned the popular consensus about his identity (cf. Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21).
**some say John the Baptist, some say Elijah, and others say Jeremiah or one of the other prophets.** These answers reveal something of the messianic speculation that existed in the first century. Herod Antipas had already superstitiously identified Jesus as John the Baptist, raised from the dead (14:2). The view that Jesus was Elijah was evidently based on Mal 4:5, which speaks of God sending Elijah before the eschatological day of the Lord (cf. 27:45-49). The speculation that Jesus was Jeremiah or another of the prophets is harder to explain (cf. 21:11). Perhaps the association of Jesus with Jeremiah is due to Jeremiah's preaching of judgment and opposition to the Temple leaders of his day (cf. 2 Esdr 2:16-18; 2 Macc 15:12-16). There is also indication that Deut 18:15-18 was understood messianically by some Jews in Jesus' day (cf. John 1:21, 25; 6:14-15; 7:40). These views of Jesus were positive, but they proved to be inadequate. The crowd may have viewed Jesus as a prophetic messenger of God, but as the ensuing narrative shows, their understanding was extremely superficial and fickle (27:15-26).
16:15-17 **But who do you say I am?** Jesus' second query probes the disciples' understanding of his identity.
**Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."** This implies that Peter answered for the group in 16:16 and that Jesus spoke to Peter as spokesman for the group in 16:17-19 (cf. 15:15; 19:27). Peter's remarkable answer links Jesus' messiahship (see 1:1, 16-18; 2:4; 11:2; 16:20; 22:42; 23:10; 24:5, 23; 26:63, 68; 27:17, 22) to his divine sonship (see 2:15; 3:17; 4:3, 6; 8:29; 11:27; 14:33; 16:16; 26:63; 27:40, 43, 54; 28:19). The likely OT background for the linkage of the terms Messiah and Son of God is found in 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 17:13; Pss 2:6-8, 12; 89:27). At this answer Jesus pronounces Peter's blessedness (cf. 5:3).
**You are blessed, Simon son of John, because my Father in heaven has revealed this to you.** Peter's awareness of Jesus' true identity in the context of confusion among many Jews (16:14) was not due to any special brilliance on Peter's part but to God's special revelation to him (cf. 11:25-27; 13:10-17). It is ironic that Peter described Jesus as the Son of the living God, since later, in Jerusalem, the high priest demanded in the name of the living God that Jesus tell whether he was the Messiah, the Son of God. The high priest's question thus reprises the main themes of Peter's confession. If Peter's faithful confession is the Christological high point of the Gospel, the high priest's angry question is certainly the low point. The expression "the living God" implicitly distances the true God of Israel from the false gods of the nations (cf. Deut 5:26; 2 Kgs 19:4; 1 Sam 17:26; Ps 42:2; 84:2).
16:18 **you are Peter (which means "rock"), and upon this rock I will build my church.** Jesus' response to Peter's resounding confession continued with a pronouncement of Peter's foundational authority in the church that Jesus would build. The word "church" occurs only twice in the Gospels, here and in Matthew 18:17. Though many Protestants think otherwise, Jesus played on the name of Peter in order to speak of him (as spokesman for the disciples) as the foundation of the nascent church (cf. Eph 2:20; Rev 21:14). This is the more natural understanding of Jesus' words, much to be preferred over reactionary views that take the rock to be Jesus himself or Peter's confession of Jesus. (The NLT's parenthetical "which means 'rock'" supports this interpretation, although the Gr. text does not contain the clause as noted in NLT mg.)
**all the powers of hell.** Lit., "the gates of Hades" (NLT mg), which probably refers to the domain of Satan and death (cf. the "gates of Sheol" in Isa 38:10; Wis 16:13; 3 Macc 5:51; _Psalms of Solomon_ 16:2; and "the gates of death" in Job 38:17; 1QHa 14:24; 4Q184 1:10). Jesus promises that the church he will build on the foundation of the apostles will not be destroyed by the evil powers arrayed against it.
16:19 **I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven.** Jesus' linkage of the church and the keys of the Kingdom in 16:18-19 indicates that the church is the agency of Kingdom authority on the earth.
**forbid . . . permit.** Keys seem to symbolize authority (cf. Isa 22:22; Luke 11:52; Rev 1:18), and the authority concerns forbidding and permitting. This language of "forbidding" and "permitting" (lit. "binding" and "loosing") is highly unique and controversial. It is debated whether this language refers to evangelism, exegetical and doctrinal pronouncements, or church discipline. It is also hard to determine whether Jesus promised that the church's decisions would be ratified in heaven, or that heaven's decisions would be ratified by the church (cf. 18:18; John 20:23).
16:20 **not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.** After this remarkable revelatory moment, it is striking that Jesus forbade the disciples to make him known as the Messiah (cf. 8:4; 9:30; 12:16; 17:9). Jesus evidently did this in order to reduce the excitement of the crowds who tended to view the Messiah as a merely political figure. This may also be due to the increasing opposition of the religious leaders and the principle of God's sovereignty (11:25-27; 13:10-17). The commentary below discusses the difficulties of 16:18-20 more fully (cf. Burgess 1966).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Rock of the Church. Through the centuries, there has been a great deal of discussion of Matthew 16:18. In response to Roman Catholic teaching about Peter as first pope and apostolic succession, Protestants have often argued that Jesus did not mean that Peter was the rock. Instead, it has been suggested that Jesus was speaking of himself (Lenski 1961:626) or of Peter's confession (McNeile 1949:241) as the foundation of the church. Gundry (1994:334-335) argues that 16:18 alludes to 7:24, and that Jesus meant he would build his church on his own words. But 7:24 is so far removed from 16:18 that such an allusion is overly subtle. It is sometimes argued that Peter cannot be in view since the Greek word for Peter ( _Petros_ [TG4074, ZG4377]) is masculine, and the Greek word for rock ( _petra_ [TG4073, ZG4376]) is feminine. But this is a metaphor, and grammatical precision is not necessary. It is also argued that since _petra_ means bedrock and _petros_ means an individual stone, Peter is not the foundation of the church. But again, this is overly subtle and would render metaphorical speech impossible. Jesus was speaking of Peter in 16:18 just as clearly as Peter was speaking of Jesus in 16:16 (France 1985:254).
The metaphor of a foundation may refer in various contexts to such entities as Jesus' teaching (7:24), Jesus himself (1 Cor 3:10-11), and repentance (Heb 6:1). The individual context is decisive about the entity to which the metaphor points. In this context, Jesus' reply to Peter's confession is a pun (the technical term is paronomasia) on the nickname he had just given Peter (4:18; 10:2). The pun concerns Peter's unique role as the model disciple whose words and deeds frequently represent the disciples as a whole in Matthew. Peter's future role as preacher to Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2; 10) is also projected here. Jesus was not speaking of himself as the foundation of the church, since his own metaphor describes him as the builder. Neither is Peter's apostolic confession the foundation of the church—he as the confessing apostle is that foundation. Yet, Christ does not address Peter as a lone individual here but as the first among equals, since the context makes it clear that Peter was speaking for the apostles as a whole in 16:16 (Turner 1991). This best fits the Matthean context, and it also coheres with other New Testament texts that speak of the apostles (plural) as the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20; Rev 21:14). The Baptist teacher Broadus (1886:355-358) recognized this over a hundred years ago, and recent evangelical commentaries concur (see Blomberg 1994:251-253; Carson 1984:368; France 1985:254-256; Hagner 1995:469-471).
The real difficulty Protestants have with the Roman Catholic teaching concerning Peter is the notion of sole apostolic succession emanating from Peter as the first bishop of Rome. This notion clearly injects anachronistic political concerns into the text of Matthew, which says nothing about Peter being the first pope or about the primacy of Rome over other Christian churches. Certainly Matthew would not have endorsed the idea of Peter's infallibility or sole authority in the church, since it is quite clear in Matthew that Peter speaks as a representative of the other apostles and often makes mistakes (15:15; 16:16; 17:4, 25; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35; cf. Acts 11:1-18; Gal 2:11-14). In Peter's own words, Jesus himself is the chief shepherd, senior pastor, or _pontifex maximus_ of the church (1 Pet 5:4). For further discussion of Peter, see Brown, Donfried et al. (1973); Cullmann (1962), Davies and Allison (1991: 647-652); Kingsbury (1979); and Turner (1991).
The Keys and Binding and Loosing. As noted above, Jesus spoke of Peter as both foundation of the church and holder of the keys of the Kingdom. The linkage of the foundation and key metaphors makes it clear that one cannot divorce the church and the Kingdom because the former is the agency by which the latter is extended on earth. The foundational ecclesiastical role of Peter and the other apostles is carried out through their handling of the keys, which is their exercise of Kingdom authority (cf. Isa 22:15, 22; Rev 1:18; 3:7; 9:1-4; 20:1-3). This authority is exercised through binding and loosing (NLT "forbidding" and "permitting"). Scholars differ in their explanations of binding and loosing. Some stress the idea that keys are a metaphor of authority over who enters the church; thus, the apostles, through their confession of Jesus, control who is permitted and who is forbidden to enter (cf. 10:7; 28:18-20). Others compare 16:19 to 18:18 and posit discipline within the church as the area of the authority described as binding and loosing. In rabbinic Judaism the motif of binding and loosing was often applied to careful interpretation of biblical law in areas of personal conduct, or halakha; the rabbis rendered authoritative opinions on what was permitted and what was forbidden.
It is not easy to decide which of the above interpretations is correct. Interpreting 16:19 along the lines of 18:18 is problematic because the context of Matthew 18 concerns maintenance of the community, not entrance into it. Further, the binding and loosing in 18:18 is a function of the community, not the apostles. The problem with interpreting the binding and loosing in terms of the rabbinic usage is that such usage is later than Matthew and occurs in a different religious context. Matthew's imagery in 16:16-19 concerns the building of the church and entrance into it by those who, with Peter and the apostles, confess Jesus as Messiah, Son of God. The apostles, therefore, were in a real sense the gatekeepers of the Kingdom, since they were the foundational leaders of the church, the agency that extends the Kingdom on earth. Their role was to continue the authoritative proclamation of the truth of Matthew 16:16, and in doing so, they permitted those who confessed Jesus to enter the church and through it the Kingdom. Those who refuse to confess Jesus find the door closed and locked; they are forbidden entrance. (See Hagner 1995:472-474; Hiers 1985 for further discussion of the possibilities.)
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. Jesus' suffering as a model of discipleship (16:21-28; cf. Mark 8:31–9:1; Luke 9:22-27)
21 From then on Jesus[*] began to tell his disciples plainly that it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem, and that he would suffer many terrible things at the hands of the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law. He would be killed, but on the third day he would be raised from the dead.
22 But Peter took him aside and began to reprimand him[*] for saying such things. "Heaven forbid, Lord," he said. "This will never happen to you!"
23 Jesus turned to Peter and said, "Get away from me, Satan! You are a dangerous trap to me. You are seeing things merely from a human point of view, not from God's."
24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If any of you wants to be my follower, you must give up your own way, take up your cross, and follow me. 25 If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake, you will save it. 26 And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?[*] Is anything worth more than your soul? 27 For the Son of Man will come with his angels in the glory of his Father and will judge all people according to their deeds. 28 And I tell you the truth, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom."
## NOTES
16:21 **From then on.** At this crucial point in Matthew's narrative (cf. the same phrase "from then on" in 4:17), Jesus begins to make his death and resurrection explicit.
**it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem. . . . He would be killed, but on the third day he would be raised from the dead.** Jesus predicted that he would be killed but raised up later (cf. 17:9, 22-23; 20:17-19, 28; 26:2, 12, 20-32). Up to this point, this has only been implied (1:21; 10:38; 12:14, 40; 16:4). His suffering, death, and resurrection, are "necessary" in the plan of God and will fulfill Scripture (17:10; 24:6; 26:54; cf. Luke 24:26-27).
**elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law.** The Pharisees and Sadducees are omitted from the list of Jewish religious leaders who will make Jesus suffer in Jerusalem, perhaps because the chief priests were for the most part Sadducees, and the scribes were for the most part Pharisees. The "elders" mentioned here are venerable leaders, perhaps members of the Sanhedrin or supreme court (cf. 21:23; 26:3, 47, 57; 27:1, 3, 12, 20, 41; 28:12). The elders mentioned in 15:2 were probably the ancient worthies to whom the Pharisaic traditions were traced.
16:22 **Peter . . . began to reprimand him.** Peter showed his own lack of understanding of Jesus' mission (cf. Mark 8:31-9:1; Luke 9:22-27).
**Heaven forbid.** Lit., "may God be merciful to you!" This is an extremely strong protest against what Jesus had just said about his death and resurrection. The death of Jesus was incompatible with Peter's notion of what the Messiah ought to be, and so it should never happen. Peter could accept the notion of a glorious Messiah (16:27-28), but not one who suffers. Peter erred here, but one should note that even the OT prophets had difficulty reconciling the sufferings and glory of the Messiah (1 Pet 1:10-12).
16:23 **Get away from me, Satan! You are a dangerous trap to me.** It is striking that Peter went, in so short a time, from being the rock solid foundation on which Jesus would build the church (16:18) to being a dangerous trap or even a stone over which Jesus might stumble (cf. Isa 8:14). This is due to Peter's mental fixation on human priorities, not divine revelation. Matthew 16:23 is the polar opposite of 16:17—Peter confessed Jesus as Messiah when he thought in line with divine revelation, but when his thinking was in keeping with human intuition, he grievously erred and functioned just as Satan had previously. The words "Get way from me, Satan" do not mean that Jesus identified Peter with the devil but that Peter's opposition to the cross put him and Jesus in an adversarial relationship. Peter's attempt to keep Jesus from doing the Father's will is reminiscent of Satan's similar attempt (4:8-10). Satan had attempted to keep Jesus from doing the Father's will, and he would do the same with the disciples.
16:24 **If any of you wants to be my follower, you must . . . take up your cross, and follow me.** Jesus' strong and stinging rebuke of Peter (compare 16:23 with 4:10) became a teachable moment for the rest of the disciples, in which Jesus explained that the cross would define not only his own future but theirs as well (cf. 10:38). Jesus could not reign as the glorious Messiah until he went to the cross as suffering servant, and his disciples, likewise, could not reign with him until they deny themselves and suffer with him. The cross is paradigmatic for Jesus and his followers alike (cf. 20:26-28).
16:25-27 The way of the cross is for the present; glory and reward will come only in the future when Jesus comes again. Jesus presents three reasons that Christ-like self-denial is the path his disciples must pursue.
**If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake, you will save it.** The first reason states the double paradox that self-preservation leads to self-destruction and self-denial leads to self-fulfillment (cf. 10:39).
**Is anything worth more than your soul?** The second reason for self-denial speaks of the folly of gaining material wealth while losing one's own soul (cf. 4:8; 6:19-21). It is likely that the word "soul" here refers to one's selfhood. The implication is that true humanity is found not in the acquisition of goods but in humble service to others.
**the Son of Man will come with his angels.** The third reason for taking up one's cross is the prospect of future reward at the glorious return of Jesus with his angels (13:40-41; 24:30-31; 25:31; 26:64; cf. Zech 14:5). The language of 16:27b echoes several OT passages (Ps 28:4; 62:12; Prov 24:12; cf. Sir 35:19; Rom 2:6; Rev 22:12).
16:28 **some standing here right now will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom.** This difficult statement most likely refers to the transfiguration, which occurs next in the narrative. This is discussed in more detail in the following commentary.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 16:21 is widely recognized as a crucial text in Matthew's narrative. In one view of the structure of Matthew, 16:21 begins the third major section of Matthew with its phrase "from then on" (cf. 4:17; Bauer 1989). That threefold view of Matthew's structure has not been followed in this commentary, but nonetheless Matthew 16:21 is the first time in Matthew that Jesus unambiguously announces his death and resurrection to his disciples. The rest of Matthew's narrative from chapters 16–28 is encapsulated here. This announcement immediately elicited strong disagreement from Peter, who, despite his previous stirring confession (16:16), could not be more wrong in 16:22. Peter was rebuked in 16:23 just as strongly as he was blessed in 16:17; his words in 16:16 were revealed to him by God, and his words in 16:22 were strictly human in origin. In 16:24-27, Jesus turned from Peter, always the model disciple, to address the disciples as a whole with the message of cross before crown, suffering before glory, service before reign. Peter had given voice to a way of thinking that was apparently pervasive among the disciples, and all of them needed to be shown their fundamental error.
Peter's shockingly swift decline from blessed confessor to rebuked adversary ought to speak loudly to every disciple of Jesus. For just a moment, Peter's mindset became positively satanic, since he sought to dissuade Jesus from following the Father's will to the cross (cf. 4:8-9). Peter heard only that Jesus would be killed—the words about resurrection did not register at all. And so it is with disciples today who all too often do not grasp that their present sufferings are not worthy to be compared to the glory that is to come at Jesus' return (16:27; cf. Rom 8:18; 2 Tim 2:11-13). The desire for a comfortable lifestyle and the avoidance of suffering is a hindrance to Kingdom work that can be overcome only by divine grace (19:23-26). Even those who have seemingly overcome the lure of self-aggrandizement and who have followed Jesus still need periodic reorientation to the values of the Kingdom, as did the sons of Zebedee and their mother (20:20-28). The values and example of "the rulers in this world" always threaten to infiltrate the Kingdom, and Jesus' disciples need to constantly reflect on his counsel that "among you it will be different" (20:25-26). The lesson is not that glory and reward do not await faithful disciples (19:27-29), but that such are attained only after a life of self-denying service that follows in the steps of Jesus to the cross.
The Coming of Jesus in His Kingdom. According to Matthew 16:27, Jesus promised his disciples that their lives of self-denial would be rewarded at his return—in his Father's glory with his angels. This is a clear reference to the coming of Jesus to the earth at the final judgment (13:40-41; 24:30-31; 25:31; 26:64). But 16:28 is more perplexing because it seems to emphasize the certainty of that glorious coming by stating that some of Jesus' contemporaries would live to see "the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom." All of Jesus' disciples died long ago, so either Jesus and Matthew were wrong (Beare 1981:360, 472-473), or the "coming" spoken of here is something other than that which ushers in the final judgment. Evangelical scholars understandably take the second option and suggest that Jesus was speaking of his transfiguration (Blomberg 1992:261; Toussaint 1980:209), his resurrection, his sending the Spirit at Pentecost, or the judgment of Jerusalem in AD 70. Some attempt to see 16:28 as a general prediction of Christ's future glory up to his return to earth, encompassing the resurrection, ascension, Pentecost, and present heavenly session (Carson 1984:380-382; France 1985:261; Hendriksen 1973:659-660; Morris 1992:434-435).
Although the last view mentioned above has merit, the view associating this "coming" with the transfiguration seems most likely. Seen in the light of 16:28, the transfiguration, which occurred only six days later (17:1), amounts to a foreshadowing of the future glorious coming. Perhaps Keener (1999:436) is correct in saying "probably the transfiguration proleptically introduces the whole eschatological sphere." The transfiguration was a glorious experience (17:2, 5), and though it was only temporary, it could serve as a preview of what was to come with permanence at Jesus' future return to the earth. Some of those who heard Jesus make the prediction in 16:28—namely Peter, James and John—did witness the transfiguration (17:1). Peter himself seems to reflect on his participation in the temporary glory of the transfiguration as a confirming anticipation of the truth of Christ's powerful future coming to the earth (2 Pet 1:16-18). For further discussion of 16:28, see Beasley-Murray (1986:187-193). A previous text that presents similar difficulties is 10:23. In the commentary on 10:23, I argued that this passage states that the mission of the church to Israel will continue until Jesus' glorious return to the earth.
Summary of Matthew 16. Earlier in Matthew, confrontations with the Pharisees (and other religious leaders) occurred as the religious leaders responded to the words and works of Jesus (3:7; 9:3, 11, 34; 12:2, 10, 14, 24, 38). As things proceeded, however, the Pharisees began to seek Jesus out in order to initiate confrontation (15:1; 16:1; 19:3; 21:23; 22:23, 34). Their second request for a sign (16:1-4; cf. 12:38) necessitated Jesus' warning that the disciples beware their teaching (16:5-12). This leads to what is perhaps the most crucial pericope in this Gospel, in which Jesus receives Peter's representative confession of his messiahship and promises to build and empower his church (16:13-20). At this crucial juncture, Jesus clearly announces his death and resurrection for the first time, and then points his disciples to a self-denying lifestyle, which will be rewarded when he comes again (16:21-28).
This chapter continues to underline the theme of opposition from the Pharisees and goes a step further in that Jesus clearly tells the disciples that the opposition will lead to his death (16:21). Once again, the "little faith" of the disciples is confronted as Jesus prepares them to carry on the Kingdom mission in his absence (16:8). In spite of their weakness, they received the Father's revelation that Jesus is the Messiah and they would become the foundation of the messianic community that Jesus would build (16:16-19). Their futures would be tied to that of Jesus; each would, like him, bear a cross on his way to future glorious reward (16:24-28).
## TEXT [Commentary]
12. Jesus' transfiguration (17:1-13; cf. Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36)
1 Six days later Jesus took Peter and the two brothers, James and John, and led them up a high mountain to be alone. 2 As the men watched, Jesus' appearance was transformed so that his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as light. 3 Suddenly, Moses and Elijah appeared and began talking with Jesus.
4 Peter exclaimed, "Lord, it's wonderful for us to be here! If you want, I'll make three shelters as memorials[*]—one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
5 But even as he spoke, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy. Listen to him." 6 The disciples were terrified and fell face down on the ground.
7 Then Jesus came over and touched them. "Get up," he said. "Don't be afraid." 8 And when they looked up, Moses and Elijah were gone, and they saw only Jesus.
9 As they went back down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, "Don't tell anyone what you have seen until the Son of Man[*] has been raised from the dead."
10 Then his disciples asked him, "Why do the teachers of religious law insist that Elijah must return before the Messiah comes?[*]"
11 Jesus replied, "Elijah is indeed coming first to get everything ready. 12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, but he wasn't recognized, and they chose to abuse him. And in the same way they will also make the Son of Man suffer." 13 Then the disciples realized he was talking about John the Baptist.
## NOTES
17:1 **Six days later Jesus took Peter and the two brothers, James and John, and led them up a high mountain to be alone.** If the interpretation of 16:28 suggested above is correct, Jesus' prediction there that some of his disciples would see a royal "coming" before they died was fulfilled only six days afterward (Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36). Exod 24:16, which mentions that a cloud rested on Mt. Sinai for six days, is the first of many OT allusions in this passage. Only Peter, James, and John observed the miracle (cf. 26:37). These are three of the first four disciples Jesus called (4:18-22); Peter's brother Andrew was left behind. Jesus' being accompanied by these three may be intended to remind the reader of Moses' being accompanied by Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, but the seventy elders were also present with Moses (Exod 24:1, 9). The event, which occurred on an unnamed, high mountain, reminds the reader of Moses' experience at the giving of the law from Sinai (cf. 5:1; 15:29; Exod 24:12-18; 31:18).
17:2 **Jesus' appearance was transformed so that his face shone like the sun.** The traditional though opaque term "transfiguration" underlines the difficulty in describing the transformation that happened to Jesus. The word used in the Gr. text eventually gave rise to the English "metamorphosis" (cf. Rom 12:2; 2 Cor 3:18). Matthew relies on two similes to describe this event, describing its glory as something that dazzles like bright sunlight. The detail that Jesus' face shone recalls Exod 34:29-35.
17:3 **Moses and Elijah appeared and began talking with Jesus.** Allison (1993) argues that Moses typology occurs throughout Matthew, and it is clear that Matthew presents Jesus' teaching as fulfilling the law of Moses. It is clear from Matt 17:5 that Deut 18:15-19 is also implied here. Elijah's presence is undoubtedly connected to Mal 4:5-6, to which Jesus alluded concerning John the Baptist in 11:14. It is sometimes held that Moses and Elijah represent respectively the OT law and prophets (cf. 5:17; 7:12). Others point out that both had mountaintop experiences with God—Moses at Sinai and Elijah at Horeb (1 Kgs 19:8). In any event, Moses and Elijah were both key prophetic figures in the OT, so their presence with Jesus is fitting. If the presence of the two individuals is understood typologically, Jesus was the "prophet like Moses" spoken of in Deut 18:15, and John was Elijah (17:10-13). Matthew's comment that Jesus conversed with Moses and Elijah is tantalizingly brief. Luke 9:31 indicates ominously that the conversation concerned Jesus' upcoming departure (lit. "exodus") from the world, which would be fulfilled in Jerusalem. For a detailed study of the transfiguration, see McGuckin (1986).
17:4-5 **I'll make three shelters as memorials.** Peter's knee-jerk response to this glorious manifestation was perhaps to suggest a reenactment of the feast of tabernacles ( _sukkoth_ [TH5521, ZH6109] "booths," cf. Lev 23:42-43; Zech 14:16ff). Or maybe Peter was thinking in terms of the "tent of meeting" where God spoke with Moses outside the camp (Exod 33:7). His plan was to put up three tents or huts as temporary quarters or memorials for the three prominent persons there. This idea was well-intentioned, and Peter did acknowledge Jesus' lordship and prerogatives in the way he put the question, but it nevertheless threatened to blur the uniqueness of Jesus as God's Son.
**a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said.** The voice coming from the bright cloud reminds the reader of significant revelations to Israel from clouds in the days of Moses (Exod 40:34-38; cf. 2 Macc 2:8). The brightness of the cloud is a bit oxymoronic and suggests the "shekinah" or visible manifestation of God's glory (Exod 24:16-17; cf. Ezek 1:4; 10:4). The cloud also anticipates the clouds that will accompany Jesus at his return (24:30; 26:64).
**This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy. Listen to him.** The heavenly voice reiterates the words spoken at Jesus' baptism (3:17; cf. Ps 2:7) and adds "listen to him." This command that the disciples attend exclusively to Jesus quashes Peter's idea for three tents in language that alludes to Deut 18:15. Jesus and Jesus alone must be heard and obeyed. It is significant that this endorsement occurred not long after Jesus' clear announcement of his upcoming suffering in Jerusalem and Peter's negative response to it (16:21-22). The disciples were still likely perplexed at the notion of a suffering Messiah, and they needed this renewed divine endorsement of Jesus.
17:6-7 **The disciples were terrified.** Peter's enthusiasm at being present for this occasion must have rapidly changed to terror when the voice rang out from the cloud (Deut 4:33).
**Then Jesus came over and touched them.** He and the other disciples fell on their faces in fear and did not get up until Jesus touched them and told them to do so (cf. 8:25-26; 14:26-27; cf. Dan 8:17; 10:8-10; Rev 1:17).
17:8 **they saw only Jesus.** When the disciples got up and looked around, Moses and Elijah had vanished and only Jesus was with them. This underlines the word from heaven that Jesus alone is to be heard and obeyed. As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem and the suffering he would endure there, the disciples must not lose their focus on him.
17:9 **don't tell anyone what you have seen until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.** This is the last time in Matthew that Jesus enjoins silence concerning miraculous events (cf. 16:20 for the most recent time). This and other commands for silence aimed to avoid "superficial political messianism" (Carson 1984:388), which would have further exacerbated the enmity of the religious leaders. After Jesus had been vindicated by his resurrection, the true nature of his messianic ministry would become clearer, and the story of his miracles could be told in a proper context.
17:10 **Elijah must return before the Messiah comes.** Jesus had already spoken of the complex relationship of John the Baptist to Elijah in Matt 11:10-14, but the disciples' question shows that they still did not understand how the coming of Elijah related to the Messiah's death and resurrection. Evidently the appearance of Elijah with Jesus reminded them of Mal 4:4-5, which predicted the coming of Elijah as a forerunner of the Messiah and the day of the Lord. Since Elijah had indeed appeared, they might have wondered what hindered the coming of the day of the Lord and the restoration spoken by Malachi, and why Jesus must suffer in Jerusalem.
17:11-13 **Elijah has already come, but he wasn't recognized.** Jesus replied in effect that the disciples should focus on John the Baptist's Elijah-like ministry (not the recent appearance of Elijah at the transfiguration). If they did so, they would understand that John's death foreshadowed the death of Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The description of the transfiguration proper is brief—just the first three verses of Matthew 17. But the incident becomes the backdrop for two significant incidents for the disciples. In the first, Peter's hasty response to the glory of the Lord is corrected by the same heavenly voice heard at Jesus' baptism (17:4-8; cf. 3:17). In the second, Jesus once again forbids the disciples to make him known (cf. 16:20), which leads to their question about the future coming of Elijah (17:9-13). Jesus answers their question cryptically in terms of a past coming of "Elijah," and when he compares his own future suffering to what has happened to this "Elijah," the disciples finally grasp that he is speaking of John the Baptist. Thus, the passage contains the transfiguration proper (17:1-3), a lesson on the preeminence of Jesus (17:4-8), and a lesson on the continuity of John the Baptist with Elijah of old and with Jesus himself (17:9-13).
This passage presents two lessons, one relating to the disciples' deepest spiritual needs and one relating to a perplexing intellectual question. The first lesson concerns Jesus' preeminence in the disciples' lives. Confronted with the amazing scene of Moses and Elijah speaking with a gloriously transformed Jesus, Peter proposed the construction of temporary shelters for all three of them. We will never know exactly what Peter had in mind for these three shelters, since his proposal was interrupted by the voice from heaven. But we can be sure that Peter was on the wrong track, since his proposal did not reflect the sole sufficiency of Jesus for his disciples. Setting up three tents for Moses, Elijah, and Jesus would have had two erroneous effects: it would have belittled Jesus with faint praise, and arrogated Moses and Elijah to a status that belongs only to Jesus. As great as Moses and Elijah were, each was only God's servant, not his Son (3:17). Moses was the prototypical prophet, but he spoke of Jesus as the definitive eschatological prophet whose words must be heeded (Deut 18:15-19). Elijah's ministry courageously stood for the law of Moses, but Jesus as the definitive teacher of that law brings it to its ultimate goal (5:17-19). Therefore, however well-meaning Peter's proposal was, it suggested the unthinkable notion that Moses and Elijah were on the same level as Jesus. This would not do, for Jesus alone is the beloved Son who pleases the Father, and Jesus alone must be heard and obeyed.
The second lesson has to do with the disciples' understanding of the mysteries of biblical prophecy. In the plan of God, the ministries of Elijah, John, and Jesus are intricately interwoven. In his own right, John was not Elijah but came to minister in the spirit of Elijah (Luke 1:17; John 1:21). John's ministry as the forerunner of Jesus was in line with that spoken of by Isaiah concerning the one who would prepare the Lord's way (3:3; Isa 40:3).
According to Matthew 17:13, it seems that the disciples did understand that John's ministry was a fulfillment of Malachi's prophecy (Mal 4:4-5) and that John's suffering and death anticipated what was about to happen to Jesus. Matthew 17:11 remains perplexing, however, since it seems to leave the future coming of Elijah as an open question. Perhaps Revelation 11:3-6, another perplexing text, has something to do with this.
The Transfiguration and Theology. The transfiguration of Jesus is an amazing event but not totally unexpected for Matthew's readers. After all, Jesus had a miraculous birth, and his ministry began with the ringing endorsement of the heavenly Father (3:17). He had done mighty works of compassion and had definitively taught the Torah with nothing less than heavenly authority (7:29). He had even demonstrated supernatural control of natural processes by calming storms and feeding thousands of people with a few loaves of bread. He had promised a glorious return, a judgment of all people, and a righteous Kingdom on the earth. After his resurrection, he would receive total authority in heaven and on earth, and his presence would accompany his disciples in their communication of his Kingdom message to all the nations until the end of the present age before his return (28:18-20).
Thus, from the standpoint of Matthew as a whole, Jesus' glorious transfiguration is in keeping with his status as the Son of God, his fulfillment of Old Testament patterns and predictions, and his promise of a future Kingdom. The transfiguration is an integral part of Matthew's high Christology and his apocalyptic eschatology. It authenticates both Jesus' divine identity and God's plan to invade this world and rule it forever. By the transfiguration, the disciples were given a glimpse of who Jesus is and what he will one day bring to this world (see 2 Pet 1:16-18). Moses and Elijah are worthy figures, but they are only supporting actors in the redemptive drama the disciples witness. As the scene ends, Moses and Elijah have exited, and only Jesus remains in the center of the stage. The "listen to him" of the transfiguration becomes the "teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you" of the Great Commission.
In light of other New Testament texts, the transfiguration should probably be viewed not as the illumination of the man Jesus with an extrinsic glory but as the momentary uncovering of the Son of God's own intrinsic glory, which has been temporarily veiled and will be reassumed at the resurrection and ascension (John 17:4-5, 24; Phil 2:5-11; Col 1:16-19; Heb 1:1-4). Orthodox systematic theologians are challenged by the transfiguration to attempt an explanation of what must be ultimately inexplicable to mere humans. God alone knows how the eternal Son of God came to earth as a genuinely human child, and how the divine and human natures of Jesus were implicated in his transfiguration.
## TEXT [Commentary]
13. Jesus heals an epileptic boy (17:14-21; cf. Mark 9:14-29; Luke 9:37-43)
14 At the foot of the mountain, a large crowd was waiting for them. A man came and knelt before Jesus and said, 15 "Lord, have mercy on my son. He has seizures and suffers terribly. He often falls into the fire or into the water. 16 So I brought him to your disciples, but they couldn't heal him."
17 Jesus said, "You faithless and corrupt people! How long must I be with you? How long must I put up with you? Bring the boy here to me." 18 Then Jesus rebuked the demon in the boy, and it left him. From that moment the boy was well.
19 Afterward the disciples asked Jesus privately, "Why couldn't we cast out that demon?"
20 "You don't have enough faith," Jesus told them. "I tell you the truth, if you had faith even as small as a mustard seed, you could say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it would move. Nothing would be impossible.[*]"
## NOTES
17:14-15 **He often falls into the fire or into the water.** The man's son was an epileptic whose seizures were life-threatening. Still worse, the timing of the seizures when he was near water or fire pointed to something that was not accidental but sinister: he was demon-possessed (17:18).
17:16-17 **your disciples . . . couldn't heal him.** The inability of Jesus' disciples' to heal the boy is puzzling in view of their commission in 10:8, but it is explained by a familiar theme in 17:20.
**You faithless and corrupt people.** Jesus spoke of his contemporaries in very negative terms (cf. 11:16; 12:39, 45; Deut 32:5, 20). They were not only faithless but also morally crooked or depraved. It is not clear whether Jesus directed this rebuke only to the crowd, including the man whose epileptic son was demon-possessed, or to the crowd and his own disciples. Blomberg (1992:267) and Davies and Allison (1991:724) take it that Jesus lumped the disciples in with the crowd here, but this is unlikely because the disciples' "little faith" hardly characterizes them as a faithless and perverse generation. They received their own rebuke in 17:20, so it is better to take 17:17 as Jesus' exasperation with the crowd, which continued to hound him for miracles while not grasping his unique identity and mission (16:13-14).
**How long must I be with you? How long must I put up with you?** These are very striking questions in light of Jesus' previous compassion for the crowd (cf. most recently 15:29-32). The questions may remind the reader of God's complaint against Israel in Num 14:27 or Isaiah's question in Isa 6:11 (cf. John 14:9). Nevertheless, Jesus shows compassion in casting out the demon and healing the boy. On balance, Jesus was growing impatient with Israel's unbelief and was expressing "prophetic exasperation" (Hill 1972:270).
17:19 **Why couldn't we cast out that demon?** Privately the disciples came to Jesus to unravel the mystery of their inability to heal the boy. Their question reminds the reader of previous private questions (13:36; 15:12).
17:20 **You don't have enough faith.** Jesus explained that the disciples' inability was due to their all too familiar "little faith" (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8). The weakness of the disciples is repeatedly stressed in the narrative section between chapters 13 and 18 (see 14:16-17, 26-31; 15:16, 23, 33; 16:5-12, 22; 17:4, 10-11).
**I tell you the truth.** This underlines the importance and authority of what follows. This phrase occurs on Jesus' lips over thirty times in Matthew.
**if you had faith even as small as a mustard seed you could say to this mountain, "Move."** The disciples' ability to do miraculous works (10:8) was evidently conditioned upon their faith in the power of God, so Jesus challenged them in that area by using hyperboles for both the minuscule size ("as small as a mustard seed;" cf. 13:31) and the huge potential (moving mountains; 21:21; 1 Cor 13:2) of their faith (cf. 17:1, 9).
17:21 This verse, noted in the NLT mg, is textually suspect because it is absent from the earliest manuscripts (including B Θ 0281 ite syrs, c copsa). It was likely borrowed from Mark 9:29 (cf. Metzger 1994:35, 85). The idea of this disputed verse is that true faith will manifest itself in prayer and fasting in difficult situations (cf. 6:16-18).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The story of the exorcism and healing of the epileptic boy has two main parts, the first dealing with the healing itself (17:14-18), and the second with the question raised by Jesus' disciples. In both parts there is a request (17:14-16, 19) and a response from Jesus (17:17-18, 20-21). In both parts the inability of the disciples (17:16, 19) is contrasted with the power of Jesus (17:18, 20). The problem throughout the episode is lack of faith, on the part of both Jesus' contemporaries (17:17) and his own disciples (17:20). The attentive reader is not surprised at either.
The pericope about the healing of the epileptic boy (cf. Mark 9:14-29; Luke 9:37-43) underlines two themes previously seen in Matthew. The "little faith" of the disciples was pointed out by Jesus as recently as 16:8, and the wickedness of Jesus' generation is underlined in 3:7; 11:16; 12:34-45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:33, 36; 24:34. Both themes are striking in contrast to the glory of Jesus' transfiguration, and both figure into Jesus' rebuke in 17:17, which alludes to Deuteronomy 32:5, 20.
The lesson of this passage is that disciples are vulnerable to taking on the moral and spiritual values of their contemporaries. Jesus' disciples had "little faith" as they lived among a faithless and depraved generation. This faithlessness was true even of those in the crowd who, like the man with the epileptic son, believed that Jesus could heal their illnesses. This sort of "faith" operated only in the material realm and did not recognize Jesus for who he was as the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Rather, he was acknowledged only as some sort of prophetic figure (16:14; 21:11). In contrast, Jesus' disciples had "little faith," but it was genuine faith that confessed the true identity of their Lord (14:33; 16:16). The issue is not the intensity or amount of faith but the degree to which that faith perceives its object. The power of faith is in the person in whom it is placed. Jesus' disciples were unable to heal the epileptic boy because they had taken their eyes off of Jesus and looked at the obstacles, just as Peter did during the storm when he began to sink (14:31). Faith is not believing in faith but in the heavenly Father. It is not believing that the Father will do whatever we demand but believing that the Father can, and will, do whatever is best for us. We cannot assume that God will endorse and perform our selfish biddings, but we must believe he will empower us to do great things to extend his Kingdom through word and deed.
## TEXT [Commentary]
14. Jesus predicts his death and pays his tax (17:22-27; cf. Mark 9:30-32; Luke 9:43-45)
22 After they gathered again in Galilee, Jesus told them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of his enemies. 23 He will be killed, but on the third day he will be raised from the dead." And the disciples were filled with grief.
24 On their arrival in Capernaum, the collectors of the Temple tax[*] came to Peter and asked him, "Doesn't your teacher pay the Temple tax?"
25 "Yes, he does," Peter replied. Then he went into the house.
But before he had a chance to speak, Jesus asked him, "What do you think, Peter?[*] Do kings tax their own people or the people they have conquered?[*]"
26 "They tax the people they have conquered," Peter replied.
"Well, then," Jesus said, "the citizens are free! 27 However, we don't want to offend them, so go down to the lake and throw in a line. Open the mouth of the first fish you catch, and you will find a large silver coin.[*] Take it and pay the tax for both of us."
## NOTES
17:22-23 **After they had gathered again in Galilee.** Geographical movement south from Caesarea Philippi back into Galilee occurs here.
**The Son of Man is going to be betrayed. . . . He will be killed, but on the third day he will be raised from the dead.** The second of three passion predictions occurs here (cf. the first in 16:21 and the third in 20:18-19). There were previous "hints" also (9:15; 10:38; 12:40; 16:4; 17:12). This second prediction adds the detail that Jesus will be delivered or betrayed, hinting at the sordid role of Judas (cf. 10:4; 20:18-19; 26:2, 15, 16, 21, 23-25, 45, 46, 48; 27:3-5). In this prediction Jesus spoke of himself as the Son of Man and of his enemies with the generic phrase "into the hands of men."
**the disciples were filled with grief.** The disciples finally grasped the stark reality of the impending events in Jerusalem, and this anticipates their grief at the Last Supper and Jesus' grief at Gethsemane (26:22, 37). They did not speak against this reality as Peter did in 16:22, but their severe grief implies that they had not yet begun to grasp the reality of Jesus' resurrection.
17:24-25 **Doesn't your teacher pay the Temple tax?** A reference to the annual Temple tax of two drachmas (Exod 30:11-16; 38:25-26; Neh 10:32-33; Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.312; _War_ 7.218; _m. Sheqalim_ 1-2). See Davies and Allison (1991:738-741) for a discussion and dismissal of the view that a Roman civil tax is in view here. A drachma was roughly equivalent to a denarius, a day's wage for a laborer (20:2, 9, 10, 13). Evidently, Peter was approached with the question because he was perceived as the leader of the disciples. The question is phrased in a manner which expects an affirmative answer, and Peter so replied before checking with Jesus about it.
**Do kings tax their own people or people they have conquered?** Jesus speaks first, asking Peter a metaphorical question. The upshot of the question is clear: Kings do not tax their sons but their subjects. By analogy, Jesus as the unique Son of God, is greater than the Temple and is exempt from paying this tax to his father's house (cf. 12:6; 21:12-13). Unfortunately, the NLT's translation tends to obscure the key analogy of sonship by rendering the Gr. word "sons" as "their own people" and "the citizens" in 17:25-26 (but see NLT mg). If anything, the plural "sons" includes the disciples with Jesus since they too are the sons of God, their heavenly Father (5:9, 45; 6:9, 26).
17:27 **Open the mouth of the first fish you catch, and you will find a large silver coin.** Despite the fact that Jesus was exempt from the Temple tax, he decided to pay it in order to avoid offense (cf. 12:19; 22:15-22). Jesus provided the money for the tax in an amazing, even bizarre fashion that prompts Blomberg's (1992:271) comment, "this verse is perhaps the strangest in Matthew's Gospel." The "large silver coin" Peter would find in the fish's mouth is lit. a "stater," which was worth four drachmas (see NLT mg) and would pay the tax for both Peter and Jesus. It is noteworthy that Jesus commanded Peter to fish with a hook. Peter did not need a net this time since only one fish would be needed (4:18, 20, 21; 13:47).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage contains two elements, another prediction of Jesus' suffering and death (17:22-23) and an incident concerning the payment of the Temple tax (17:24-27). The narrative of the Temple tax incident has Peter answering two questions, the first from the Temple tax collectors (17:24-25a) and the second from Jesus (17:25b-26a). The rest of the passage (17:26b-27) contains Jesus' teaching on the matter, both in principle (17:26b) and in practice (17:27). For the record, Peter answered the tax collectors' question wrongly and Jesus' question rightly.
One cannot help but recall that Jesus did not mind offending the Pharisees on the matter of ritual hand washing (15:12), but in the spirit of 12:19 (cf. Isa 42:2) he would not protest the Temple tax (cf. 22:15-22; Rom 13:6-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14). Jesus had previously had cordial relations with the tax collectors at Capernaum, and this only exacerbated his tension with the Pharisees (cf. 9:9-11). Jesus' disciples today often get this backwards, treating religious hypocrites with much deference while making loud protests against perceived injustices by sinners. The lesson of 12:19-20/Isaiah 42:2-3 still is needed. Jesus treated non-religious sinners gently and religious hypocrites harshly, and his disciples should do the same. Foregoing one's liberties for the sake of avoiding offense and furthering the testimony of the Kingdom is also a Pauline teaching (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:9–9:1; 9:19).
There is a striking blend of humility and power in this passage. Jesus worked a miracle in order to submit to the tax collectors and avoid causing them offense. Once again, Peter learned a lesson about the danger of speaking too quickly.
Summary of Matthew 17. It is important to note that since 16:5, Matthew has been stressing Jesus' private interaction with the disciples. He has taught them to beware the Pharisees' teaching (16:5-11) and revealed to them his identity (16:13-17), his program for the church (16:18-20), and his future, along with theirs (16:21-28). Peter's confession of Jesus as Messiah and Son of God was confirmed miraculously by the transfiguration. The last mention of John's Elijah-like ministry turned into a passion prediction (17:12). The healing pericope recalls two familiar themes, the lack of faith of Jesus' generation (17:17) and the little faith of Jesus' disciples (17:20). The final mention of Capernaum in Matthew also implies the unbelief of Jesus' adopted hometown (cf. 11:23-24). Capernaum, after all the miracles Jesus did there, should have recognized that Jesus' unique sonship would preclude his paying the Temple tax. Nevertheless, he would pay it to avoid causing them to sin (17:27).
Matthew 17 is interwoven with a wide array of theological themes prevalent in Matthew. It also is full of themes that have been preeminent throughout the narrative block that begins in 13:53. Jesus had done many miracles, but his evil contemporaries—for the most part—still did not believe in him. The conflict with the Jewish religious leaders continued and intensified, but Jesus was faithfully teaching his disciples, and their little faith was growing. They had accepted with great sadness his clear prediction that he would suffer, die, and rise again in Jerusalem, but they were still preoccupied with carnal concerns, such as who would be the greatest (18:1; cf. 16:23). There was still much for them to learn about the Kingdom before they made the fateful trip to Jerusalem with Jesus.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. Life and Relationships in the Kingdom (18:1-35)
1. Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-14; cf. Mark 9:33-50; Luke 9:46-50)
1 About that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?"
2 Jesus called a little child to him and put the child among them. 3 Then he said, "I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven. 4 So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.
5 "And anyone who welcomes a little child like this on my behalf[*] is welcoming me. 6 But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea.
7 "What sorrow awaits the world, because it tempts people to sin. Temptations are inevitable, but what sorrow awaits the person who does the tempting. 8 So if your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It's better to enter eternal life with only one hand or one foot than to be thrown into eternal fire with both of your hands and feet. 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It's better to enter eternal life with only one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.[*]
10 "Beware that you don't look down on any of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels are always in the presence of my heavenly Father.[*]
12 "If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them wanders away, what will he do? Won't he leave the ninety-nine others on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost? 13 And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice over it more than over the ninety-nine that didn't wander away! 14 In the same way, it is not my heavenly Father's will that even one of these little ones should perish."
## NOTES
18:1 **Who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?** Evidently while Jesus was still at Capernaum, the disciples came to him with a question (cf. Mark 9:33-37; Luke 9:46-48). The disciples questioned Jesus several times in Matthew (13:10; 15:12; 17:19; 21:20; 24:3). What led to this question about greatness (cf. 5:19; 11:11) in the Kingdom is unclear in Matthew, but see Mark 9:34. Perhaps some of the other disciples were concerned about the prominence of Peter (16:17-19; 17:24) or of James and John (17:1). The desire for greatness is part and parcel of fallen human existence, and it runs counter to what Jesus taught in 16:21-28. Two matters are unclear: whether the disciples were concerned about greatness in an abstract sense or about which _of them_ was the greatest; and whether they were concerned about greatness in the present or in the future manifestation of the Kingdom. If this story should be understood in light of the later story of the sons of Zebedee and their mother (20:20-28), it seems likely that the disciples were concerned about which of them would be the greatest in the future (19:27–20:16).
18:2 **Jesus called a little child to him and put the child among them.** Jesus answered the question with a visual display, a sort of acted parable (18:2), before he explained greatness verbally (18:3-4). The NLT describes the child whom Jesus placed in the midst of the disciples as a "little child." It is difficult to know the exact age of the child. The Gr. word _paidion_ [TG3813, ZG4086] can refer to a child of any age from infancy to puberty (BDAG 749; cf. 2:8ff; 11:16; 14:21; 15:38; 19:13-14), and all that can be determined from the context is that the child was old enough to respond to Jesus' calling him/her into the midst of the disciples.
18:3-4 **unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom.** Matthew contains many statements about entering into the Kingdom (see 5:20; 7:21; 19:23-24; 23:13; cf. 19:17; 25:21, 23).
**as humble as this little child.** The character trait that appears to be foremost in the simile of becoming like a child is humility (11:29; 23:12; Luke 1:52; 3:5; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:9; 4:6, 10; 1 Pet 5:5-6; cf. "meekness" in 5:5; 21:5). In this sense conversion amounts to a renunciation of all one's human prestige or status and an acceptance of the values of the Kingdom. It is not that children are innocent of selfishness or that they consistently model humility, but that children have no status in society. As they are at the mercy of adults, so disciples acknowledge in repentance that they have no status before God and that they depend solely on the love and mercy of the heavenly Father. (It is not at all clear that John 3:3 is another version of this saying of Jesus, as advocated by Davies and Allison 1991:758.)
18:5-6 Since those who exercise childlike faith exhibit the essence of the Kingdom (cf. 21:15-16), the Father will severely judge those who cause such "children" to sin (cf. Mark 9:38-50; Luke 17:1-2). Here the use of the metaphor shifts from a child as the model of humility (18:1-4) to a child as the object of godly or sinful behavior. Causing Jesus' little ones to sin is contrasted with receiving them hospitably.
**a large millstone tied around your neck.** If receiving them hospitably is tantamount to receiving Jesus himself (10:40-41; John 13:20), causing them to sin is tantamount to rejecting Jesus himself, which brings consequences immeasurably more severe than drowning with a large millstone around one's neck (cf. Josephus _Antiquities_ 14.450). "Heavy millstone" is more literally "millstone for a donkey," a large millstone turned by a donkey. This detail along with the stress on the depth of the sea vividly portrays the horrible consequences of causing a believer to fall into sin. To cause someone to fall into sin is to corrupt that person morally and spiritually and, as 18:7-9 points out, to render him or her liable to eternal punishment (5:29-30; 17:27). The transition from the child as metaphor to the reality of discipleship probably occurs in 18:5 (Hagner 1995:520), not in 18:6 (Davies and Allison 1991:754, 761). The point of the metaphor is that disciples should be humble and demonstrate this humility by welcoming other disciples, not causing them to sin.
18:7-9 **What sorrow awaits the world.** Jesus' pronouncements of woe upon those who cause his disciples to fall into sin recalls 11:21 and anticipates 23:13-16, 23-29; 24:19; 26:24. Evidently, the offense spoken of here is somewhat different from that of 17:27, which speaks of offending those who do not believe. In 18:7 God's sovereignty and human responsibility are combined in the idea that incidents of causing believers to stumble are inevitable (24:10-11) yet culpable (13:41; cf. 26:24).
**Temptations are inevitable, but what sorrow awaits the person who does the tempting.** Offense inevitably will come from the outsiders, but it may even come from the disciples themselves! Therefore, any potential offense must be dealt with promptly and decisively. Failure to deal radically with sinful proclivities indicates that the "disciple" is in danger of punishment in hell.
**cut it off and throw it away.** Jesus used the amputation of a hand or foot and of the gouging out of an eye as hyperboles here as he had previously in 5:29-30. As awful as these images are, the prospect of eternal punishment is worse. It should go without saying that this language is hypothetical as well as hyperbolical. One's hands, feet, and eyes do not cause one to sin, and ridding oneself of them would not get at the root of sin, the heart (15:18-20). The point is that one must deal radically with one's sinful tendencies (cf. Prov 4:23). For eschatological judgment as "fire," see also 3:10-12; 5:22; 25:41.
18:10-11 **don't look down on any of these little ones.** Disciples must not only deal radically with sin in their own lives, they must also studiously avoid looking down on their brothers and sisters (cf. Rom 14:3, 10, 15). One's fellow believers are styled here as "little ones," as in 18:6 (cf. 10:42; 25:40, 45).
**their angels are always in the presence of my heavenly Father.** This implies that there are angels with access to God who care in some way for believers (Heb 1:14). This should probably not be pressed so far as to insist that every believer has an individual guardian angel, but it is clear that angelic ministry to believers is real, albeit mysterious (cf. Pss 34:7; 91:11-12; Dan 10:10-14; Acts 12:15; Rev 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14).
Verse 11 is not included in the most ancient manuscripts ( B L* f1,13 33 ite syrs copsa) and seems to break the continuity of the passage. Its authenticity is doubtful here. It probably has been interpolated from Luke 19:10 (Metzger 1994:36). All in all, the tone of 18:1-10 alternates between warnings of eschatological judgment (18:3, 6-10) and promises of eschatological blessing (18:4-5), depending on the course of action chosen.
18:12-13 NLT omits the question "what do you think?" (cf. 17:25; 21:28; 22:17, 42; 26:66), with which Jesus introduces a parable involving a lost sheep that is of great value to the shepherd (cf. Luke 15:3-7).
**search for the one that is lost.** The effort taken by a shepherd to retrieve one lost sheep has been illustrated in modern times by the story of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls by a shepherd looking in a Qumran cave for a lost sheep. The analogy of believers and sheep is from the OT (e.g., Ps 23; Jer 23; Ezek 34) and is found elsewhere in Matthew (9:36; 10:6, 16; 12:11-12; 15:24; 18:12; 25:32-33; 26:31; cf. John 10). Based on Matthew's other uses of this imagery, we can see that Jesus is the shepherd who rescues the lost sheep and rejoices over it. Although the shepherd leaves the ninety-nine sheep "on the hills," one would assume that they are not in imminent danger as he seeks the single lost sheep. When the lost sheep is found, the shepherd greatly rejoices that he has rescued it.
18:14 **In the same way, it is not my heavenly Father's will that even one of these little ones should perish.** By analogy, the Father is concerned for his little ones (disciples) and does not wish that any of them should go astray and perish (cf. 5:29-30; 10:28). The implication is that disciples should model their own lives after the concern of the Father as expressed by the parable of the shepherd. Disciples must receive one another, not cause one another to go astray (18:5-8).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Introduction to the Fourth Discourse: The Values of the Kingdom. Matthew 18:1-35 comprises the fourth discourse of Jesus in Matthew. Like the first three discourses, it has a narrative setting (18:1) and is concluded with the characteristic "when Jesus had finished" (19:1). The setting is somewhat vague in that "about that time" seems to refer only to the general time frame when Jesus began to tell his disciples about his death and resurrection. Though the disciples grieved at this announcement (17:23), their grief sadly turned to speculation over who was or would be the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven (18:1; cf. 20:20-28). The fourth discourse is Jesus' answer to this question and a subsequent question by Peter about forgiveness (18:21). A unique feature of this discourse is Jesus' use of a child as a visual aid (18:2) prior to his verbal response to the disciples' question.
The fourth discourse concerns genuine spiritual greatness. Jesus used a child as the ultimate object lesson of humility and the duty of hospitality to fellow disciples (18:3-5). Then he turned to the opposite of hospitality, giving offense, and spoke in vivid language about the horrible end of anyone who causes a disciple to fall into sin (18:6-14). Next come instructions on handling brothers who sin (18:15-20), and the answer to Peter's question about longsuffering in forgiveness, which leads to the parable of the unmerciful servant (18:21-35). The discourse holds together along the lines of God's concern for the "little ones" who believe. Their humble status is zealously guarded by the heavenly Father (18:7). His little ones must deal promptly with sin in their midst, yet the solemnity of the process of discipline underlines once again the Father's concern for his children (18:15-20). Peter's question with Jesus' answer underlines the absolute necessity of the rule of forgiveness in the Kingdom community (18:35).
The fourth discourse is not highly structured. One could divide it into two parts, each beginning with a question (18:1-20, 21-35) or each ending in a parable (18:1-14, 15-35). The latter of these two approaches seems better. In any event, the discourse holds together through its use of key terms such as "children" (18:2-5), who are the little ones (18:6, 10, 14). These children must be mimicked (18:4) and received (18:5), not caused to fall into sin or despised (18:6, 10). The use of family imagery for the community of disciples is perhaps the most noticeable motif. Disciples are children, and even those who sin against them are their brothers (18:15, cf. NLT mg), fellow children of the heavenly Father (18:10, 14, 19, 35). The language of 18:8-9 exhibits a clause-by-clause parallelism. The repetition of "two or three" and the juxtaposition of heaven and earth are key aspects of 18:15-20.
The Humble Enter God's Kingdom. Once again Jesus proved himself to be the master teacher as he spontaneously chose just the right object lesson to answer a question. He did not choose a child out of a sentimental notion of the innocence or subjective humility of children, since children may already exhibit in seed form the traits which Jesus spoke against here. He chose the metaphor or acted-out parable to stress that a child is at the mercy of adults and lacks social status. A child depends entirely on adults, particularly its parents, for its welfare. Thus, turning to God as a disciple of Jesus involves humbling oneself as a child before the heavenly Father. Such humility in total dependence upon the Father's mercy renounces any power, position, or status one might claim from human resources (cf. 5:3, 5). This perspective is nothing less than a total renunciation and reversal of the ways and values of the world, where the drive to get ahead leads to all sorts of sinful strategies to achieve greatness (20:26-27; 23:11-12). The opposite of humility is pride, which by implication would make one least in the Kingdom of Heaven.
Humility or genuine greatness leads to treating Kingdom disciples well, since it is tantamount to treating Jesus himself well (18:5; cf. 10:40). Mistreating disciples also has eternal consequences (18:7). No sacrifice is too great, even the spiritual equivalent of a hand, a foot, or an eye, if it gets one into the Kingdom (18:8-9; cf. 13:44). In light of this polarity of reward and punishment, disciples must carefully scrutinize themselves and make very sure that they do not despise one another (18:10). Instead of holding one another in contempt, they must have the same concern for one another that motivates the shepherd to rescue a straying sheep (18:12-14). Regarding oneself as a child before God continues to demand deep humility, and treating children/disciples well is not likely to win the world's applause. But such behavior is only walking in the steps of Jesus, who epitomizes humility and concern for children/disciples (11:25; 12:18-21; 20:28; 21:5). Walking in his steps in this fashion is counter-cultural behavior; it can be used by the Spirit to convict a world obsessed with power and status due to the sin of pride (5:13-16). Also, humility and concern for fellow disciples will insure that when church discipline is necessary (18:15-20), it will be carried out with proper motives (cf. Gal 6:1).
It is clear that the disciples still have many lessons to learn. Jesus had already made it clear that his destiny was suffering, death, and resurrection, and that they would share in his destiny. Suffering comes before reward (16:21-28). Thus, it is highly ironic that they were preoccupied with greatness so soon after Jesus' clear teaching on his destiny and theirs (Hagner 1995:517). This preoccupation simply will not go away (20:20-28). The disciples of Jesus must constantly remind themselves that their Lord's experience must be the paradigm of their own (10:38; 11:29; 16:24; 20:28; Phil 2:5; Col 1:24; Heb 10:32-38; 1 Pet 2:21; Rev 1:9)
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Correcting a sinning believer (18:15-20)
15 "If another believer[*] sins against you,[*] go privately and point out the offense. If the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back. 16 But if you are unsuccessful, take one or two others with you and go back again, so that everything you say may be confirmed by two or three witnesses. 17 If the person still refuses to listen, take your case to the church. Then if he or she won't accept the church's decision, treat that person as a pagan or a corrupt tax collector.
18 "I tell you the truth, whatever you forbid[*] on earth will be forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit[*] on earth will be permitted in heaven.
19 "I also tell you this: If two of you agree here on earth concerning anything you ask, my Father in heaven will do it for you. 20 For where two or three gather together as my followers,[*] I am there among them."
## NOTES
18:15-17 **If another believer sins against you.** The warnings against despising a fellow disciple or causing him or her to fall into sin inform the procedure laid out here (cf. 18:6, 10). In view of this background and Peter's question in 18:21, it is possible that the disputed words "against you" in 18:15 are authentic, despite their absence in many early manuscripts of the NT (cf. Davies and Allison 1991:782; Metzger 1971:45). The NLT's "another believer" is lit. "your brother" (so NLT mg).
**go privately . . . take one or two others with you . . . take your case to the church.** Three stages of confrontation are clear here, involving successively more members of the community of disciples. Ideally, the sin of one against another can be reconciled between the two of them (cf. Lev 19:17-18; Prov 3:12; 25:9-10; 27:5-6), but if this is unsuccessful, the next step is to secure peace by bringing in one or two others, evidently to underline the gravity of the problem and to add their wisdom to its solution. Verse 16 supports this practice by citing Deut 19:15 (cf. 26:60; Num 35:30; John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 6:18; 10:28; Rev 11:3). Regrettably, if these two steps cannot resolve the matter, it must be taken before the whole local community, the "church" (cf. 16:18).
**if he or she won't accept the church's decision, treat that person as a pagan or a corrupt tax collector.** At this point, after three opportunities for reconciliation, the gravity of the situation ought to be clear, and the offender ought to acknowledge his or her error. But if the offender will not heed the church, there is no higher earthly authority. The only remaining alternative is withdrawal of fellowship from the offender, who is regarded no longer as a disciple but as a notorious sinner, like a "pagan or a corrupt tax collector" (lit. "Gentile or a tax collector"). This sort of treatment would mean that the offender would be regarded as an outsider and could not participate in the community's activities. But in view of Jesus' own compassionate treatment of notorious sinners (5:46-47; 9:10-13; 10:3), it would not necessarily mean a "shunning," or total withdrawal from personal contact. The Community Rule from Qumran lays out a similar procedure for dealing with interpersonal problems (1QS 5:25-6:1; CD 9:2-8).
18:18-20 These verses supply a theological foundation for the process of discipline outlined in 18:15-17. The consequences of the community's decision are ominous, since the community on earth acts in conjunction with the God of heaven.
**whatever you forbid on earth will be forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven.** The forbidding and permitting (lit. "binding and loosing") mentioned here recalls 16:19 and is tied to the exercise of the keys of the Kingdom (cf. John 20:23). Here the authority is clearly the community's, not just Peter's or the apostles'. This involves authoritative proclamation of entrance or exclusion, forgiveness of sins or retention, and eventual punishment for sins. In 18:18 the matter of discipline is in view, showing that the process of 18:15-17 is an extremely serious one involving the eternal destiny of the offending party (see notes on 16:19).
**If two of you agree here on earth concerning anything you ask, my Father in heaven will do it for you.** The promises in 18:19-20 of answered prayer and God's presence also refer to the solemn matter of the sinning brother. It is possible that the two who agree in 18:19 are two members of a three-member court that represents the community ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 1:1; Hagner 1995:533). During the discipline process, the church may be assured that their deliberations on earth will be confirmed by their Father in heaven and that Jesus is present with them throughout the difficulties.
**I am there among them.** The presence of Jesus with the church during the process of discipline is similar to the rabbinic notion that God's presence (the Shekinah) is with a group as small as two people who are studying the Torah ( _m. Avot_ 3:2, 3, 6). Jesus' promise that he is with his church speaks of nothing less than divine activity (Joel 2:27; Zech 2:10-11). It recalls 1:23 and anticipates 28:20. The high Christology of Matthew is once again obvious.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 18:15-20 contains a procedure for discipline (18:15-17) followed by its theological basis. There are three steps in the procedure, and the basis involves three truths: the authority of the church, the promise of answered prayer, and the presence of Jesus. The procedure spelled out here will be a necessary one since Jesus has just taught that offenses are inevitable. The Father's total dedication to his little ones dictates that offenses within the community be dealt with promptly and fairly. After the model of the rescue of the straying sheep, the offended person must take the initiative to bring the offender back into the fold (18:12, 15). There is no place for the offended person to become bitter or gossip about the offender to a third person (cf. Prov 25:9-10). The three stages of confrontation assure the fair treatment of both the offender and the injured party with as little fanfare as possible. Though "church discipline" (cf. 1 Cor 5:1–6:11; 2 Cor 2:5-11; Gal 6:1-5; 2 Thess 3:6, 14-15; 1 Tim 5:19-20; 2 Tim 4:2; Titus 2:15; 3:10; 1 John 5:16; 3 John 1:10; Jude 1:20-23) is often taken lightly in evangelical circles, it is an ominous matter, an aspect of letting God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven (cf. 6:10). Successively rejecting the overtures of a brother, two or three witnesses, and the church is tantamount to rejecting Jesus and the Father.
Yet the severity of 18:15-20 is cushioned by its context, since it is "embedded in a section filled with kindness" (Davies and Allison 1991:804). Jesus has been speaking of his disciples as humble children (18:5), little ones (18:6), and lost sheep (18:12-13). He will go on to stress the necessity of forgiveness in his community (18:21-35). The sinner is described as a brother, a fellow child of the heavenly Father (18:15). Even the discipline process allows the sinner three chances to repent, and those who are involved in it are to view themselves as agents of the Father, who is like a shepherd seeking straying sheep. The goal is reconciliation and return to the flock, not severance of relationship.
The flippant way in which 18:19 is often cited to assure small meetings of Christians that God is with them is disturbing because it twists a solemn passage into a cliche. No doubt God is present with any legitimate meeting of his people, whatever its size, and there is no need to mishandle Scripture to prove it. Taking this solemn passage out of context cheapens it and profanes the sacred duty of the church to maintain the harmony of its interpersonal relationships.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Forgiving a sinning believer (18:21-35)
21 Then Peter came to him and asked, "Lord, how often should I forgive someone[*] who sins against me? Seven times?"
22 "No, not seven times," Jesus replied, "but seventy times seven
23 "Therefore, the Kingdom of Heaven can be compared to a king who decided to bring his accounts up to date with servants who had borrowed money from him. 24 In the process, one of his debtors was brought in who owed him millions of dollars.[*] 25 He couldn't pay, so his master ordered that he be sold—along with his wife, his children, and everything he owned—to pay the debt.
26 "But the man fell down before his master and begged him, 'Please, be patient with me, and I will pay it all.' 27 Then his master was filled with pity for him, and he released him and forgave his debt.
28 "But when the man left the king, he went to a fellow servant who owed him a few thousand dollars.[*] He grabbed him by the throat and demanded instant payment.
29 "His fellow servant fell down before him and begged for a little more time. 'Be patient with me, and I will pay it,' he pleaded. 30 But his creditor wouldn't wait. He had the man arrested and put in prison until the debt could be paid in full.
31 "When some of the other servants saw this, they were very upset. They went to the king and told him everything that had happened. 32 Then the king called in the man he had forgiven and said, 'You evil servant! I forgave you that tremendous debt because you pleaded with me. 33 Shouldn't you have mercy on your fellow servant, just as I had mercy on you?' 34 Then the angry king sent the man to prison to be tortured until he had paid his entire debt.
35 "That's what my heavenly Father will do to you if you refuse to forgive your brothers and sisters[*] from your heart."
## NOTES
18:21-22 **how often should I forgive someone who sins against me? Seven times?** Peter once again spoke up, evidently for the rest of the disciples, and asked a question about forgiveness. Perhaps his question was asked impulsively and interrupted Jesus' discourse. Peter already knew that Jesus taught forgiveness (6:12, 14-15), but he was concerned here with the extent of the longsuffering that should be shown to a brother who repeatedly sinned against another disciple. It is not clear whether this hypothetical sinner has repeatedly responded to the process outlined in 18:15-20. Even if he has not, it would seem that there is no contradiction between corporate exclusion (18:15-20) and personal forgiveness (18:21-35).
**seventy times seven!** Peter seemed to think that forgiving seven times was quite adequate, but Jesus' hyperbolic answer indicates that forgiveness must be unending (cf. 5:21-26; 6:12, 14-15; _m. Yoma_ 8:9). Whether 18:22 is translated "seventy-seven times" (NIV; BDAG 269) or "seventy times seven" (NLT), the following parable of the unforgiving servant (18:23-35) demonstrates that disciples have been forgiven by their heavenly Father of much more than they could ever forgive their fellow disciples. Thus, to be forgiven is to be freed to forgive. The response to offense mandated by Jesus is the opposite of Lamech's vengeful boast that he would be avenged seventy-seven times upon anyone who injured him (Gen 4:24).
18:23-27 Jesus' answer to Peter continues with a parable of the Kingdom, introduced by the common similarity formula (cf. 13:24, 31, 33, 45, 47; 20:1; 22:2; 25:1). The king's servants are likely to be understood as his governors or officials, since it seems unlikely that slaves would be entrusted with so much money or would owe money to a king (BDAG 260).
**owed him millions of dollars.** The first scene of the story tells the reader that a servant was forgiven an amazingly large debt by a king who wished to settle his financial affairs. The servant owed the king an extremely large amount of money (NLT "millions of dollars"), lit. "10,000 talents" (cf. NLT mg). A talent was probably worth around 6,000 drachmas (17:24) or denarii (20:2ff; BDAG 988). A laborer was paid a denarius a day (20:2), so if this is taken lit. a laborer would have to work 60,000,000 days or roughly 193,000 years (60,000,000 days divided by 310 work days a year) to earn this much money! But the figure ("10,000"; Gr. _mupioi_ ) here is hyperbolic; Danker (BDAG 661) suggests the English slang "zillions" to translate it (cf. the large amounts found in 1 Chr 29:3-7 and Josephus _Antiquities_ 17.320). What is meant is an incalculably large amount in contrast to the amount owed this servant by his fellow servant in 18:28.
**ordered that he be sold . . . to pay the debt.** The king's plan to sell the servant and his family into slavery in order to obtain a modicum of satisfaction was evidently a legal solution (cf. 2 Kgs 4:1; Isa 50:1; Amos 2:6; 8:6), but the pleas of the prostrate servant for more time to pay touched the king's heart and changed his mind. His compassion reminds the reader of Jesus' compassion (9:36; 14:14; 15:32; 20:34).
**forgave his debt.** Instead of merely allowing his servant time to repay the enormous debt, with astonishing mercy he forgives it entirely.
18:28-30 In the second scene of the story the forgiven servant does not respond in kind to the king's compassion (18:28-30). The language of the second scene is quite similar to that of the first.
**owed him a few thousand dollars.** After being forgiven an enormous debt by the king, he refused to forgive his fellow servant a comparatively small debt, lit. "100 denarii" (NLT mg), roughly four months' work for a laborer. If our calculation in 18:24 is contrasted with the amount here, the servant was forgiven nearly 600,000 times the amount he refuses to forgive, but this is hyperbole.
**put in prison until the debt could be paid in full.** Despite the pleas of his fellow servant for more time, the unforgiving servant choked him and had him thrown in jail until he could repay (cf. 5:25-26; 24:49). This violent behavior is in stark contrast to the previous compassion of the king. The unforgiving servant did not do for the other as he would have had the other do for him (7:12), let alone do for the other as the king had already done for him.
18:31-34 In the third scene, other servants saw how the forgiven servant treated his fellow servants. There was a monstrous inconsistency. Should not this servant have imitated the mercy he received from the king? The servants were so horrified they told the king, who reversed his previous compassionate treatment and angrily punished the servant whom he had previously forgiven.
**tortured until he had paid his entire debt.** The evil servant (25:26) was to be tortured until he made arrangements for the king to be repaid. There is clear irony here in that the unforgiving servant was treated in the end as he treated his fellow servant (18:30, 34). In this way, the third scene resolves the incongruity between the first and second scenes.
18:35 **That's what my heavenly Father will do to you if you refuse to forgive your brothers and sisters from your heart.** The moral or application of the story comes at its conclusion: the heavenly Father's actions toward unforgiving disciples will be like those of the unforgiving servant's master. This was made clear in the parable when the king asked the evil servant why he did not treat his fellow servant as he had been treated by the king (18:32). If one presses the details, it will be impossible for the evil unforgiving servant ever to repay all that he owes to the king. Perhaps there is a hint here of the horror of eternal punishment (cf. 18:6-9). The connection with 6:14 is clear. Disciples dare not presume that God will forgive them if they are unwilling to forgive their fellow disciples. And this forgiveness must be genuine, from the heart, which touches on Matthew's recurrent theme of the heart or motivation as integral to true righteousness (cf. 5:8, 28; 6:21; 12:34; 13:15, 19; 15:8, 18, 19; 22:37). Peter's question (18:21) has been answered vividly.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus answered Peter's question about forgiveness prosaically (18:22) and poetically (18:23-35). Both answers contain striking hyperboles. Peter thought it was remarkable that he was willing to forgive someone seven times, but Jesus said that seventy-seven times is more appropriate. Then he told a story containing the striking contrast of a servant who had been forgiven a vast amount (it would have taken the earnings of several lifetimes to repay it) but refused to forgive a paltry amount that could be repaid in a few months. The forgiven servant proved to be unforgiving and was severely judged by his master. The point is that those who have genuinely received forgiveness are forgiving to others (6:14-15; cf. Luke 6:36; Eph 4:31–5:2; Jas 2:13; 1 John 4:11). But the unforgiving character of this servant indicates that his entreaty to his master was a hoax (18:26). This contrast clearly portrays the infinite grace of God in forgiving humans their many trespasses against him over against the refusal of a disciple to forgive a minor offense against him. The incompatibility of the two situations could not be clearer, and the resulting teaching is that those who have been forgiven by God can and must forgive their fellow humans. To be forgiven is to be empowered to forgive. No matter how offensively one has been treated by a fellow human, there is no comparison to the heinous rebellion of wicked humans against a holy and loving God. Anyone who has truly experienced the compassion of the heavenly Father should have little problem showing genuine compassion to a fellow human.
Perhaps it is difficult to reconcile the process of discipline laid out in 18:15-20 with the duty of unlimited forgiveness taught in 18:21-35. But both can be tied back to the controlling motif of the chapter: disciples as the little ones, brothers (and sisters) of one another, together children of the heavenly Father. Disciples dare not allow this family to be disrupted by offenses, yet they cannot resolve offenses without a forgiving spirit. In terms of another metaphor found in this chapter, a straying sheep cannot be left alone in the wilderness, but those who seek it must be willing to receive it back into the flock. When this delicate balance between discipline and forgiveness is faithfully maintained, excommunication from the church is in reality a self-imposed exile (Davies and Allison 1991:804).
Summary and Transition. In one key sense, the journey to Jerusalem has already begun with Jesus' announcement of his suffering, death, and resurrection in 16:21, and the disciples must realistically face the grim prospects awaiting them. This will be impossible if there is a selfish preoccupation with greatness and an accompanying devaluation of others. Instead, disciples must receive each other as they would a child (18:5-10), shepherd each other as they would a lost sheep (18:12-14), deal patiently but decisively with unrepentant sinners in their midst (18:15-20), and genuinely forgive those who sin against them as many times as necessary (18:21-35). These values will strengthen the community's relationships and enable it to withstand the rigors that lie ahead in Jerusalem and beyond.
With 19:1, Jesus begins his journey to Jerusalem. He would continue to model the values he inculcated in Matthew 18 (e.g., 19:14), and the disciples would continue to struggle with a worldly notion of greatness (e.g., 20:20-28).
## TEXT [Commentary]
VII. Opposition Comes to a Head in Judea (19:1–25:46)
A. Ministry in Judea (19:1–23:39)
1. Teaching on marriage and divorce; blessing little children (19:1-15; cf. Mark 10:1-16; Luke 18:15-17)
1 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went down to the region of Judea east of the Jordan River. 2 Large crowds followed him there, and he healed their sick.
3 Some Pharisees came and tried to trap him with this question: "Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife for just any reason?"
4 "Haven't you read the Scriptures?" Jesus replied. "They record that from the beginning 'God made them male and female.'[*]" 5 And he said, "'This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.'[*] 6 Since they are no longer two but one, let no one split apart what God has joined together."
7 "Then why did Moses say in the law that a man could give his wife a written notice of divorce and send her away?"[*] they asked.
8 Jesus replied, "Moses permitted divorce only as a concession to your hard hearts, but it was not what God had originally intended. 9 And I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery—unless his wife has been unfaithful.[*]"
10 Jesus' disciples then said to him, "If this is the case, it is better not to marry!"
11 "Not everyone can accept this statement," Jesus said. "Only those whom God helps. 12 Some are born as eunuchs, some have been made eunuchs by others, and some choose not to marry[*] for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven. Let anyone accept this who can."
13 One day some parents brought their children to Jesus so he could lay his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples scolded the parents for bothering him.
14 But Jesus said, "Let the children come to me. Don't stop them! For the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to those who are like these children." 15 And he placed his hands on their heads and blessed them before he left.
## NOTES
19:1 **When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went down to the region of Judea east of the Jordan River.** Following the characteristic formula that concludes each of Jesus' five discourses (cf. 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 26:1), Matt 19 begins with the fateful geographical note that Jesus departed Galilee for the area of Judea east of the Jordan River (cf. 4:15, 25). He would not return to Galilee until after the resurrection (28:7, 16). The journey south to Jerusalem (over fifty miles) would customarily be made on the east side of the Jordan in order to avoid Samaria (10:5; cf. Luke 9:51-53; John 4:3-4, 9). The reference in 20:29 to Jericho as the point of departure for the journey to Jerusalem could imply that Jesus had already crossed the Jordan from east to west at Jericho. The journey would bring him nearer to those who would soon arrest, try, and crucify him, as he himself had predicted (16:21; 17:22-23).
19:2 **Large crowds followed him there, and he healed their sick.** Jesus characteristically continued to heal those who were sick in the large crowd following him (cf. 12:15; 14:14; 15:30-31).
19:3-6 From here to 20:28 the focus is on Jesus the teacher. In Matthew's literary structure, the fourth discourse ends with 18:35-19:1, but Jesus continued to teach and discourse.
**Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife for just any reason?** While Jesus was still east of the Jordan, he was drawn into a discussion of divorce by some Pharisees who wanted to test his understanding of divorce law (cf. Mark 10:1-12). Perhaps they wanted to make it seem that Jesus contradicted Moses (19:7). This renews the important Matthean theme of opposition from the religious leaders (cf. 12:14, 24, 38; 15:1, 12; 16:1; 22:15, 35). The discussion here reprises Jesus' teaching in the Sermon on the Mount (5:31-32). The background of the Pharisees' question appears to be the rabbinic dispute over divorce and Deut 24:1-4 between Hillel and Shammai. Hillel took a rather loose view of what the shameful or indecent matter mentioned in Deut 24:1 entails, so he permitted divorce for any reason. But Shammai interpreted Deut 24:1 strictly as a reference to sexual impropriety. Later, around AD 200, the Mishnah would codify this oral tradition ( _m. Gittin_ 9:10; cf. Josephus _Antiquities_ 4.244-259).
**God made them male and female. . . . This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.** Jesus did not enter into the specifics of the exegesis of Deut 24 but instead cited Gen 1:27 (cf. Gen 5:2) and 2:24 in succession, stressing the original divine purpose for marriage in the creation account. Genesis 2:24 was also cited by Paul in 1 Cor 6:16 and Eph 5:31, and in the Damascus Document (CD) 4:21. The gist of Jesus' approach is that the original divine plan for monogamy should be more normative than subsequent concessions to human sinfulness. The clause rendered "the two are united into one" by the NLT is lit. "the two shall become one flesh." It is this "one-flesh" relationship that makes divorce wrong. When God has so united two people, humans may not split them apart. The marital union is a basic, intimate relationship that demands one's total allegiance. When two people are married, their identity as their parents' children is permanently altered. Their new identity as husband and wife is forever.
19:7-9 **why did Moses say in the law that a man could give his wife a written notice of divorce and send her away?** Given the apparent prevalence of divorce in that day, Jesus' argument for the permanence of marriage understandably concerned the Pharisees. Their response to Jesus pits Deut 24:1 against Gen 1–2, evidently still with the motive of trapping Jesus (19:3). Their understanding of Deut 24:1 appears to have been similar to the liberal view of the school of Hillel. Rather than the NLT's "could give," their response is more lit. "Why did Moses command to . . . send her away?" and shows that they understood Moses as commanding divorce. Jesus would not accept this view. His citation of Gen 1–2 places the creation narrative in Genesis over the legislation of Deut 24. God's original purpose for marriage overrides the Mosaic concession for human sin.
**Moses permitted divorce.** He did not command it. Sexual infidelity is the only permissible grounds for the dissolution of a marriage (cf. 5:32). On this point, Jesus seems to share the strict perspective of Shammai, but his appeal to the creation ordinance rather than Deut 24 might not be accepted by either Shammai or Hillel. The original divine ordinance of marriage trumps the subsequent human expedient of divorce. This is quite different from the Mishnaic view that unfaithful wives had to be divorced by their husbands ( _m. Nedarim_ 11:12; _m. Sotah_ 5:1; _m. Yevamot_ 2:8). But divorce is not a matter of course even in the OT (Mal 2:16).
19:10-12 **If this is the case, it is better not to marry!** The disciples were amazed at the strictness of Jesus' approach and considered a life of celibacy to be better than marriage under such tight constraints (cf. Sir 25:16-26).
**Not everyone can accept this statement.** Jesus noted that celibacy is only for certain people who are divinely gifted to accept it (cf. 1 Cor 7:1-2, 7-9). The words "this statement" in 19:11 refer to the disciples' comment about celibacy in 19:10, not back to Jesus' comments on divorce in 19:9. The disciples were already aware of (1) eunuchs (Lev 21:20; Isa 39:7; 56:4; Dan 1:3-8; Acts 8:27; cf. _m. Zavim_ 2:1; _m. Yevamot_ 8:4), and (2) those who cannot marry and have children due to birth defects in their genitals or castration, but Jesus added a third category: (3) those who "choose not to marry" (NLT) due to their commitment to the Kingdom. The choice not to marry is literally to "make a eunuch of oneself" (cf. NLT mg), but this is not to be taken literally. It refers to those who choose celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom over marriage and parenting. Among those who fit this category are probably John the Baptist, Jesus, and Paul (cf. 1 Cor 7:32-38; 9:5). The eschatological urgency of the Kingdom makes it a priority even over normal family relationships (cf. 8:21; 12:46-50). On the other hand, the Mishnah's reflection on Gen 1:31 leads to the conclusion that no man is exempt from the duty to have children ( _m. Yevamot_ 6:6).
It should be noted here that there is not even a hint in this passage that celibates are more spiritual than married people, or that their lifestyle is a morally superior model to which others should aspire. Rather, only those who are specially gifted should choose celibacy as their role for the sake of the Kingdom. There is no basis here for the promotion of an ascetic lifestyle as the ideal for human existence. For further discussion of celibacy, see Davies and Allison (1997:26-27); Trautman (1966).
19:13-15 **Let the children come to me.** This incident recalls and reinforces 18:1-14 (cf. Mark 10:13-16; Luke 18:15-17). It is fitting here since Jesus had been discussing divorce, marriage, and singleness. With this background Jesus was asked to bless some children by laying his hands on them and praying for them (cf. Gen 48:14-15). The disciples rebuked those who asked for the blessing as unwelcome intruders. But Jesus turned the rebuke back on the disciples; they were not to hinder children from coming to him because the Kingdom belongs to such as them.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Introduction to the Narrative Section of Matthew 19:1–23:39. The narrative block between Matthew's fourth (Matt 18) and fifth (Matt 24–25) discourses begins with Jesus' journey south from Galilee to Judea beyond (east of) the Jordan (19:1). After a time, he crossed the river to Jericho (20:29) and then moved further westward up into the hills toward Jerusalem as far as Bethphage and the Mount of Olives (20:17; 21:1). When proper arrangements were made, Jesus entered the city (21:10), had a confrontation with the Temple leaders, and left to spend the night in Bethany (21:17). The next morning he returned to the city (21:18), entered the Temple again (21:23), and became embroiled in a series of heated disputes with various Jewish religious leaders. These disputes culminated in the seven woe oracles of Matthew 23, after which Jesus left the Temple for the Mount of Olives (24:1-3), the setting for the fifth and final discourse. In all of this, Matthew's story is very similar to that found in Mark, with few significant differences (Davies and Allison 1997:1).
The material in Matthew 19–23 continues such basic themes as Jesus the healer, the opposition of the religious leaders, the teaching of the disciples, and the movement of Jesus ever closer to his suffering in Jerusalem. But while the themes are familiar, the content is more topically arranged than in the last narrative block. There is comparatively less stress on healing (19:2; 20:34; 21:14) and passion predictions (20:17-19; cf. the cryptic language in 21:37-39; 23:32). The bulk of the material is devoted to Jesus teaching his disciples (19:10–20:28) and confronting the Jerusalem religious establishment (21:12–23:39). The disciple-oriented material in Matthew 19–20 is, in effect, a continuation of themes from the fourth discourse in Matthew 18 on the values of the Kingdom community. In the material covering Jesus' Temple confrontations with the religious leaders, a bad situation goes from worse (Matt 21–22) to worst (Matt 23).
Davies and Allison (1997:1-3) present the material in this fourth narrative block as falling into four major sections. First, in 19:1–20:28, Jesus teaches the disciples on family obligations. Second, in 20:29–21:22, Jesus speaks and acts prophetically in healing, cleansing the Temple, and disputing with the chief priests. Third, deeds are left behind as Jesus engages in controversial dialogues with various Jewish religious leaders in 21:23–22:46. Fourth, in Matthew 23, Jesus turns back to the disciples to warn them against Pharisaic practices before he announces seven woes on the Pharisees and laments the fate of Jerusalem.
The Structure of Matthew 19:1-15. Matthew 19:1-15 begins with a transition and introduction that sets off this new narrative block here from the discourse of Matthew 18. The narrative block begins with a controversy initiated by the Pharisees concerning the legality of divorce (19:3-9). Jesus' strictures against divorce were the occasion for his disciples' jaded remark on the superiority of singleness; Jesus responded to this as well (19:10-12). At this point children entered the picture, and against the wishes of the disciples, Jesus affirmed and blessed them. So there are three units in this section, with the initial debate with the Pharisees leading to two discussions in which Jesus corrects the disciples' views of marriage and children respectively. The key motif in the section is the four answers of Jesus, the first pair given to the Pharisees (19:4, 8) and the second pair to the disciples (19:11, 14). Jesus' dispute with the Pharisees on the permanence of marriage and the undesirability of divorce leads naturally into the discussions of singleness and children with his disciples.
Jesus' Teachings on Marriage. The permanence and normative nature of marriage is the major point of this passage. Jesus' citation of Genesis 1–2 makes this point explicitly, and his deprecation of divorce as due to sin further supports it. His explanation of celibate singleness as a lifestyle appropriate only for relatively few specially gifted people implicitly honors marriage as the norm for most people. Similarly, his affirmation of the children who result from marriage lends implicit support to the institution of marriage itself. In our day, just as in Jesus' day, divorce occurs all too frequently; singleness is often exalted over marriage as the more fulfilling lifestyle (although seldom is singleness celibate today!); and children are deprecated as a time-consuming drag on one's career. But Jesus speaks strongly for marriage as the divine pattern for people, a pattern to which all except a relative few should aspire. This pattern can be abandoned by legal divorce only after it has been broken by sexual infidelity. The obligations of this pattern are preferable to the seeming freedom of singleness, except in cases of special divine endowment. The offspring of this pattern are to be affirmed and blessed. In a sense, marriage can be viewed in terms of Jesus' teaching on taking up one's cross and denying oneself (16:25). Divorce, singleness, and childlessness may seem to be the way of success and fulfillment ("saving one's life"), but in the end the seemingly carefree life will be a lonely, lost life. Marriage and parenting may appear to lead to a burdensome life ("losing one's life"), but in the end "married with children" will prove to be the richest possible life for most because it is life according to the Creator's pattern for his creatures.
In the present fallen world, the ideal relationships intended in the created pattern are not easy to attain. Yet the inauguration of the power of the Kingdom enables disciples to live to a great extent according to the created pattern. Many genuine followers of Jesus have failed as spouses, parents, or singles, and the church must reach out to restore them to obedience and fellowship. Nevertheless, it is better to avoid sin than to be forgiven of it. Prevention is superior to cure. For a superb discussion of the passage and ministry in light of it, see the pastorally oriented discussion in Bruner (1990:675-687).
Jesus' Teaching on Divorce and Remarriage. It is likely that the Pharisees' question in 19:3 was directed toward Jesus' understanding of Deuteronomy 24:1ff. In its original context, this passage prohibits a woman who has been remarried and divorced from two different men to remarry her first husband. Deuteronomy 24 is not a divine mandate to divorce but only a concession due to the hardness of hearts. Jesus interprets the original "one-flesh" implications of marriage (Gen 2:24) as requiring the permanence. He will _permit_ divorce only in the instance of sexual immorality, which breaks the one-flesh character of the union. Except in cases of infidelity, divorce leads to adultery. The language here assumes, as did the Old Testament, that a man could divorce his wife but a wife could not divorce her husband (cf. 19:3). However, a wife could appeal to the community elders for redress of grievances ( _m. Ketubbot_ ).
Matthew 19:9 (cf. 5:32) has been understood in a variety of ways, and its exegetical difficulties are compounded by textual difficulties (Metzger 1994:38-39). One difficulty is the meaning of the word _porneia_ [TG4202, ZG4518], which has been understood variously as marital infidelity (NLT), premarital infidelity (as in Matt 1:19), or incest (as in Lev 18:6; 1 Cor 5:1; cf. BDAG 854). All in all, the approach of NLT seems best because the context does not restrict the general sense of _porneia_ in any specific way. Another major difficulty is the scope of the exception clause, "unless his wife has been unfaithful." The question is whether this clause permits both divorce and remarriage when infidelity has occurred or only divorce and not remarriage. Most protestant scholars take the former view (Davies and Allison 1997:17), but there are notable exceptions (e.g., Hagner 1995:549; Heth and Wenham 1984). Those who take the second view tend to view 19:11-12 as spoken specifically to the celibacy required of those who have been divorced.
It appears that this issue cannot be resolved by grammatical arguments, but the view that both divorce and remarriage are permitted in the case of infidelity seems best: Freedom to remarry is the essence of divorce; it is meaningless otherwise ( _m. Gittin_ 9:3). Further, it seems arbitrary to think that divorced people are universally given the gift of celibacy. Rather, repentant individuals who have been divorced due to infidelity should have the freedom to get it right the second time. For a helpful discussion of the many exegetical difficulties here and reference to scholarly literature, see Carson (1984:412-418). For a superb pastoral discussion of the passage, see Bruner (1995:675-687).
The disciples of Jesus are a "new creation" in Christ (2 Cor 5:17; Eph 2:11-14). Participation in Christ's Kingdom amounts to being a new people, whose identity and relationships are drawn from humanity as defined before the Fall. Similarly, when Jesus says that divorce "was not what God originally intended," he implicitly tells his disciples that their identity is to recapitulate the human identity and relationships from before the Fall—before hard hearts began to pervert God's intention. Jesus' disciples look forward to the time "when the world is made new" (19:28), but they also long for God's will to be done on earth as it is in heaven (6:10). In this light, the permanence of marriage ought to be a matter of course in the Christian community, an aspect of its present life that mirrors and anticipates the righteousness that will come with God's Kingdom to the earth (Hagner 1995:549-551). If Moses did not command divorce, then certainly Jesus did not. Even in cases of marital infidelity, divorce should not be the first—let alone the only—option. Are not the deep wounds caused by marital infidelity susceptible to healing by the love of God? Should not couples contemplating divorce, even in cases of infidelity, be made to consider the implications of Matthew 18:21-35? Forgiveness must be rendered in every situation, including this one, and such forgiveness can often lead to a restored relationship and renewed testimony to the power of Jesus' Kingdom message. If God hated divorce under the old covenant (Mal 2:14-16), how much more so now that the Kingdom has dawned.
Jesus Blesses the Children. Here, as in 18:3-10, children represent those to whom the Kingdom belongs—i.e., Jesus' disciples. Because of their spiritual significance, Jesus welcomed them, laid his hands on them, and prayed for them. This passage indicates that Jesus affirmed and cared for children and that his disciples should too. After this incident, he left that area, perhaps to avoid further arguments with the Pharisees (cf. 19:3).
It is doubtful whether this passage should be pressed into the service of later theological concerns. Whatever the merits of the practice of infant baptism, it is extremely doubtful that it is implied here (Davies and Allison 1997:34-35). As in 18:5, where "a little child like this" refers to believers (18:6), here "children" (19:13) represents Jesus' disciples. The use of little children as an illustration of the humility of the Kingdom is consistent with Matthew's teaching elsewhere (10:42; 11:25; 18:14; 21:15-16; 25:40, 45). Infant baptism is not explicitly mentioned in patristic literature until Tertullian ( _On Baptism_ 18; c. AD 175), who opposed it. But for a well-stated evangelical view to the contrary, see Bruner (1990:695-698).
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Riches or the Kingdom? (19:16-30; cf. Mark 10:17-31; Luke 18:18-30)
16 Someone came to Jesus with this question: "Teacher,[*] what good deed must I do to have eternal life?"
17 "Why ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. But to answer your question—if you want to receive eternal life, keep[*] the commandments."
18 "Which ones?" the man asked.
And Jesus replied: "'You must not murder. You must not commit adultery. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. 19 Honor your father and mother. Love your neighbor as yourself.'[*]"
20 "I've obeyed all these commandments," the young man replied. "What else must I do?"
21 Jesus told him, "If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
22 But when the young man heard this, he went away sad, for he had many possessions.
23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is very hard for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. 24 I'll say it again—it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!"
25 The disciples were astounded. "Then who in the world can be saved?" they asked.
26 Jesus looked at them intently and said, "Humanly speaking, it is impossible. But with God everything is possible."
27 Then Peter said to him, "We've given up everything to follow you. What will we get?"
28 Jesus replied, "I assure you that when the world is made new[*] and the Son of Man[*] sits upon his glorious throne, you who have been my followers will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or property, for my sake, will receive a hundred times as much in return and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who are the greatest now will be least important then, and those who seem least important now will be the greatest then.[*]"
## NOTES
19:16-17 **Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?** The second half of Matthew 19 begins with a question just like the first half did (19:3). After his teaching on family matters, Jesus was approached by a man who wanted to know what good deeds he must do to inherit eternal life (7:14; 18:8-9; 19:29; 25:46; cf. Mark 10:17-22; Luke 18:18-23). The Marcan and Lukan versions of this episode contain important differences from Matthew's account. The man addresses Jesus as "teacher," which implies that he did not adequately grasp Jesus' identity (cf. 8:19; 12:38). But there is no indication in the passage that the man approached Jesus with insincere motives.
**Why ask me about what is good? . . . There is only One who is good.** This puzzling question may imply that the man should focus not on his own good deeds, but on the goodness of the one true God (perhaps an allusion to Deut 6:4). Or it may mean that since God is good, his commandments provide a detailed definition of goodness. At any rate, Jesus' eventual reply that the man should keep the commandments is not novel, but restates the gist of Lev 18:5.
19:18-20 **Which ones?** Although the man knew that all the commandments in the Torah are binding, he asked Jesus to be more specific. Perhaps his question is similar to that of 22:36, where a Pharisee asks Jesus to identify the greatest commandment in the law. Or perhaps he wanted Jesus to assign him one remarkable act of righteousness that would assure him of eternal life. In reply, Jesus rapidly cited five of the ten commandments, from the sixth through the ninth followed by the fifth (Exod 20:12-16; Deut 5:16-20). To these he added the "golden rule" from Lev 19:18 (cf. 5:43; 7:12; 22:39; Rom 12:9; 13:9; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8; _Didache_ 1:2). The sixth through ninth commandments prohibit specific sinful behaviors, while the fifth commandment and the golden rule enjoin godly behavior toward one's parents and toward one's neighbors in general terms.
**I've obeyed all these commandments.** The man responded to Jesus by baldly affirming that he had kept all these (cf. Paul in Phil 3:6), but acknowledging that he needed something more.
19:21 **If you want to be perfect.** Jesus had just reaffirmed the central social tenets of the Torah, but as its definitive teacher he added his own authoritative directives (cf. 5:17ff). Jesus told the man that in order to be perfect he must sell his possessions and give them to the poor (cf. 1 Cor 13:3). The word "perfect" refers to spiritual maturity or development in godliness, in contrast to the man's admitted inadequacies (5:48; BDAG 996).
**come, follow me.** In addition to exchanging his earthly treasures for heavenly treasure (6:20), he should follow Jesus as an itinerant disciple (4:22; 8:22; 9:9), laying up treasure in heaven (6:19-21; 13:44-46). Jesus demanded that the ruler forsake the wealth to which he was devoted, since that wealth was preventing him from loving God and neighbor (6:24). It is striking that Jesus appended his own commands to those of Moses, but this should not be surprising in light of 5:17-19. Genuine obedience to the Torah is determined by Jesus alone. This radical demand for total commitment to the Kingdom is in reality an offer of the gospel of grace, calling the ruler to renounce his reliance on wealth and to commit himself to the Kingdom. This passage serves as further commentary on previous texts in Matthew that juxtapose serving materialism and serving God (6:21, 24; 13:22).
19:22 **he went away sad.** Jesus had identified the inadequacy haunting this young man, but the man was not yet willing to obey Jesus, become perfect, and obtain eternal life.
19:23 **it is very hard for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.** Jesus took the incident with the ruler as an opportunity to teach his disciples about the deceitfulness of riches (cf. Mark 10:23-31; Luke 18:24-30). Wealth can desensitize people regarding their deepest needs, just as poverty can alert them to the Kingdom (5:3).
19:24 **it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.** This restates 19:23 with an absurd hyperbolic metaphor, utilizing the largest animal and the smallest opening commonly considered by the disciples. Just as it is humanly impossible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, so it is impossible, apart from the power of God's grace, for a rich person to enter God's Kingdom. Despite sermonic lore, there is no historical evidence for the existence of a small gate in Jerusalem, supposedly called the "Needle's Eye," through which a camel on his knees could barely squeeze. Such an illustration weakens Jesus' hyperbolic statement that it is impossible for rich people to enter the Kingdom.
19:25-26 **who in the world can be saved?** The disciples' incredulous question may be based on the idea that riches are proof of God's approval. If so, then the rich of all people would be most likely to enter the Kingdom (Prov 22:4). Jesus was not condemning riches but the idolatrous manner of coveting riches (6:24; cf. 27:57). Only by the sovereign grace of God can such idolatry be overcome.
19:27-28 **We've given up everything to follow you. What will we get?** Recalling Jesus' words (19:21), Peter asserted that the disciples had done what the young man would not do and inquired about their reward (cf. 10:41-42; 16:27). Evidently, Peter was speaking for the disciples once again (as in 15:15; 16:16; 17:4). That Jesus did not rebuke Peter for asking this question may surprise those who think that one serves God strictly out of love, not for rewards. Jesus first speaks of the reward of the twelve (19:28) and then expands his perspective to include all who have sacrificed to follow him (19:29).
**when the world is made new . . . you . . . will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.** The terminology focusing on the twelve tribes of Israel is remarkable (cf. Luke 22:30; Rev 21:12). So is the description of the eschaton as a time "when the world is made new" (lit. "the regeneration;" cf. Isa 65:17; 66:22; John 3:5; Acts 3:21; Rom 8:18-23; 2 Pet 3:13; Rev 21–22; _1 Enoch_ 45:3-5). Renewal of the present world is necessary because it is passing away (5:18; 24:35). The idea of eschatological renewal stresses the cosmic effects of Christ's redemptive work.
In this context, "judging" Israel probably implies both sharing in final judgment and ruling in the world to come. The striking teaching that the disciples will share the rule of the coming Kingdom with Jesus may be based on Dan 7:9, 13-14, 18, 22, 27 (cf. Luke 22:30; 1 Cor 6:2; Rev 2:26-27; 3:21; 20:6; Wis 3:8).
19:29 **property.** Lit., "field" or "farm."
**hundred times.** This is the reading of some manuscripts ( C W ); other manuscripts (B L) read "manifold." The former may be the result of harmonization to Mark 10:30; the latter, to Luke 18:30. Whichever is the original reading, the idea is that the eschatological blessing that will come to all who follow Jesus will far outweigh their present sacrifices. Such compensation adds to the motivation to suffer with Jesus in the present (16:24-28; Rom 8:18)
19:30 **many who are the greatest now will be least important then, and those who seem least important now will be the greatest then.** This enigmatic saying, which is repeated in 20:16, brackets the parable of 20:1-15. The Gr. speaks of the "first" and the "last," not the "greatest" and the "least." The saying warns the rich young man, currently among the first/greatest of the world, against leveraging his present wealth against his eternal destiny. The disciples may be encouraged, on the one hand, that their sacrifice will be rewarded. On the other hand, they also are warned against presuming on the grace of God. The chapter division at 20:1 is unfortunate, since the parable of the landowner in 20:1-16 continues the answer to Peter's question just as did the parable of the unforgiving servant in 18:21-35.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The "rich young ruler" episode is a Gospel text that is frequently viewed as instructive for those who do personal evangelism (cf. John 4), but this passage can be misunderstood. By his stress on the second table of the law, Jesus was not teaching a way of salvation by mechanical observation of the commandments. Jesus' use of the term "perfect" in 19:21 does not imply a notion of two levels of discipleship (Thomas 1961:292). Jesus was simply answering the young man's question by gradually showing him his root problem, which was covetousness. Jesus began by shifting the focus from preoccupation with self to preoccupation with God. Instead of being preoccupied with good deeds, the man should have been occupied with God's goodness (19:16-17). Perhaps the man was asking Jesus to assign him one good deed that would bring him the eternal life he wanted. When Jesus directed him to the commandments, he seemed confused as to which commandments were relevant. When Jesus cited commandments 5–9, the man affirmed he had kept the commandments but still lacked something.
At this point Jesus got to the heart of the problem by commanding the man to give his wealth to the poor and become a disciple, which would bring heavenly treasure. In a sense, Jesus asked the man to reprise a role previously scripted in two parables (13:44-46). "Jesus demands not alms but everything" (Davies and Allison 1997:46). The man would lose everything material but gain Jesus and the Kingdom. This is what he lacked all along. But his sorrowful departure makes it clear that he had not kept all the commandments, since he had not truly loved his neighbor as himself and was unwilling to give his possessions to the poor (19:19). Jesus did not cite the tenth commandment, "you must not covet" (Exod 20:17), but the man's response clearly shows he had broken this commandment also. Jesus brought the man to the point where he acknowledged what he lacked by his decision not to follow Jesus. His wealth had become a god that took priority over the true God, which violates the first commandment (Exod 20:2-3). The ruler's refusal to do a good thing—to divest himself of his wealth and follow Jesus—shows that he did not acknowledge the goodness of God in his life. He served money, so he could not serve God (6:24). His materialism prevented him from seeking the Kingdom first (6:33). But his sorrow indicates not only that he was not ready to follow Jesus but that he also realized what he lacked.
Jesus' commands to the rich young man are directed specifically toward his individual spiritual need. All of Jesus' disciples need to help the poor (e.g., Acts 4:34-37; Gal 2:10; 6:10; Jas 2:1), but not all need to totally divest themselves of their wealth to do so (see 27:57; Luke 8:3; 19:2, 8-9; Acts 5:4). Greed for material gain bars one from the Kingdom (1 Tim 6:9-10), but the sin of greed is not limited to the rich. There are those within the Kingdom who are rich by God's providence (1 Cor 1:26), and they are accountable for the use of their resources to further God's work (1 Tim 6:17-19).
Jesus and the Kingdom. It is noteworthy that in this context five terms are used in a very similar way. In 19:24 Jesus speaks of the "Kingdom of God" in tandem with his more characteristic term "Kingdom of Heaven" (19:23)—this in response to the young man's question about inheriting "eternal life" (19:16, 29). Jesus further described the same concept as being "perfect" (19:21), and the disciples refer to it as being "saved" (19:25; cf. 1:21; 10:22; 16:25). Two conclusions can be drawn from this semantic interplay. First, as is already evident from comparisons with the synoptic Gospels (Matt 13:31-32; Mark 4:30-32; Luke 13:18-19 and Matt 19:14; Mark 10:14; Luke 18:16), there is no real difference between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew. Rather, the term "Kingdom of God" is occasionally used for subtle literary and contextual reasons to describe the same referent as the more common Kingdom of Heaven. Second, while the language here about inheriting eternal life and entering the Kingdom may imply that the Kingdom is future, the language of being "perfect" and "saved" implies that the Kingdom may be truly—if not totally—experienced in the present life. The Kingdom of God is both present and future, and those who do not recognize both its aspects truncate the riches of scriptural truth and spiritual blessing.
The description of the future Kingdom in terms of the twelve tribes of Israel appears to justify a belief in the eschatological conversion of the nation of Israel to faith in Jesus as Messiah. This would be in keeping with Matthew's overall emphasis on the preeminent fulfillment of Scripture through the words and deeds of Jesus the Messiah. The followers of Jesus, the ultimate teacher of the Torah, constitute Israel within Israel, the eschatological remnant. In the end they will judge or govern the nation as a whole (Gundry 1994:393-394; Overman 1996:285). Yet somehow certain commentators view this language as indicating that the Gentile church, which replaces Israel, will rule over the nations as a whole (Blomberg 1992:301; Hendriksen 1973:730). Among the problems with this view is its dissolution of the distinction made by Jesus between the rule of the disciples over Israel (19:28) and the reward of all who sacrifice to follow Jesus (19:29). If the church supersedes Israel, this distinction is rendered meaningless.
Summary and Transition. The flow of Matthew 19 actually carries over to 20:16, since the parable of the workers is the conclusion of Jesus' answer to Peter's question in 19:27 about rewards. It is significant that immediately after this answer comes Jesus' third passion prediction (20:17-19). Following another answer to another question about rewards (20:20-28), the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem occurs, and the passion week begins. In this way the geographical movement of Matthew 19:1 (toward Jerusalem) signifies the beginning of the end of Jesus' earthly ministry.
Matthew 19 begins with an extended discussion of the divorce question (19:3-12; cf. 5:31-32). A brief incident of blessing children (19:13-15; cf. 18:1-14) leads to the well-known "rich young ruler" pericope (19:16-22), which precipitates Jesus' teaching the disciples about the deceitfulness of riches (19:23-26; cf. 6:19-24; 13:22). Then Peter questions Jesus about rewards, and Jesus answers with a parable (19:27–20:16).
Matthew 19 continues several themes already prominent in Matthew. Jesus continues to heal multitudes of people (19:2; cf. 20:29). The Pharisees appear once again with questions designed to trip Jesus up (19:3; cf. 21:23; 22:15, 34). The theme of reward, stressed by Jesus after his initial passion prediction (16:21), is amplified in this chapter as well (19:27–20:15; 20:20-28). It is also interesting to note how the disciples seem to be amazed at Jesus' radical teachings on divorce and riches (19:10, 25). Their remarks continue to show that Jesus was working with men of little faith whose messianic understanding was limited. Connected to this is Peter's continuing role as the model disciple, who as _primus inter pares_ (first among equals) verbalized the questions that were in the minds of all the apostles (19:27; cf. 14:28;16:16, 22; 17:4, 24; 18:21; 26:33-35, 40).
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. The parable of the vineyard workers (20:1-16)
1 "For the Kingdom of Heaven is like the landowner who went out early one morning to hire workers for his vineyard. 2 He agreed to pay the normal daily wage[*] and sent them out to work.
3 "At nine o'clock in the morning he was passing through the marketplace and saw some people standing around doing nothing. 4 So he hired them, telling them he would pay them whatever was right at the end of the day. 5 So they went to work in the vineyard. At noon and again at three o'clock he did the same thing.
6 "At five o'clock that afternoon he was in town again and saw some more people standing around. He asked them, 'Why haven't you been working today?'
7 "They replied, 'Because no one hired us.'
"The landowner told them, 'Then go out and join the others in my vineyard.'
8 "That evening he told the foreman to call the workers in and pay them, beginning with the last workers first. 9 When those hired at five o'clock were paid, each received a full day's wage. 10 When those hired first came to get their pay, they assumed they would receive more. But they, too, were paid a day's wage. 11 When they received their pay, they protested to the owner, 12 'Those people worked only one hour, and yet you've paid them just as much as you paid us who worked all day in the scorching heat.'
13 "He answered one of them, 'Friend, I haven't been unfair! Didn't you agree to work all day for the usual wage? 14 Take your money and go. I wanted to pay this last worker the same as you. 15 Is it against the law for me to do what I want with my money? Should you be jealous because I am kind to others?'
16 "So those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last."
## NOTES
20:1 The chapter division here is misleading, since the parable of the vineyard workers occurs as an explanation for the cryptic saying of 19:30 about the reversal of those who are first (NLT "the greatest") and those who are last (NLT "least important"). The saying is repeated in 20:16 as the conclusion of the parable, so it is doubly clear that the parable completes Jesus' answer to Peter's question about reward in 19:27. Jesus' answer has two stages, the first a prosaic promise (19:28-30) and the second a poetic warning (20:1-16).
**the Kingdom of Heaven is like.** This is the usual way a parable is introduced (13:24, 31 etc.).
**the landowner who went out early one morning to hire workers for his vineyard.** The parable is about a landowner (13:27; 21:33) who hires, at different times during the day, five groups of workers to harvest his vineyard. The situation is one of socioeconomic extremes. A wealthy landowner hires poor men who must subsist on what they earn from day to day.
20:2 **the normal daily wage.** A denarius was the "normal daily wage" (so NLT mg; see 18:28; 22:19), and those hired at dawn are promised this amount.
20:3-7 The first "act" of the parable continues, as four additional groups of workers are hired throughout the day at successive intervals, 9 a.m. (20:3), noon (20:5), 3 p.m. (20:5), and 5 p.m. (20:6). The literal terms for the times of day were counted from 6 a.m., so 9 a.m. is lit. "the third hour," noon is "the sixth hour," 3 p.m. is "the ninth hour," and 5 p.m. is "the eleventh hour." It seems a bit unrealistic that workers would be hired throughout the day, but this may imply some urgency to complete the harvest.
**marketplace.** The workers are hired in the "marketplace," which in ancient towns was the center of activities (23:7).
**he would pay them whatever was right.** Those hired at 9 a.m., noon, and 3 p.m. were promised "whatever was right," and in their cases a fair wage would be progressively less than a denarius. Those hired at 5 p.m. would work a very short time and could expect only a small wage. One should note that the narrative of the hiring of the workers at 9 a.m., noon, and 3 p.m. is quite brief (20:3-5), contrasting with the more extended descriptions of the hiring of the first and last workers (20:1-2, 6-7). The stress is clearly on the first and last groups of workers. Hagner (1995:571) may be correct in stressing the detail that no one had hired the last group of workers all day long. For him, this signifies that no one had considered outcasts such as the tax collectors and sinners worthy of the Kingdom until Jesus called them to repentance.
20:8-9 **call the workers in and pay them.** The second "act" of the parable occurs after sundown (Lev 19:13; Deut 24:15; Josephus _Antiquities_ 20.220), when the owner of the vineyard instructed his foreman to pay the workers.
**each received a full day's wage.** Those who were hired last would have been astonished to receive twelve times what they might expect.
20:10-11 **they assumed they would receive more.** Those who were hired first, who toiled all day in the heat, observed that those who worked only one hour were paid the amount for a full day's work. So they excitedly expected to receive much more.
**they protested.** When they were paid the same amount as those who only worked one hour, they protested (lit. "grumbled") to the vineyard owner.
20:13-14 **Friend, I haven't been unfair!"** The landowner addressed them as friends (22:12; 26:50) and told them they were treated fairly since they were paid what they had agreed to (20:2).
**I wanted to pay this last worker the same as you.** For unspecified reasons the owner of the vineyard wanted to be especially generous to the last group of workers. The other workers had no right to complain, since they received a normal wage.
20:15 The parable concludes with two rhetorical questions (20:15) that affirm that the owner of the vineyard acted legally and accuse the first workers of jealousy.
**Should you be jealous because I am kind to others?** Lit., "Is your eye evil because I am good?" The goodness of the landowner is probably intended to remind the reader of God, who alone is good (19:17). The expression "evil eye" reflects the deep envy of the first workers and possibly their intent to do harm to the owner of the vineyard (6:33; Mark 7:22; cf. Deut 15:9; Prov 23:6; 28:22; Tob 4:7; Sir 14:8-10). The landowner had been fair to those who worked all day (20:13) and generous to those who worked only a short time (20:14), since he wanted to treat all his workers equally (20:16; Blomberg 1990:224).
20:16 **So those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last.** The parable, once concluded, is here framed with the same cryptic pronouncement that occurred just before it. The order of 20:16 reverses that of 19:30—there the first are mentioned before the last, but here the last are mentioned before the first. The idea of reversal is clear, but the identities of "the first" and "the last" are not. The NLT interprets correctly the reversal as the result of eschatological judgment with its adverbs "now" and "then," which are not in the Gr. text. The parable comes immediately after the promise of reward to the disciples that concludes Matthew 19. The first occurrence of the reversal pronouncement in 19:30 begins with "but," which implies that it is a warning against the simplistic assumption that reward is an automatic entitlement of the original disciples.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
If a parable is "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning," one wonders about the heavenly counterparts of the earthlings described here. Most would agree that the vineyard stands for Israel (Isa 5:1-7; Jer 12:10; Matt 21:28, 33-39), and that the landowner represents God, who sovereignly and graciously bestows rewards upon his servants. The harvest speaks of eschatological judgment (see 13:39). Beyond this the identification of the first/greatest and last/least is more controversial. Perhaps "those who are first" represent Peter and the disciples, given Peter's question in 19:27. If so, Peter and the disciples are warned not to presume upon God's grace just because they sacrificed to serve his Kingdom. They will be fairly rewarded for their rigorous service, but they must not grumble if others who seem to have sacrificed less receive as great a reward as they do. In every case, God's generosity far outstrips human expectations, and we should not side with those who asked the question of 20:12. The servants may not complain if they receive a reward appropriate for their work. In the Kingdom, human standards of merit are replaced by divine generosity. This seems to be a true accounting for the details of the parable in its immediate context, but there are other interpretations of this imagery. See the discussion in Davies and Allison (1997:67-68).
Several approaches to the reversal described in this crucial saying (19:30; 20:16) are particularly noteworthy:
1. Social reversal. At the final judgment the poor will be enriched, and the rich will be impoverished. This Gospel has spoken of such a reversal in the Beatitudes (cf. 5:3), though this is a much stronger theme in Luke.
2. Religious reversal. The tax collectors and sinners who enter the Kingdom last are preferred by God to the Jewish religious leaders (Hagner 1995:573; Hill 1972:285). This is undoubtedly a key Matthean theme (9:11-13; 11:19; 21:31).
3. Redemptive-historical reversal. In God's plan, Gentiles instead of Jews will come into prominence (Gundry 1994:399). Matthew indicates in many places that surprisingly many Jews reject the Kingdom and many Gentiles receive it (8:10-12; 15:22-28). This may well be the most prominent view throughout the history of the church.
4. Ecclesiastical reversal. Those among the disciples who want to be prominent will be humbled, but those who are humble will be considered truly great. At least two important texts underline this point (18:1-4; 20:25-28).
5. Anthropological reversal. At the consummation of the age, God's sovereign grace will humble proud people and exalt humble people. While this is true, Matthew seems more concerned about the community of disciples than humanity at large.
The problem with all the above approaches is that they are not supported by the immediate context, which addresses the parable as a warning to Peter and the disciples that they should not presume on God's grace and rewards. They are the ones who are in danger of grumbling against God (cf. Exod 16:7-12; Num 14:27; Deut 1:27) when others who come into the Kingdom later are rewarded. They must accept whatever reward God graciously gives them, and they must not compare themselves with others. Thus, the parable of the landowner anticipates the problem of Zebedee's sons—ambitiously seeking the greatest rewards in the future Kingdom (20:20-28).
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus predicts his death as a ransom for many (20:17-28; cf. Mark 10:32-45; Luke 18:31-33)
17 As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside privately and told them what was going to happen to him. 18 "Listen," he said, "we're going up to Jerusalem, where the Son of Man[*] will be betrayed to the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. They will sentence him to die. 19 Then they will hand him over to the Romans[*] to be mocked, flogged with a whip, and crucified. But on the third day he will be raised from the dead."
20 Then the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Jesus with her sons. She knelt respectfully to ask a favor. 21 "What is your request?" he asked.
She replied, "In your Kingdom, please let my two sons sit in places of honor next to you, one on your right and the other on your left."
22 But Jesus answered by saying to them, "You don't know what you are asking! Are you able to drink from the bitter cup of suffering I am about to drink?"
"Oh yes," they replied, "we are able!"
23 Jesus told them, "You will indeed drink from my bitter cup. But I have no right to say who will sit on my right or my left. My Father has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen."
24 When the ten other disciples heard what James and John had asked, they were indignant. 25 But Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. 26 But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave. 28 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many."
## NOTES
20:17-19 **Jesus was going up to Jerusalem.** The mention that Jesus had begun the ominous journey to Jerusalem lends drama and urgency to the third passion prediction (cf. Mark 10:32-34; Luke 18:31-34).
**he took the twelve disciples aside privately.** Matthew notes that this was a private announcement (cf. 17:1; 26:37), which probably was difficult since crowds constantly followed Jesus (19:2; 20:29).
**hand him over to the Romans to be mocked, flogged with a whip, and crucified.** This third passion prediction is more explicit than the first two in that it states that the Jewish authorities will condemn Jesus to death (26:66), but that the Gentile authorities will actually carry out the execution (27:2; cf. John 18:31). This is the first time crucifixion has been mentioned in the passion predictions (cf. 16:21; 17:22-23; ). Crucifixion was a Roman form of execution, not a Jewish one ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 7:1-4), but it could be viewed in terms of Deut 21:23 as an indication of being cursed by God (cf. Gal 3:13). The mention of the leading priests and teachers of religious law recalls 2:4. The predicted details of Jesus' sufferings anticipate the occurrence of those sufferings: he was mocked (27:29-41; cf. Ps 22:7), flogged (27:26), and crucified (27:35), just as predicted here. The additional details of this third prediction serve to stress the exactness of Jesus' knowledge of what would happen. The involvement of both Jews and Romans stresses the universality of Jesus' rejection (Davies and Allison 1997:80-81). All three of the passion predictions conclude with the resurrection of Jesus, which becomes the central focus of the preaching of the early church (26:32; 27:63; 28:6; Acts 2:24; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40-41; 1 Cor 15:4-8).
20:20 **the mother of James and John.** In obvious contrast to Jesus' projected sufferings, the mother of Zebedee's sons ironically sought their future glory (cf. Mark 10:35-45; Luke 22:24-30). The two sons of Zebedee were indeed James and John, but their names do not occur in the Gr. text of this verse (cf. 4:21; 10:2; 17:1; 26:37; 27:56).
**knelt respectfully.** This translates the same Gr. word ( _proskuneō_ [TG4352, ZG4686]) that in other contexts is translated "worship" (2:2, 11).
20:21 **in places of honor.** This does not occur in the Gr. text but brings out the implication of sitting at Jesus' right or left hand. These seats probably connote proximity to the king's prestige and authority in ruling the future Kingdom (19:28), rather than simply sitting next to him at the eschatological banquet (8:11) or at the final judgment (25:31-33). The fact that the mother made the request for her sons probably reflects negatively on them, not her (see next note). James, John, and their mother had not even begun to understand the significance of Jesus' repeated passion predictions or the meaning of such statements as found in 19:30, 20:16.
20:22 **You don't know what you are asking!** Jesus had asked the mother what she wanted from him, but at this point he addressed the mother and her sons. This implies that the sons had instigated their mother's original question. None of them understood the gravity of their request, or its monstrous inappropriateness at this point.
**bitter cup of suffering.** This translates one Gr. word ( _potērion_ [TG4221, ZG4539] "cup"). To be sure, drinking the cup is a metaphor for experiencing suffering (26:39; cf. Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Jer 25:17; Ezek 23:31; John 18:11).
**we are able!** Their answer to Jesus' question was sincere, though brash, since they did not know what they were talking about. Similarly, they all promised Jesus at the Last Supper that they would not desert him in his sufferings (26:35).
20:23 **You will indeed drink from my bitter cup.** The disciples would share in drinking the cup—that is, in suffering with Jesus. James was later martyred by Herod Agrippa I, but John was evidently spared such a fate (John 21:20-23; Acts 12:1-2).
**I have no right to say who will sit on my right or my left. My Father has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen.** Jesus could not promise them the best seats in his future Kingdom. In accord with the mysterious reality of the incarnation, Jesus acknowledged his human limitations, much as he does in 24:36.
20:24 **when the ten other disciples heard what James and John had asked, they were indignant.** The NLT's "James and John" is lit. "the two brothers." The ambition of James and John angered the remaining disciples, probably because they were jealous.
20:25 This quest for status became an opportune time for teaching Kingdom values to all the disciples, similar to a previous occasion (18:1-4).
**rulers in this world.** Lit., "rulers of the Gentiles." Jesus once again explained the norms of the Kingdom for spiritual greatness (18:1-14; cf. 10:39; 16:25; 19:30; 23:11-12). He did this first by contrasting the values of the world (20:25) with the values of the Kingdom (20:26-27). Then he pointed to his own life and death as the model for their aspirations.
20:28 **the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.** While worldly rulers tend to flaunt their power and status with ostentatious displays of "pomp and circumstance," Jesus is the epitome of greatness because he has served and ransomed his people (see commentary below). On the authenticity of 20:28 as a saying of the historical Jesus, see Blomberg (1987:243-244); Carson (1984:432-433); Hagner (1995:579-580).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 20:17-28 narrates the third and fullest prediction of Jesus' passion, followed by an episode stressing the disciples' ambition. In this passage, Matthew contrasts Jesus' humility and suffering (20:17-19, 28) with the disciples' pride and desire for glory. The verses 20:17-19 contain the main elements of the two previous passion predictions: betrayal, death, and resurrection, but they also contain unique elements (discussed below). The structure of the second part of the passage involves a dialogue (20:20-23), which turns into an occasion of teaching (20:24-28). First, Jesus responded to a request from the mother of Zebedee's children (20:20-23). When the rest of the disciples learned of this, their anger became another opportunity for Jesus to teach his disciples about genuine greatness in his Kingdom (20:24-28). This teaching takes the form of two parallel statements about worldly greatness (20:25) in antithesis to two parallel statements about Kingdom greatness (20:26-27). True greatness involves following in Jesus' steps along the path of sacrificial service (20:28; cf. 10:38-39; 16:24-26; 19:21). In this passage the reader is influenced to respond in sympathy to Jesus and antipathy to the disciples. Their ignorance, pride, and false confidence contrast with Jesus' knowledge, humility, and acceptance of the Father's will.
Jesus' Passion Predictions. As noted previously, Matthew 20:17-19 is the third of three explicit predictions of Jesus' sufferings, death, and resurrection in Jerusalem. There are, of course, several implicit references to the Passion that prepare the reader for these explicit predictions (10:21, 24-25, 28, 38; 12:14, 38-40; 16:4). It is helpful to lay the three out side-by-side to note similarities and differences. When this is done, it is clear that the third prediction is the most detailed of the three. It stresses the imminence of Jesus' sufferings in Jerusalem, as well as the dual agency of his death by a Jewish sentence carried out by Roman authorities. There is also a detailed description of his horrible sufferings. Only the third prediction mentions that Jesus' death will be by crucifixion. The second prediction is the briefest. It alone omits mention of Jerusalem, but it alone mentions the grieving response of the disciples. Only the first prediction is presented as a summary of what Jesus said rather than as a direct quotation.
Jesus' Passion and the Disciples' Ambition. Matthew 20:20-28 is a remarkable study in the definition of authentic greatness. Ever since the fall of humanity, greatness has been defined in terms of prestige, power, and glory. Jesus alluded to this state of affairs in 20:25 and immediately repudiated it in 20:26. His definition of greatness in terms of service turns the world's model on its head. His disciples are to follow his example of sacrificial, suffering servanthood even to the point of death. Paul clearly grasped this radically altered definition of greatness (2 Cor 4:5; 10:1; 12:9-10; Phil 2:3-11), which McNeile (1949:290) defines as _servire est regnare_ (to serve is to reign). One can do no better than to reflect on these words of Jesus from Luke's account of the Last Supper: "Who is more important, the one who sits at the table or the one who serves? . . . I am among you as one who serves." (Luke 22:27). John's account of Jesus' explanation of his washing the disciples' feet is also highly relevant here (John 13:12-17).
JESUS' THREE PASSION PREDICTIONS
---
Matthew 16:21 | Matthew 17:22-23 | Matthew 20:18-19
From then on Jesus began to tell his disciples plainly that it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem, and that he would suffer many terrible things at the hands of the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law. **He would be killed,** but ON THE THIRD DAY HE WOULD BE RAISED FROM THE DEAD. | After they had gathered together again in Galilee, Jesus told them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed. **He will be killed,** but ON THE THIRD DAY HE WILL BE RAISED FROM THE DEAD." And the disciples' hearts were filled with grief. | As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside privately and told them what was going to happen to him. "Listen," he said, "we're going up to Jerusalem, where the Son of Man will be betrayed to the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. They will sentence him to die. Then they will hand him over to the Romans to be mocked, flogged with a whip, and crucified. But ON THE THIRD DAY HE WILL BE RAISED FROM THE DEAD."
**Words similar in the first and second predictions**
Words similar in the first and third predictions
Words similar in the second and third predictions
WORDS SIMILAR IN ALL THREE PREDICTIONS
In this passage, the reader's emotions are torn between positive feelings for Jesus and negative feelings toward Jesus' disciples. Jesus has now spoken of his coming sufferings in Jerusalem three times, but, inexplicably, his disciples have forgotten their previous grief over this prospect. It is instructive to compare the selfish request of the mother of Zebedee's sons with the selfless request of the Canaanite woman for her daughter (15:21-28). One would have thought that the mother of two of Jesus' disciples would have had more spiritual insight than the Canaanite woman, but such was not the case. The disciples were preoccupied with thoughts of their own glory instead of concern for their Lord's sufferings. Davies and Allison (1997:82) put it well: "The loneliness of the Passion narrative begins here." Later, Peter and the very disciples who wanted to sit at Jesus' right and left in the Kingdom would sleep as Jesus agonized in the garden of Gethsemane (26:36-46). As Jesus predicted, he did not sit on a throne in Jerusalem but was crucified, with thieves on his right and left hand (27:38). How shocking it is to contemplate the disciples' insensitivity to Jesus' priorities! But it is all the more shocking to realize that many professed followers of Jesus still do not seem to grasp the nature of greatness in his Kingdom.
Jesus, a Ransom for Many. In giving himself as a "ransom" ( _lutron_ [TG3083, ZG3389]) for many, Jesus paid a price that frees them from slavery to sin (cf. Mark 10:45; Luke 1:68; 1 Tim 2:6; Titus 2:14; Heb 9:12; 1 Pet 1:18). The concept of ransom probably draws on such OT texts as Exodus 30:12, Psalm 49:7-9, and especially Isaiah 53:10-12, since Matthew had previously viewed Jesus as the suffering servant in 8:17 (citing Isa 53:4) and 12:18-21 (citing Isa 42:1-4).
Matthew 20:28 recalls 1:21 and anticipates 26:28. In 1:21 it is stated that Jesus will save his people from their sins. This affirmation, a play on the meaning of the name "Jesus," indicates that the problem of Israel is not its occupation by Rome but its sin against God. But _how_ would Jesus deliver his people from their sins? By paying a ransom that would free them from the bondage of alienation from God, according to 20:28. In view of the background in Isaiah 53:10-12, the haunting question of 16:26 (lit., "What can a man give in exchange for his soul?"), and the use of the preposition "for" ( _anti_ [TG473, ZG505], "instead of," "in behalf of") in 20:28, we should understand Matthew as teaching that redemption is vicarious; it comes when Jesus substitutes his own life for the lives of his people. But _when_ will Jesus pay this ransom? According to 26:28, the wine of the Last Supper was intended as a sacred sign of Jesus' blood, shed for the remission of his people's sins. His blood was shed at his crucifixion, and clearly this was when the ransom was paid (cf. 1 Pet 1:18-19). The tearing of the Temple veil when Jesus died probably symbolizes the completion of this redemption (27:51). In summary, Jesus saved his people by shedding his blood as a ransom that frees them from the bondage of their sins. While this falls short of a comprehensive "doctrine" of the atonement, Davies and Allison (1997:100) are overly pessimistic when they say that "it is impossible to construct a Matthean theory of the atonement." While there are some unanswered questions, the general thrust is clear.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Jesus heals two blind men (20:29-34; cf. Mark 10:46-52; Luke 18:35-43)
29 As Jesus and the disciples left the town of Jericho, a large crowd followed behind. 30 Two blind men were sitting beside the road. When they heard that Jesus was coming that way, they began shouting, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!"
31 "Be quiet!" the crowd yelled at them.
But they only shouted louder, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!"
32 When Jesus heard them, he stopped and called, "What do you want me to do for you?"
33 "Lord," they said, "we want to see!" 34 Jesus felt sorry for them and touched their eyes. Instantly they could see! Then they followed him.
## NOTES
20:29-30 The details of this pericope present several difficulties when compared with the accounts in Mark and Luke (cf. Mark 10:46-52; Luke 18:35-43; and Blomberg 1987:128-130).
**As Jesus and the disciples left the town of Jericho.** Since Jericho was about 10 miles northwest of the Dead Sea, they would need to walk about 15 miles southwest to reach Jerusalem. It would be an uphill climb of almost 3500 feet, since Jericho (846 feet below sea level) is in the Jordan rift valley, near the lowest spot on earth, the Dead Sea, and Jerusalem (2625 feet above sea level) is in the central hills of Judea.
**Two blind men.** Matthew has previously included another story of the healing of two blind men (9:27-31), but this is a different event. Perhaps Matthew intended that the two stories provide two witnesses to Jesus' power (Deut 19:15).
**Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!** Jesus' reputation had evidently preceded him, since the blind men called out to him as soon as they heard he was coming. The blind men called Jesus "Lord" (7:21-22; 8:2; 9:28; 12:8; 14:28; 15:22) and "Son of David" (1:1, 20; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 21:9, 15; 22:42). These terms are often associated with healings in Matthew. The men asked Jesus to have mercy on them (cf. 5:7; 9:27; 15:22; 17:15; 18:33).
20:31 **"Be quiet!" the crowd yelled.** The crowd tried to silence the blind men, perhaps because they did not want Jesus to be delayed from his trip to Jerusalem. But the men cried out all the more when they were opposed.
20:32-34 **What do you want me to do for you?** Jesus stopped to help them, asking them what they wanted. This seemed obvious, but Jesus probably asked the question to draw out the men's faith.
**we want to see!** In response to their request that their eyes be opened, Jesus touched them (8:3, 15; 9:29), and instantly they saw (cf. 8:3). Jesus stood above the crowd in showing compassion to the blind men (cf. 9:36; 14:14; 15:32).
**they followed him.** It is significant that the men followed Jesus, evidently joining the throng making its way up to Jerusalem with him (21:8-9). Thus, the episode is framed as an _inclusio_ by the references at its beginning and end to following Jesus (20:29, 34). The trip that began in 19:1 is nearly complete. At this point, Jesus' entry into Jerusalem might indeed seem triumphal, but the note of triumph will soon turn to tragedy.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus had told his disciples that they were on their way to Jerusalem, and that he would be betrayed and crucified there (20:17-19). When they left Jericho, Jerusalem was only 15 miles away, and it was inevitable that the ominous events Jesus had predicted would occur soon. But Jesus could not focus on his own concerns since, as usual, he and the disciples were accompanied by a large crowd. On their journey, Jesus exercised compassion and healed two blind men. At their first cry for help, the crowd disdained them. But their faith was strong and they called out to Jesus again and again. Jesus had just told his disciples that greatness in his Kingdom is calculated on the scale of service, not power. He used his power to serve the blind men, who responded by following him on the way to Jerusalem. There was no need to command the blind men to be silent (contrast 8:4; 9:30), for Jesus' hour had come. Their cries to the Son of David would soon be echoed by others on the approach to Jerusalem, but the religious leaders there would not join the chorus (21:9, 15-16).
Summary and Transition. Matthew 20 begins with the parable of the landowner and workers (20:1-16). As noted in the last chapter, this parable is actually the conclusion of Jesus' answer to Peter's question in 19:27. The saying, "those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last," brackets the parable (19:30; 20:16). Following the parable, there is a significant mention of Jerusalem in connection with Jesus' third Passion prediction (20:17-19). Then, the mother of Zebedee's children voices her ambitions for her sons (20:20-28). The chapter concludes with the healing of two blind men at Jericho, as Jesus drew ever closer to Jerusalem (20:29-34).
It is important to note that Matthew 20 revolves around Jesus' proximity to Jerusalem and plan to go there (20:17, 18, 29; cf. 16:21; 21:1, 10; 23:37). His passion prediction is made all the more dramatic by this nearness to Jerusalem. The mother of Zebedee's sons makes her request at a late hour in Jesus' earthly career, and Jesus' response stresses that his humble service to mankind involves his sacrificial death (20:28). The healing of the blind men features their messianic confession that Jesus is the Son of David, a confession soon echoed in Jerusalem at the Triumphal Entry (20:30-31; 21:9, 15). All these things tend to pique the reader's anticipation of the epochal events about to be accomplished in Jerusalem.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. The Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (21:1-11; cf. Mark 11:1-11; Luke 19:29-44; John 12:12-19)
1 As Jesus and the disciples approached Jerusalem, they came to the town of Bethphage on the Mount of Olives. Jesus sent two of them on ahead. 2 "Go into the village over there," he said. "As soon as you enter it, you will see a donkey tied there, with its colt beside it. Untie them and bring them to me. 3 If anyone asks what you are doing, just say, 'The Lord needs them,' and he will immediately let you take them."
4 This took place to fulfill the prophecy that said,
5 "Tell the people of Jerusalem,[*]
'Look, your King is coming to you.
He is humble, riding on a donkey—
riding on a donkey's colt.'"[*]
6 The two disciples did as Jesus commanded. 7 They brought the donkey and the colt to him and threw their garments over the colt, and he sat on it.[*]
8 Most of the crowd spread their garments on the road ahead of him, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. 9 Jesus was in the center of the procession, and the people all around him were shouting,
"Praise God[*] for the Son of David!
Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the LORD!
Praise God in highest heaven!"[*]
10 The entire city of Jerusalem was in an uproar as he entered. "Who is this?" they asked.
11 And the crowds replied, "It's Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee."
## NOTES
21:1 **Jesus and the disciples approached Jerusalem.** Jesus finally approached the ultimate destination of his trip from Galilee, the city where he had predicted he would be crucified (16:21; 19:1; 20:18-19; cf. Mark 11:1-11; Luke 19:29-44; John 12:12-19). Getting to Jerusalem from Jericho involved an arduous uphill hike of about 15 miles in distance and about 3500 feet in altitude.
**they came to the town of Bethphage on the Mount of Olives.** The Mount of Olives is a ridge, about two and a half miles long, lying just east of Jerusalem and running roughly north and south (cf. 24:3; Zech 14:4). Bethphage is mentioned only here and in the Synoptic parallels (Mark 11:1; Luke 19:29). It was evidently located on the east slope of the Mount of Olives near Bethany. When one comes from the east to the top of the Mount of Olives, the panorama of Jerusalem just across the Kidron Valley to the west is magnificent.
21:2-3 **a donkey tied there, with its colt beside it.** For his entrance into Jerusalem, Jesus told two disciples to acquire a donkey and its colt from a village near Bethphage. Perhaps this nearby village was Bethany (Mark 11:1). The disciples only needed to tell anyone who asked about their use of the donkeys that the Lord needed them. Jesus' plan to ride into Jerusalem on a donkey is hardly the picture of a conquering general mounted on a stallion.
21:4-5 Matthew cited Zech 9:9, with introductory words from Isa 62:11, to underline Jesus' humility (cf. John 12:14-15).
**the people of Jerusalem.** Lit., "the daughter of Zion" (NLT mg), a common OT expression that refers to Jerusalem and its inhabitants (cf. 2 Kgs 19:21; Isa 37:22; Jer 4:31; Lam 1:6; Mic 4:8; Zeph 3:14).
**Look, your King is coming to you. He is humble.** Zechariah 9:9 mentions that the coming King will be just, have salvation, and be humble, but Matthew includes only the last characteristic, humility. The prophecies of Zechariah frequently concern the troubles of Jerusalem and God's concern for it (Zech 1:12-17; 2:2-5; 3:2; 8:3-8; 12:3,10; 13:1; 14:4-9). Particularly noteworthy are texts that speak of God's coming or return to Zion (Zech 1:16; 8:3; 14:4, 16), the joining of Gentiles to the people of God (Zech 2:11; 8:22-23; 9:9), and the eschatological worship of the King (Zech 14:9, 16-17).
**riding on a donkey—riding on a donkey's colt.** In Zech 9:9 the words "donkey" and "donkey's colt" are arranged in synonymous parallelism and do not refer to two animals.
21:6 **The two disciples did as Jesus commanded.** In some unknown way, God's providence had prepared those in charge of the donkeys to permit Jesus to use them (Luke 19:32-34).
21:7 **They . . . threw their garments over the colt and he sat on it.** The Gr. text says the disciples put their garments on _both_ donkeys and that Jesus sat on _them_. Grammatically the pronoun "them" may refer either to the donkeys or to the garments thrown on the donkeys. It seems doubtful that Matthew is affirming that Jesus somehow straddled both animals, although some scholars argue that Matthew did intend this due to a misunderstanding of the Heb. parallelism in Zech 9:9 (Meier 1978:21-22, 144). Hagner (1995:594) thinks Matthew understood the parallelism but maximized the details of the correspondence with Zech 9:9 with a typically rabbinic hermeneutic. Instead, the idea is probably that Jesus rode on the garments spread on the colt (cf. Mark 11:2; Luke 19:35; John 12:14). Only Matthew mentions two donkeys; Mark and Luke state that Jesus rode a colt that had never been previously ridden. Matthew's mention of the colt's mother highlights its youth and the fact that it had not been ridden before. For further discussion see Davies and Allison (1997:120-123).
21:8 **spread their garments on the road . . . others cut branches.** The crowd's spreading garments and palm branches on the road is a festive acknowledgement of Jesus' kingship (cf. 1 Kgs 1:32-40; 2 Kgs 9:13; 1 Macc 5:45-54; 13:51; 2 Macc 10:7).
21:9 **praise God for the Son of David!** Lit., "Hosanna to the Son of David" (see NLT mg). Hosanna is a cry for help ("Save!"), but was used idiomatically as an expression of jubilant praise. Jesus is frequently called "the Son of David" in Matthew (1:1; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30-31; cf. 12:3; 22:41-46; 2 Sam 7:8, 12-16). Another messianic title is "the one who comes" (3:11; 11:3; 23:39; Ps 118:26). "Praise God in highest heaven" probably echoes Ps 148:1 (cf. Luke 2:14; 19:38). Psalms 113–118 were known as the Hallel and were frequently sung during Israel's major feasts. Sadly, the excitement of the crowd was not in the end matched by faithful commitment to Jesus (27:20). Their confession that Jesus was a prophet turned out to be inadequate (21:11).
21:10-11 **It's Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.** Even though Jerusalem was accustomed to large crowds of pilgrims during major festivals, Jesus' entrance into the city resulted in a major uproar. All over the city, people were asking about the identity of the one who had clamorously entered the city (cf. 2:3). The answer of the exultant crowds here did not echo the messianic terms used in 21:9. Instead, Jesus was described merely as the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee (2:23; 13:54; see also 16:13-14). This was accurate but fell short of fully describing Jesus. Hagner's suggestion (1995:596) that the crowds in 21:11 were Jerusalem residents, not the crowd of pilgrims as in 20:29; 21:8, 9, is doubtful.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The scene played out at Jesus' entry into Jerusalem is a familiar one. A conquering king parades triumphantly into a city with all the trappings of glory and power (Davies and Allison 1997:112-113). But there is something very strange about this Triumphal Entry. The king was clothed plainly, not in royal robes or in full military splendor. He rode an unpretentious young donkey, not a dashing war horse. He was meek, not militaristic. His entry sent mixed signals, and it is no wonder that all Jerusalem was perplexed about his identity. Paradoxically, Jesus' entry combined the trappings of power and glory with the imagery of humility. Throughout his ministry, his teaching and example had exalted humility and downplayed pride (5:5; 8:20; 11:25; 12:18-21; 16:24-25; 18:4; 19:14; 20:26-28; 21:5; 23:12). The "Triumphal" Entry epitomizes the upside-down values of the Kingdom. Jesus radically shifted the world's paradigm of greatness, showing greatness to be found in humble service, not arrogant rule. For a very different picture, one of Jesus' return in judgment, see Revelation 19:11-16.
There is much irony in the shouts of the crowd. They were at the same time correct and incorrect. They were correct in ascribing messianic language to Jesus, but incorrect in their understanding of the meaning of that language. They rightly quoted messianic texts, but they wrongly thought of their Messiah as a conquering military hero. And this is not surprising, since even the disciples still struggled to grasp Jesus' words, "among you it will be different" (20:26). For this reason the Triumphal Entry was also a tragic entry.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. Jesus clears the Temple (21:12-17; cf. Mark 11:15-18; Luke 19:45-48)
12 Jesus entered the Temple and began to drive out all the people buying and selling animals for sacrifice. He knocked over the tables of the money changers and the chairs of those selling doves. 13 He said to them, "The Scriptures declare, 'My Temple will be called a house of prayer,' but you have turned it into a den of thieves!"[*]
14 The blind and the lame came to him in the Temple, and he healed them. 15 The leading priests and the teachers of religious law saw these wonderful miracles and heard even the children in the Temple shouting, "Praise God for the Son of David."
But the leaders were indignant. 16 They asked Jesus, "Do you hear what these children are saying?"
"Yes," Jesus replied. "Haven't you ever read the Scriptures? For they say, 'You have taught children and infants to give you praise.'[*]" 17 Then he returned to Bethany, where he stayed overnight.
## NOTES
21:12 **Jesus entered the Temple and began to drive out all the people buying and selling animals.** Having entered the city proper, Jesus proceeded to the Temple area and disrupted the financial transactions going on there (cf. Mark 11:15-18; Luke 19:45-48). While his entry to the city was royal, his action in the Temple was prophetic (Davies and Allison 1997:133-134). Previous "cleansings" of the Temple were accomplished by Josiah, Hezekiah, and Judah Maccabaeus (2 Kgs 23:1-7; 2 Chr 29:3-11; 1 Macc 4; 2 Macc 10). This episode reinforces the previous episode's stress on Jesus as the messianic Son of David. In distinction from the Synoptic accounts that Jesus cleared the Temple at the end of his ministry, John's Gospel describes a similar scene at the beginning of Jesus' ministry (John 2:14-22). It is possible that John adapted the Synoptic account for literary purposes, but it is more likely that there were two clearings of the Temple by Jesus.
It is important to realize that the word "Temple" ( _hieron_ [TG2411, ZG2639]) refers to the entire walled complex, which was roughly rectangular, with the area of thirty-five football fields. The outer Court of the Gentiles was probably where Jesus drove out the merchants, healed the blind and lame, and received the children's praise (21:12, 14-15). The first inner court was the Court of the Women, where all Jews could enter (evidently the case in Mark 12:44; Luke 2:37; John 8:2-3). Only ritually pure Jewish males could go further, into the Court of the Israelites, where the sacrificial altar stood (as may be the case in Mark 11:11; Luke 18:11; 24:53). Beyond this area was the Temple proper, or Court of the Priests, where only priests could go (Herzog in Green and McKnight 1992:812).
**the tables of the money changers.** Money changers were necessary because many pilgrims holding foreign coins were present at the major festivals, such as Passover. Presumably, the pilgrims would exchange their currency to pay the half-shekel Temple tax (17:24; Exod 30:11-16; _m. Sheqalim_ ). Doves were a permissible sacrifice for those who could not afford a lamb for a sin offering, a firstborn offering, or an offering for the ritual purity of a recent mother (Luke 2:22-24; Lev 5:7, 11; 12:6, 8). Jesus' disgust was probably not due merely to mercantile activities, since those were required by the Law itself. He was likely angry because those transactions were taking place within the Temple itself or because the merchants were dealing dishonestly with the pilgrims—or both. Perhaps money was not being changed equitably, and the pilgrims were being charged exorbitant prices for their sacrificial animals (21:13; _m. Keritot_ 1:7).
21:13 **'My Temple will be called a house of prayer,' but you have turned it into a den of thieves.** Jesus' disruptive acts are based on his biblical citations, which highlight monstrous incongruity of turning a house of prayer into a den of thieves (Isa 56:7; Jer 7:11). The word translated "thieves" ( _lēstēs_ ) can have overtones of insurrection or guerilla warfare (26:55; 27:38, 44; BDAG 594). If this is the case, Jesus' action is not simply against dishonesty but also against revolutionary extremism. Possibly Jesus' actions should be viewed as a portent of the Temple's destruction by the Romans in AD 70 (Evans 1989).
21:14 **The blind and the lame came to him in the Temple.** In addition to acting against dishonest practices in the Temple, Jesus acted on behalf of the physically needy there. This account of the healing of blind and lame people in the Temple (evidently in the outer court of the Gentiles; cf. Lev 21:17-23; _m. Hagigah_ 1:1) is the last record of healing miracles in Matthew (cf. 11:5; 15:30-31).
21:15-16 As Blomberg (1992:315) points out, Jesus' activities in the Temple model the values of Hos 6:6—God prefers mercy over sacrifice (cf. 9:12-13; 12:7).
**leading priests and the teachers of religious law.** These were the ones consulted by Herod as to the place of Jesus' birth, and they appear in two of Jesus' Passion predictions (2:4; 16:21; 20:18). Given their earlier opposition, the indignation of the religious leaders is not at all surprising. They were evidently incensed at Jesus' miracles and at the messianic overtones of the cries of the children, which echo the citation of Ps 118:26 in Matt 21:9.
**Haven't you ever read the Scriptures? For they say, "You have taught children and infants to give you praise."** Jesus cited Ps 8:2 to vindicate the cries of the children. His introductory formula stresses their ignorance, or rather their obstinacy (cf. 12:3, 5; 19:4; 21:42). They had read but would not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. In contrast, the "children and infants" praise Jesus in messianic language, and once again the theme of the "little ones" receiving the Kingdom is stressed by Jesus, this time as endorsed by the Psalm (cf. 10:42; 11:25; 18:6). Psalm 8 is understood messianically elsewhere in the NT (1 Cor 15:27; Eph 1:22; Phil 3:21; Heb 2:6-9; 1 Pet 3:22).
21:17 **he returned to Bethany.** After this confrontation with the leaders, Jesus left the religious leaders in the Temple and returned to Bethany (26:6; cf. Mark 11:1, 11-12; 14:3; Luke 19:29; 24:50; John 11:1, 18; 12:1) to spend the night there.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Unexpectedly, Jesus' first action upon entering Jerusalem was not to deliver it from the oppressive Roman occupying forces but to deliver it from its own hypocrisy. Instead of directly threatening the political status quo, he confronted the Temple, the religious center of Israel, and its established leadership. Instead of being a house of prayer, it had been perverted into a center of commercial activity. It is not completely clear whether Jesus objected to commerce in the outer Temple courts as a matter of principle, or whether his actions were directed against unscrupulous greed that capitalized on the sincere religious motives of the pilgrims. At any rate, it is significant that his major activities in the Temple were directed against hypocrisy and on behalf of the needy. Like the prophets before him, Jesus spoke and acted against the corruption of Israel's established worship and for those who were without status. Therefore, Jesus' acts in the Temple augur the eschatological reversal in which the meek "will inherit the earth," while corrupt leaders will be brought low.
The Christology implicit in this episode is impressive. Jesus' acts of healing in the Temple and of clearing it both demonstrate what he said earlier in 12:6: "there is one here who is even greater than the Temple" (cf. Mal 3:1). When Jesus cited Ps 8:2 to vindicate the children's praise, he implicitly claimed to be worthy of the praise and worship that the psalm directs to God the Creator. For Matthew such insight is due to divine revelation, not human intellect or intuition (11:25). It is altogether fitting that mere children have a better grasp of Jesus' identity than the established hierarchy of Israel.
Renewal or Destruction? It has been common to view Jesus' action in the Temple as an act of correction or purification. But some argue that Jesus was not so much reforming the Temple as announcing its doom. Jesus did, in fact, predict the destruction of the Temple (24:2), but the activities portrayed in the Gospels do not confront the sacrificial ministry of the Temple. Instead they confront the commercial enterprises that were parasitic to it. Jesus did not interfere with the priests but with those engaged in financial transactions. In the OT, the prophets commonly denounced the corruption of the Temple and its priests, but such oracles oppose abuses of the sacrificial system rather than the system itself (Jer 6:13; Ezek 7–10; Hos 4:4-6; Mic 3:11; Zeph 3:4). The corruption of Jerusalem and the Temple is also cited in later Jewish texts ( _Jubilees_ 23:21; _1 Enoch_ 83–90; _4 Ezra_ 3:25-27; _2 Baruch_ 1:1-5; 13:4; _Apocalypse of Abraham_ 27:1-7; _4 Baruch_ 4:3-8; Josephus _Antiquities_ 20:179-181, 204-207, 213).
Davies and Allison (1997:135-137) rightly conclude that the cleansing of the Temple was an act that symbolized both the reformation of abuses and the judgment to come if the abuses continued. Protest against present corruption and prediction of future destruction are not mutually exclusive, especially when there is hope for repentance (23:39) and the rise of an eschatological Temple (Ezek 40–48). Genuine prophetic activity in the Old Testament not only predicted judgment and hope but also confronted Israel's abandonment of covenant obligations. It may be that Matthew saw in Jesus' acts a fulfillment of the Lord's coming suddenly into his Temple (Mal 3:1). Another possibility is stated by the most likely translation of Zechariah 14:21, which envisions a day in which there will be no more merchants in the house of the Lord.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Jesus curses the fig tree (21:18-22; cf. Mark 11:19-25)
18 In the morning, as Jesus was returning to Jerusalem, he was hungry, 19 and he noticed a fig tree beside the road. He went over to see if there were any figs, but there were only leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" And immediately the fig tree withered up.
20 The disciples were amazed when they saw this and asked, "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?"
21 Then Jesus told them, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and don't doubt, you can do things like this and much more. You can even say to this mountain, 'May you be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and it will happen. 22 You can pray for anything, and if you have faith, you will receive it."
## NOTES
21:18-19 **he was hungry.** Jesus looked for figs on a roadside tree and found the tree had leaves but no fruit (cf. 21:34).
**May you never bear fruit again!** Jesus pronounced a curse upon the tree, and it immediately withered, showing that it indeed would never bear fruit again. The cursing of the fig tree amounts to a prophetic parable in action (cf. Isa 8:1-4; Jer 13:1-9; Ezek 5:1-4; Hos 1:2-9). The tree probably should be understood as a symbol, not of Israel as a whole (Blomberg 1992:318; Hagner 1995:603-04), but of Jerusalem and the leaders of Israel, particularly the Temple leaders (Davies and Allison 1997:148, 151-52; Overman 1995: 295-96). Fruitless fig trees are used in OT prophetic texts as symbols of judgment (Isa 34:4; Jer 8:13; 24:1-10; Hos 2:12; Joel 1:7).
21:20-22 **How did the fig tree wither so quickly?** The object lesson of the fig tree received a new twist when Jesus responded to his disciples' question. (In Mark's account this happens on the next day; Matthew's account has evidently telescoped events that originally took place over two days into a single narrative; cf. Mark 11:12-14, 20-24). The disciples' amazement at how rapidly the tree withered overrides their perception of why the tree has withered and what it signifies. Again they lacked understanding of what Jesus was doing, and their question was beside the point. But Jesus used the occasion to teach them about faith and answers to prayer.
**if you have faith and don't doubt, you can do things like this and much more.** If the disciples pray in faith (6:8; 7:7-11; 18:19), they will see even greater things than a tree wither, such as a mountain being thrown into the sea (cf. 17:19-20; Luke 17:6; Rom 4:20; 1 Cor 13:2; Jas 1:6). This emphasis on believing prayer for the power of God to do what is humanly impossible must be correlated with the emphasis on asking for God's will to be de done, as found in the Lord's Prayer (6:9-13).
**this mountain.** If Jesus was speaking of the Temple mount when he referred to "this mountain" being thrown into the sea, the cursing of the fig tree portends the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 by the Romans (Telford 1980).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The cursing of the fig tree is the third symbolic act of Jesus in this context. Jesus had ridden a donkey's colt into the city and cleared its Temple of commercial activity. These acts respectively convey Jesus' kingly and prophetic roles. The prophetic role continues in the cursing of the fig tree, which, by all accounts, appears to be one of the strangest things Jesus ever did. But if one consults the Old Testament passages cited above (in the notes on 21:18-19), one will recognize that the symbolic acts of the prophets (living parables) were often strange. The rebuke or cursing of the fig tree conveys two theological lessons.
First, the barren tree pictures the fruitless religious leaders, whose Temple was recently cleared. The leaders did not appreciate Jesus, while the children did (21:15-16). They responded to Jesus' undeniable miracles by questioning Jesus' authority instead of praising God for his blessings. The fruitlessness of the leaders has been stressed all along in Matthew. It is pointed out very strongly again here, but Jesus' full and final denunciation will come in Matthew 23. The rejection of God's messengers will have consequences. Second, the weak disciples still need to develop faith in the power of God to answer their prayers. Their "little faith" was rebuked by Jesus before (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20), and once again they were challenged to grow in it. It is appropriate that this lesson occurs in a context connected with the Temple, since it is "called a house of prayer" (21:13; Isa 56:7). Perhaps the reason these two seemingly unrelated lessons are put together here is to contrast the fruitlessness of the unbelieving religious leaders with the potential fruitfulness of Jesus' believing disciples (Hagner 1995:606-607).
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. The authority of Jesus challenged (21:23-32; cf. Mark 11:27-33; Luke 20:1-8)
23 When Jesus returned to the Temple and began teaching, the leading priests and elders came up to him. They demanded, "By what authority are you doing all these things? Who gave you the right?"
24 "I'll tell you by what authority I do these things if you answer one question," Jesus replied. 25 "Did John's authority to baptize come from heaven, or was it merely human?"
They talked it over among themselves. "If we say it was from heaven, he will ask us why we didn't believe John. 26 But if we say it was merely human, we'll be mobbed because the people believe John was a prophet." 27 So they finally replied, "We don't know."
And Jesus responded, "Then I won't tell you by what authority I do these things.
28 "But what do you think about this? A man with two sons told the older boy, 'Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.' 29 The son answered, 'No, I won't go,' but later he changed his mind and went anyway. 30 Then the father told the other son, 'You go,' and he said, 'Yes, sir, I will.' But he didn't go.
31 "Which of the two obeyed his father?"
They replied, "The first."[*]
Then Jesus explained his meaning: "I tell you the truth, corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do. 32 For John the Baptist came and showed you the right way to live, but you didn't believe him, while tax collectors and prostitutes did. And even when you saw this happening, you refused to believe him and repent of your sins."
## NOTES
21:23-26 **By what authority are you doing all these things?** When Jesus returned to the Temple, the question of the religious leaders about his authority (cf. Mark 11:27-33) renewed the controversy that began in 21:12-16. This running controversy grew more and more heated as it led up to the prophetic woes of Matt 23. The leading priests and elders (26:3, 47; 27:1, 3, 12, 20) were in charge of the Temple, so it is not surprising that they questioned Jesus' presumption in acting as he had (cf. Acts 4:7).
**I'll tell you . . . if you answer one question.** Jesus did not answer their question directly but struck a sort of bargain with them. If they would answer his question, he would answer theirs. His question about whether John the Baptist's authority was human or divine (cf. Acts 5:38-39) put them in a quandary. If they said John's authority was merely human, they would anger the crowds who believed John and Jesus to be true prophets. (For the leaders' fear of the crowds, cf. 14:5; 21:46. The Jewish historian Josephus also speaks of the wide popularity of John the Baptist in _Antiquities_ 18.118). But if the leaders affirmed that John's authority was divine (cf. 11:7-15), their unbelief in John and Jesus and rejection of divine authority would be exposed. Jesus' response to their question with one of his own is typical in all of his encounters with the religious leaders in this section of Matthew. The leaders were repeatedly tripped up in their attempts to trip up Jesus (21:25-27; 22:21-22, 42-46). Jesus' authority is already a familiar theme in Matthew (7:29; 8:9; 9:6; 10:1; 28:19; cf. Acts 4:7-10).
21:27 **We don't know.** The only way out of the quandary for the religious leaders was to feign ignorance. In reality, this was a refusal to answer, and it betrays their negative estimate of John.
**Then I won't tell you.** Jesus responded in kind to their feigned ignorance by refusing to answer their question about his authority. But "his refusal is in fact veiled affirmation" of John (Davies and Allison 1997:162).
21:28-30 **A man with two sons.** Jesus' response to their question does not end in this stalemate. It continues with a parable about two sons who respond oppositely to their father's request to work in his vineyard (cf. 20:1; 21:33). The father's two commands and the responses of the two sons are exactly parallel in terms of literary structure but exactly opposite in terms of ethics. The first son initially agrees to work but eventually does not. The second initially refuses but eventually does work. This is the first of a set of three parables that rebuke the religious leaders for their unbelief (21:28-32, 33-44; 22:1-14). For a discussion of the textual difficulties referred to in the NLT mg on 21:29-31, see Metzger (1994:44-46).
21:31-32 **Which of the two obeyed his father?** Jesus applies the parable by asking the leaders another question, and this time they do answer.
**The first.** This answer condemned them. Since they did not believe John, they are like the first son who did not work in the vineyard even though he said he would. In contrast, since the tax collectors and prostitutes (cf. 9:10-11; 11:19) did believe John, they were like the second son who did work in the vineyard even though he said he would not.
**tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do.** These notorious sinners who repent will enter the Kingdom before the leaders who do not believe the Kingdom message.
**even when you saw this happening, you refused to believe him.** The leaders were still unrepentant, even after they saw the repentance of the notorious sinners. Their righteousness was like a tree with leaves but no fruit (21:19). The dregs of society who believed the gospel would enter the Kingdom of God (cf. 21:43), but these leaders would not (cf. 5:20). Jesus' statement that John showed the right way to live amounts to a statement that John's authority came from heaven. With that heavenly authority John pointed to Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The question put to Jesus about the source of his authority was not an innocent one (Blomberg 1992:319; Davies and Allison 1997:159). Matthew's narrative shows that Jesus' powerful words and works repeatedly made it plain to the religious leaders that Jesus' authority was from heaven (9:1-8; 12:6, 8, 28, 41-42; 15:1-12). But they were less perceptive than the crowd they presumed to lead, since even the crowd regarded John and Jesus as prophets. The leaders' question was motivated by animosity and probably by the desire to trap Jesus into saying something that could be construed as blasphemous (9:3; 22:15; 26:63-65). But Jesus turned the tables on this line of questioning by asking the leaders a question they dared not answer—the question about the source of John's authority (21:25). Then he asked them to respond to a parable about two sons, and this time they did answer, with devastating consequences (21:28-31). Their sin was not only refusing to perform what they promised, like the second son, but it was also refusing to follow the example of the first son, who symbolizes the tax collectors and prostitutes, whose repentance ought to have influenced the leaders to repent (21:32).
It is clear from this passage that being a disciple of the Kingdom involves deeds, not mere words (cf. 7:21-27). One's initial words may be reversed by one's subsequent deeds, and it is one's deeds that matter. It is astonishing to think that the Temple officials, despite their knowledge of the law and religious occupation, did not perform the will of the Father. Even more so, they did not contemplate the grace of God in drawing notorious sinners to repentance and into the Kingdom (cf. 9:10-13). This passage warns Christians today not to presume upon their own supposed righteous standing before God and not to assume that the unrighteous status of notorious sinners cannot change. One dare not be complacent about one's own supposed righteousness any more than the supposed unrighteousness of another. The call of the Father into the Kingdom is still powerful today, but entrance into the Kingdom is promised not to those who merely say "Lord, Lord," but to those who actually do the will of the Father (7:21).
Israel and the Church. It has been common for Christian exegetes to view the parable of the two sons in terms of salvation history, with the first son, who initially refused but later obeyed, representing the Gentiles, and the second son, who initially promised but later refused, representing Israel (Chrysostom, _Homily on Matthew_ , 67.2; Meier 1978:149-150). However, this interpretation posits something not found in the context—namely, the relationship of Jews and Gentiles in God's overall plan. The contextual focus is on the response of the Jews to John, so it is much preferable to see the parties contrasted in this parable as groups within Israel, not as Jews versus Gentiles. The messages of both John and Jesus confront the Jews with an eschatological reversal in which the unrepentant establishment is replaced by repentant people of no status. But the enfranchised replacements are just as Jewish as the disenfranchised former leaders. And the lesson to today's predominantly Gentile church is to avoid repeating the error of the Jewish establishment, just as Paul taught in Romans 11:19-22. (For further discussion on this theme, see the notes and commentary on 21:43.)
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. The parable of the evil farmers (21:33-46; cf. Mark 12:1-12; Luke 20:9-19)
33 "Now listen to another story. A certain landowner planted a vineyard, built a wall around it, dug a pit for pressing out the grape juice, and built a lookout tower. Then he leased the vineyard to tenant farmers and moved to another country. 34 At the time of the grape harvest, he sent his servants to collect his share of the crop. 35 But the farmers grabbed his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. 36 So the landowner sent a larger group of his servants to collect for him, but the results were the same.
37 "Finally, the owner sent his son, thinking, 'Surely they will respect my son.'
38 "But when the tenant farmers saw his son coming, they said to one another, 'Here comes the heir to this estate. Come on, let's kill him and get the estate for ourselves!' 39 So they grabbed him, dragged him out of the vineyard, and murdered him.
40 "When the owner of the vineyard returns," Jesus asked, "what do you think he will do to those farmers?"
41 The religious leaders replied, "He will put the wicked men to a horrible death and lease the vineyard to others who will give him his share of the crop after each harvest."
42 Then Jesus asked them, "Didn't you ever read this in the Scriptures?
'The stone that the builders rejected
has now become the cornerstone.
This is the LORD's doing,
and it is wonderful to see.'[*]
43 I tell you, the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation that will produce the proper fruit. 44 Anyone who stumbles over that stone will be broken to pieces, and it will crush anyone it falls on.[*]"
45 When the leading priests and Pharisees heard this parable, they realized he was telling the story against them—they were the wicked farmers. 46 They wanted to arrest him, but they were afraid of the crowds, who considered Jesus to be a prophet.
## NOTES
21:33 **listen to another story.** This second confronting parable (cf. Mark 12:1-12; Luke 20:9-19) is based on the familiar OT image of a vineyard (21:28; cf. Ps 80:8-12; Isa 27:2-6; Jer 2:21; 12:10; Ezek 19:10-14; Hos 10:1; _1 Enoch_ 10:16; 84:6; _Jubilees_ 1:16; _Psalms of Solomon_ 14:3-4; Elliott 2000:329-344). But this time the vineyard workers are tenant farmers, not the owner's sons.
**he leased the vineyard to tenant farmers.** The song of the vineyard in Isa 5:1-7 is specifically alluded to here, but Matthew adds the crucial new element of the tenant farmers who leased the vineyard while the owner went on a journey. The vineyard is Israel, the receptor of God's Kingdom blessings (21:43; Isa 5:7); the tenant farmers are Israel's leaders (21:43, 45).
**moved to another country.** This translates a word ( _apedēmēsen_ [TG589, ZG623]) that simply means to go away on a journey. Unlike the wealthy landowner of 20:1 who oversees his own harvest, this absentee owner hires tenants to work his land. For a detailed study of the parable see Snodgrass (1983).
21:34 **to collect his share of the crop.** As the parable proceeds, the crucial matter is the owner's receiving his share of the crop. Lit., this crop is "fruit," a key Matthean metaphor for right living or obedience to God's law (3:10; 7:16-20; 12:33; 13:8; 21:19, 34, 41, 43). Israel's covenant relationship with God obligated her leaders to righteousness, just as the tenant farmers were obligated by contract to produce fruit for the owner of the vineyard.
21:35-36 **the farmers grabbed his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another.** Another group of servants (lit. "slaves") is mistreated in the same way.
21:37-39 **sent his son.** The third time the owner sends his son (10:40; 15:24), thinking the son will be respected by the farmers. But the farmers also kill the son, thinking they will get the vineyard for themselves if they murder the heir. It is clear from both the OT and from Matthew itself that the maltreatment of the slaves and son sent by the landowner is meant to picture Israel's ongoing rejection of her prophets (1 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 24:19-21; 36:16; Neh 9:26-30; Jer 7:25-26; 20:1-2; 26:20-24; Dan 9:6, 10; Matt 5:12; 22:6; 23:29-37; cf. Acts 7:52; 1 Thess 2:15; Heb 11:33–12:1; Rev 11:3-7).
**dragged him out of the vineyard, and murdered him.** The detail that the son was thrown out of the vineyard before being killed may be intended as a veiled reference to Jesus' crucifixion outside the city walls in keeping with OT law (Lev 24:14; Num 15:36; Deut 17:5; 21:9; Heb 13:12). This parable clearly sets the scene for Jesus' accusation in Matt 23:29-36 that the leaders of Israel have frequently rejected God's prophets and are now about to reject him. At this point in the story, one is impressed not only by the unprovoked violence of the evil farmers but also by the extreme patience, if not foolhardiness, of the owner. But the story is not over. How will the owner respond to the atrocity of his son's murder?
21:40-41 **He will put the wicked men to a horrible death.** At this point Jesus applied the story by drawing his listeners into it and asking them how it would end. They knew all too well that the remarkable patience of the owner had reached its end, and they told Jesus that the owner would bring the farmers to an end fitting their wicked deeds.
**lease the vineyard to others.** The owner would then replace the wicked farmers with new farmers, who would render to the owner his share of the produce. Again, the religious leaders were condemned by their own words (21:31).
21:42-43 Jesus' gives his interpretation of the landowner's replacement of the tenants. The reference to the owner's getting his share of the crop after each harvest (lit. "the fruits in their seasons") may allude to Ps 1:3 (cf. 21:34, 43).
**Didn't you ever read this in the Scriptures?** Jesus' incredulous question reproves the religious leaders and recalls 12:3; 19:4; 21:16. The leaders are again portrayed as ignorant of the Scriptures, and of Ps 118:22 in particular.
**The stone that the builders rejected has now become the cornerstone.** Parts of Psalm 118 have already been cited in 21:9, 15, and Ps 118:22 also appears in Acts 4:11 and 1 Pet 2:7 (cf. Isa 8:14; 28:16). In light of the Psalms Targum, an ancient translation of the original Heb. into Aramaic, the citation of this verse probably involves a play on words "son" ( _ben_ [TH1121, ZH1202]) and "stone" ( _'eben_ [TH68, ZH74]). The rejection of the son ( _ben_ ) in the parable (21:37-39) answers to the rejection of the stone ( _'eben_ ) in Ps 118:22. It is also noteworthy that the Isaiah Targum interprets the "fertile hill" of Isa 5:1 as the Temple mount (Evans 1995:397-405; Snodgrass 1983:95-118). The architectural function of the stone that becomes the cornerstone (lit. "the head of the corner") is unclear. It may be a typical foundational cornerstone, the keystone of an arch, or the capstone at the top of a corner.
**the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation that will produce the proper fruit.** See 1 Sam 15:28 LXX; Dan 2:44; 7:27. Although it is common to take "you" as a reference to the Jewish people as a whole and "nation" as a reference to the predominantly Gentile church (Blomberg 1992:325; Hendriksen 1973:786), there is good reason to take the view that "you" refers to the unbelieving Jewish leaders and "nation" to the twelve disciples of Jesus who will lead his church (16:18-19; 19:28; Overman 1996:302-304). It is clear from numerous OT passages that the word "nation" does not only refer to Gentiles and Gentile nations (Gen 12:2; Exod 19:6, cited in 1 Pet 2:9; 2 Sam 7:23; Ps 33:12; Isa 1:4; 26:2; Jer 31:36; Ezek 37:22). Matthew did not think of the church as a Gentile entity that supersedes Israel but as the eschatological Jewish remnant that spreads the Kingdom message to all the nations, including Israel. For further discussion, see the commentary below and Turner (2002).
21:44 **Anyone who stumbles over that stone will be broken to pieces, and it will crush anyone it falls on.** The stone metaphor is continued in the language of 21:44, which echoes Isa 8:14-15 and Dan 2:34-35, 44-45. Those who reject the cornerstone will, as it were, stumble and fall on it, while at the same time their judgment will be like the stone falling on them. The destruction of the Temple in AD 70 was at least part of the judgment Jesus spoke of here (cf. 24:2; Luke 21:20). There is some doubt over the authenticity of 21:44, which may be interpolated from Luke 20:18 (see Metzger 1994:47; Comfort 2007:[Matt 21:44]). It is not included in several ancient witnesses ( 104vid D 33 it syrs Origen Eusebius).
21:45 **they realized he was telling the story against them.** This verse erases any doubt that the tenant farmers picture Israel's leaders, not Israel as a whole—the leaders themselves recognize this. The "leading priests and Pharisees" are joined together elsewhere only in 27:62. Tragically, the Jewish religious leaders understood what Jesus was saying but refused to give assent to it. When they were told that they would reject God's cornerstone and be crushed by it, they set out undaunted to crush that cornerstone. Their rejection of God fulfills God's prophecy through Jesus.
21:46 **They wanted to arrest him, but they were afraid of the crowds, who considered Jesus to be a prophet.** The leaders' fear of the crowd of festival pilgrims who believed that Jesus was a prophet (21:11, 26) was the only factor that slowed their murder plot (12:14; 26:3-5). If the leaders openly arrested Jesus, the volatile crowd of pilgrims might riot, bringing Roman soldiers onto the Temple grounds. Eventually, their plot would be aided by Judas' betrayal. The Jewish religious leaders would manipulate the Romans and persuade the fickle crowd to see things their way (26:3-5, 14-16, 47; 27:2, 20-26).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
As Davies and Allison (1997:176-177) point out, this parable joins two Old Testament themes—Israel as God's vineyard and its rejection of the prophets—with the new themes of Jesus as the culmination of God's revelation and Israel's rejection of him as the culmination of their rebellion. This parable continues Jesus' answer to the religious leaders' question as to the source of Jesus' authority (21:23). It comes from God, the owner of the vineyard, Israel. God had been amazingly patient with the leaders of his people, who had regularly rejected his messengers throughout Israel's history. These leaders had not produced fruit, or right living according to the law. Now they were about to destroy the owner's son, Jesus, thinking that this would clear the way for their ongoing authority over the people. But the owner of the vineyard would have the last word, destroying these leaders and replacing them with new ones, the disciples of Jesus. Ultimately, God will have fruit from his people. Thus, the parable of the evil farmers is a miniature history of redemption. It is just as much a prediction of Jesus' death and resurrection as the passion predictions Jesus has been making (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19).
Matthew and Isaiah's Song of the Vineyard. Isaiah 5:1-7 poignantly decries the unfaithfulness of Israel with the imagery of a well-cultivated vineyard that inexplicably fails to produce good fruit. The Beloved's transformation of a fertile hill into a promising vineyard is described in six steps in Isaiah 5:1b-2a. These steps bear much resemblance to the six steps of Matthew 21:33-34, although Matthew 21 does not put the steps in the same order. Also, Matthew omits mention of digging and removing stones, but adds a wall to the description. Despite the obvious similarities, there remain some crucial differences between Isaiah 5:1-7 and Matthew 21:33-46. Perhaps the most obvious is that the crucial figures in Matthew, the tenant farmers, are not mentioned in Isaiah. The problem in Isaiah is the lack of good fruit, but the problem in Matthew is the farmers who will not render the fruit to the owner. This necessitates the process of sending servants, and ultimately the son, to appeal to the farmers to pay the owner his share of the harvest. The resolution of the problem of the lack of good fruit in Isaiah is the destruction of the vineyard (but see Isa 27:2-6), while in Matthew the problem of the recalcitrant farmers is solved by replacing them with farmers who will render the harvest to the owner.
The Kingdom Taken and Given. From whom will the Kingdom of God be taken? Christian exegesis has often viewed Matthew 21:43 as predicting the demise of national Israel as the people of God and its replacement by the predominantly Gentile church. But what group is represented by the recalcitrant farmers from whom authority over the vineyard is to be taken? In terms of the parable proper, Israel is represented by the vineyard, not by the farmers, who ostensibly stand for the leaders of Israel. This is made clear in the response of Israel's leaders to the parable and its application by Jesus; they recognized that he had been talking about them (21:45). They were the recalcitrant farmers (21:35-39), the builders who rejected the stone (21:42), and those broken to pieces and ground into powder by the stone (21:44). The identification of the recalcitrant farmers of the parable with the Jewish religious leaders of Jesus' day seems clear (Carson 1984:454; Davies and Allison 1997:189-190; Keener 1999:510-511, 515-516).
But if 21:43 speaks of Kingdom authority being taken away from these religious leaders, to whom does the text say this Kingdom authority will be given? Some scholars take this phrase as conclusive evidence that a new "nation," the church, has replaced the nation of Israel in God's plan (Bruner 1990:770; Hagner 1995:623; Hare 1967:153; Morris 1992:544). But this view is unconvincing in view of the previous discussion of the entity from whom the Kingdom is taken. The pronoun "you" in 21:43 has as its parabolic antecedent the recalcitrant farmers, not the fruitful vineyard. In the following context it is clear that the religious leaders believed Jesus was talking about them, not Israel as a whole (21:46). Thus it is reading far too much into this verse to view it as indicating the replacement of Israel by the Gentile church. Nor does Matthew's use of the word "nation" ( _ethnos_ [TG1484, ZG1620]; 21:43) clearly support this view (Levine 1988:187-189, 207-211). If the Gentiles were in view here, one would expect the plural, "nations" (cf. Gr. of 4:15; 6:32; 10:5, 18; 12:18, 21; 20:19, 25; 24:9, 14; 25:32; 28:19). In Matthew 21:43 the entity to which the Kingdom will be given is an ethical, not ethnic, entity. Those who produce fruit—that is, those who practice Kingdom ethics—will replace the recalcitrant farmers who have refused to render the harvest to the landowner. In Matthew's view, his Christian Jewish community and others like it, who view Jesus as the ultimate teacher of the Torah (5:17-48), practice Kingdom ethics. It is they who replace the Jerusalem religious establishment as the leaders of Israel.
Israel and the Church. Matthew 21:33-46 is part of Matthew's indictment of the Jerusalem religious establishment, whose franchise to lead Israel will be forfeited to Matthew's Christian Jewish community. The "nation" of Matthew 21:43 speaks of the Matthean community as an eschatological messianic remnant whose leaders will replace the current Jerusalem religious establishment and lead Israel in bearing the fruit of righteousness to God. Thus, the parable of the recalcitrant farmers is about ethics, not ethnicity, and a Jewish remnant, not a Gentile replacement. This remnant is pictured as a repentant son (21:29), responsible farmers (21:41), and responsive guests (22:9-10). None of these parabolic details need be interpreted as speaking in ethnic terms (Levine 1988:193-239). To read this passage as Israel's rejection and replacement by the Gentile church is to read into it a later theology of supersession (Hultgren 2000:372-374). Such a view is dubious exegetically and has contributed, perhaps unwittingly in some cases, to anti-Semitism. The theology of supersession may not lead inexorably to the practice of anti-Semitism, but the connections are there in all too many cases in the history of the church. Hence, it is high time to seriously reconsider such an exegesis (Farmer 1999:30-31, 40, 48).
Matthew 21:33-46 should rather be interpreted as an intramural transferal of leadership in the Kingdom from the fruitless Jerusalem religious establishment to the fruitful Matthean Christian Jewish community, led by Jesus' apostles. This community amounts to the eschatological remnant of Israel that continues its mission to Israel while expanding its horizons to all the nations. In the larger scheme of New Testament biblical theology, this eschatological Jewish remnant becomes the nucleus of the nascent church. Although the church expands primarily by winning Gentiles to Messiah Jesus, its roots in the promises of God to the seed of Abraham must not be forgotten. Jesus' words to the Samaritan woman warrant repeating: "Salvation comes through the Jews" (John 4:22; cf. John 10:16; Acts 24:14; 28:20; Rom 11:16-24; Eph 2:11-22; Rev 21:12).
Summary and Transition. After earlier predictions of Jesus' death in Jerusalem (16:21; 20:18), and after Matthew has set the scene geographically (19:1; 20:17, 29), we observe the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (21:1-11). Matthew next describes Jesus' activities in the Temple, including casting out the money changers, healing the blind and the lame, and confronting the chief priests and scribes (21:12-17). Next, the cursing of the fig tree becomes an object lesson for prayer (21:18-22). Reentering the Temple, Jesus answered the chief priests' and elders' question regarding his authority (21:23-44). This answer comes in three stages: (1) Jesus posed a question to the religious leaders, which they refused to answer (21:24-27); (2) Jesus told a brief story about a man who had two sons (21:28-32); and (3) Jesus told another story about a landowner and his vineyard (21:33-44). The chapter concludes with the Pharisees understanding that Jesus' stories condemned them; they seek to seize him but are held in check by their fear of the multitudes (21:45-46). Chapter 22 continues in the same vein, with Jesus continuing his parables to the Pharisees, who escalate their plot against him (22:1, 15).
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. The parable of the wedding feast (22:1-14)
1 Jesus also told them other parables. He said, 2 "The Kingdom of Heaven can be illustrated by the story of a king who prepared a great wedding feast for his son. 3 When the banquet was ready, he sent his servants to notify those who were invited. But they all refused to come!
4 "So he sent other servants to tell them, 'The feast has been prepared. The bulls and fattened cattle have been killed, and everything is ready. Come to the banquet!' 5 But the guests he had invited ignored them and went their own way, one to his farm, another to his business. 6 Others seized his messengers and insulted them and killed them.
7 "The king was furious, and he sent out his army to destroy the murderers and burn their town. 8 And he said to his servants, 'The wedding feast is ready, and the guests I invited aren't worthy of the honor. 9 Now go out to the street corners and invite everyone you see.' 10 So the servants brought in everyone they could find, good and bad alike, and the banquet hall was filled with guests.
11 "But when the king came in to meet the guests, he noticed a man who wasn't wearing the proper clothes for a wedding. 12 'Friend,' he asked, 'how is it that you are here without wedding clothes?' But the man had no reply. 13 Then the king said to his aides, 'Bind his hands and feet and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'
14 "For many are called, but few are chosen."
## NOTES
22:1-3 Here Jesus again speaks in parables, uttering the third in a set of three parables that put forth an authority figure's problems with his subordinates (cf. 21:28, 33). The parable in Luke 14:15-24 is similar but probably reflects a different event in the life of Jesus.
**The Kingdom of Heaven can be illustrated by.** This is a standard introductory formula (13:24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47; 18:23). In the previous two parables, the main character was a vineyard owner who dealt with his sons and tenant farmers respectively. This time the main character is a king who sent his slaves to summon those he had already invited to his son's wedding feast. Amazingly, those whom the king invited were not willing to come (cf. 23:37). Given the preceding context, there can be little doubt that this is intended to portray the recalcitrant religious leaders, who did not believe the prophets sent by God and who ultimately rejected the Kingdom announced by Jesus, God's Son. Elsewhere in Matthew the Kingdom is spoken of as a great banquet at the end of the ages (8:11-12; cf. 26:26-29; Luke 13:29; Rev 19:9).
22:4-6 **The feast has been prepared.** The king patiently sent out other slaves to reaffirm the invitation. This time the slaves were instructed to point out in detail the nature of the preparations that had been made. Surely this would entice the invited guests to come.
**bulls and fattened cattle.** The second term is more lit. "fattened animals" ( _sitista_ [TG4619A, ZG4990]) and occurs only here in the NT; BDAG (925) posits that the fattened animals were cattle. The slaves announced that all preparations were complete and repeated the invitation, but those who had been invited paid no heed. Some were too busy with everyday concerns, such as their farms and their businesses. Others were subversive and revolted against the king by apprehending his slaves, mocking them, and killing them (cf. 2 Sam 10:4; Josephus _Antiquities_ , 9.263-266). This horrible turn of events could not have been anticipated. The second group of slaves here answers to the second group in 21:36. The nearness of the Kingdom is portrayed by the servants' repeated statement that the feast was prepared (cf. 3:2; 4:17:10:7). The recalcitrance of the religious leaders is habitual; they had regularly killed God's messengers (cf. 5:12; 23:29-36).
22:7 **he sent out his army to destroy the murderers.** His army put their city to the torch (Judg 1:8; Isa 5:24-25; 1 Macc 5:28). The king's angry treatment of his treacherous subjects portrays the judgment of the Jerusalem establishment (cf. 21:41-45). The burning of the Temple in AD 70 is at least a partial fulfillment of this veiled prophecy (Blomberg 1992:328).
22:8-10 **go out to the street corners and invite everyone you see.** He told his slaves for the third time that the feast was ready but notes that those previously invited were not worthy (on being "worthy," see 3:8; 10:10-11, 13, 37-38). He sent the slaves out into the byways to invite everyone they could find. The term NLT renders "street corners" (Gr. _diexodous_ [TG1327, ZG1447]) more likely refers to the places where the streets leave town and go into the surrounding countryside (BDAG 244).
22:11-12 **he noticed a man who wasn't wearing the proper clothes.** When the king greeted his guests, he discovered a man who was not wearing the proper clothes for a wedding. He called him "friend," which, in view of 26:50, may be ominous. It is possible that it was the custom in that day for kings to provide suitable clothing for such feasts (Gen 45:22; Judg 14:12; 2 Kgs 25:29; Esth 6:8-9; Luke 15:22; Rev 19:8; Josephus _War_ , 2.128-133; Gundry 1994:439), but some scholars deny this (Carson 1984:457; Hagner 1995:631).
**the man had no reply.** The man was at fault for insulting the king because he could not explain his inappropriate attire.
22:13-14 **throw him into the outer darkness.** The man was arrested and severely punished (8:12; 13:40-42; 24:51; 25:30). This horrible outcome pictures eternal punishment. The parable was told to prepare the listeners for the conclusion: "many are called, but few are chosen." The point of this parable is similar to that of the two sons. The established leaders of Israel had rejected Jesus and the Kingdom, but some from the dregs of society had repented (9:10-13; 21:31-32). But even among these who overtly respond to the Kingdom message, there are both good and bad (cf. 13:19-23, 38, 48). God calls many, good and bad alike, into his Kingdom, but relatively few of them are truly obedient to the call (7:13-14).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 22:1-14 comprises a narrative introduction (22:1), the parable itself (22:2-13), and a general conclusion (22:14). The parable itself contains four cycles of activity by a king (22:2, 4, 7, 11). As noted above, the parable of the wedding feast is the third in a set of three parables that share many themes and together make a case against the leaders of Israel. All three parables are about failure, whether that of the second son, the tenant farmers, those originally invited to the wedding feast, or the man without wedding clothes (Davies and Allison 1997:188-189).
According to a common interpretation of this parable, the king (God) sends his servants (prophets) to invite his subjects (Israel) to a wedding feast for his son (Jesus, cf. 8:11). The subjects refuse to come, and they kill the king's servants. The king sends his armies (Rome) and destroys the city (Jerusalem). Then the guests are secured from the main highways (Gentiles). A wedding guest without wedding garments (a hypocrite) is punished. There is truth here, but it is doubtful that the parable is intended to portray a redemptive-historical transition from Jews to Gentiles (as, e.g., Hagner 1995:632). Those who seized, mocked, and killed God's messengers are not Israel as a whole but the leaders of Israel (Overman 1996:300-302). "The exegete must be careful not to assume that the allegorical destruction of Jerusalem terminates Israel's role in God's story" (Davies and Allison 1997:202, cf. 207 n. 76).
Theological Significance. The conclusion of the parable is that "many are called but few are chosen." This must be understood as summarizing the point of the whole parable, not just 22:13. The parable stresses the contempt with which the religious leaders treated God's rule in Jesus the Messiah. Some had merely been indifferent (22:5), but others were growing more and more hostile (22:6). The invitation had gone out to many, but only relatively few responded. However, this "surprising" turn of events was not unexpected to God; he has his elect (cf. 11:25-30; 24:22, 24, 31). The biblical concept implied by 22:14 is that of the remnant (e.g., Isa 1:9; 10:20-22; Elliott 2000). Such a concept seems to be contrary to that of the Mishnah in _m. Sanhedrin_ 10:1, where it says, "All Israel has a place in the world to come."
The disastrous end of the man without a wedding garment adds a dimension not found in the previous two parables (Davies and Allison 1997:207-208). The fate of this man vividly pictures the horrific end of those who finally reject Jesus and the Kingdom, whether they appear to be righteous or not. In this respect, 22:11-13 portrays the final judgment. This man had evidently responded to the invitation to the wedding feast and had assembled in the banquet hall, but his garment showed that he did not truly belong there. His fate reminds the reader of the false prophets in 7:15-23 and of the lawless ones in 13:42. Through this part of the parable, Jesus warned his disciples that their troubles will not come merely from outside opponents. They cannot become complacent and assume a notion of divine approval that overrides the necessity of obedience to all that Jesus had commanded. Later, the betrayal of Jesus will make this point crystal clear—Judas Iscariot is another who was called but not chosen. The future will bring many troubles to the disciples from the outside, but they must also beware of defectors within the church. Only those who endure to the end will be saved (24:10-13).
## TEXT [Commentary]
12. Paying taxes to Caesar (22:15-22; cf. Mark 12:13-17; Luke 20:20-26)
15 Then the Pharisees met together to plot how to trap Jesus into saying something for which he could be arrested. 16 They sent some of their disciples, along with the supporters of Herod, to meet with him. "Teacher," they said, "we know how honest you are. You teach the way of God truthfully. You are impartial and don't play favorites. 17 Now tell us what you think about this: Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
18 But Jesus knew their evil motives. "You hypocrites!" he said. "Why are you trying to trap me? 19 Here, show me the coin used for the tax." When they handed him a Roman coin,[*] 20 he asked, "Whose picture and title are stamped on it?"
21 "Caesar's," they replied.
"Well, then," he said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God."
22 His reply amazed them, and they went away.
## NOTES
22:15-17 Following Jesus' three parables on the failure of the Jewish religious leaders (21:23–22:14), the Pharisees regrouped and conferred about how to trap Jesus in his speech (cf. Mark 12:13-17; Luke 20:20-26). Their desire to test and destroy Jesus was noted previously (12:14; 16:1; 19:3; cf. 22:35).
**supporters of Herod.** It was unusual for the Herodians (cf. Mark 3:6) to join in a common cause with the Pharisees, since the Pharisees did not support the pro-Roman Herodian dynasty and did not favor a tax that was not based on the Torah. Little is known of the Herodians, who were evidently a relatively small but well entrenched group that stood to profit from the status quo. This mixed group first speaks flattering words to Jesus about his integrity and impartiality, evidently to set up their trap (22:16). Their question about paying taxes to the Roman emperor is evidently about the "head tax," which was based on a census of Israel's population by the Romans (Josephus _Antiquities_ , 18.1, 3; _War_ 1.154; 2.118, 403-405, 433; Tacitus _Annals_ 2.42). This is a different tax than the OT-mandated tax to support the Temple, which Jesus did pay (17:24-27). It seems that the religious leaders wanted to catch Jesus in a dilemma. He would be sure to anger one group or the other either way he answered their question. To support the tax would be to alienate the Pharisees, and to reject the tax would be treasonous to Rome.
**Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?** Better rendered as "Is it lawful . . . ?" Jesus was being asked to interpret the Torah. Cf. 12:2, 4, 10; 14:4; 19:3; 27:6 for the use of _exestin_ [TG1832, ZG2003], which simply means "it is permitted."
22:18-20 **hypocrites.** "Jesus recognizes the daggers in the men's smiles" (Davies and Allison 1997:215). He saw through their flattery to their evil motives and called them on it (cf. 6:2, 5, 16; 7:5; 15:7; 23:13-15; 24:51).
**show me the coin. . . . Whose picture and title are stamped on it?** He answered their question by dramatically requiring them to produce the coin used to pay the tax (a denarius, cf. 18:28; 20:2, 9-10, 13), and asking them whose image and inscription are on it.
22:21 **give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.** Jesus' answer when they replied that it was Caesar's image assumes God's control over Rome's temporal power (Dan 1:1-2; 2:20-21, 37-38), and on the surface it seems to support the Herodians. The image of the emperor on the coin would indicate that it would be appropriate to pay it back to him. However, a Jew who was obedient to the second commandment would not be comfortable holding the coin anyway (Exod 20:4). Also, the inscription on the denarius referred to Tiberius Caesar as divine and as high priest. The image of Tiberius and both of these titles would be offensive to Jews. Jesus' distinction between duty to state and duty to God indicates that Tiberius was neither divine nor high priest.
22:22 **His reply amazed them.** Jesus' reply stunned his interrogators, and they left without further disputation. According to Matthew, Jesus words and deeds often astonished people (see 8:27; 9:33; 15:31; 21:20).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus had been speaking from 21:24–22:14 in answer to the religious leaders' question about the source of his authority. Here in 22:15 begins a series of three confrontations where the religious leaders attempt to challenge Jesus' wisdom. However, Jesus proved that his teaching far surpassed that of the Pharisees (22:15, 34), Sadducees (22:23), and Herodians (22:16). In the end, he answered all their questions, but they could not answer one of his (22:46).
Jesus' masterful answer to the question about the propriety of paying taxes to the emperor confounded both the Herodians and the Pharisees. A simple positive answer might have been expected from someone who befriended tax collectors, but it would have alienated the Pharisees and those who were even more nationalistic. A simple negative answer might have been expected from one who had recently been praised in messianic terms (21:1-11), but it would have left Jesus open to the charge of sedition (Davies and Allison 1997:212). Most likely, the Pharisees were looking for a negative answer, but they were astounded by what they heard. The anti-Herod Pharisees were told that they should pay taxes to the Roman government because, evidently, the providence of God had placed the Romans over the Jews (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-17). The Herodians were reminded that their allegiance to the emperor could not supersede their allegiance to God. The inscription on the emperor's coin was wrong—he was neither God nor high priest, but Jesus' hypocritical questioners had brought the blasphemous coin into the Temple complex (Davies and Allison 1997:215). Jesus did not comfort the Pharisees by denying the validity of the head tax, but neither did he comfort the Herodians by affirming blind loyalty to the Romans. Ironically, Jesus had indeed taught the way of God truthfully despite the insincere flattery of his questioners (22:16). This passage has clear implications on submission to governing authorities. (For additional study of this passage, see Kennard 1950 and Loewe 1940.)
## TEXT [Commentary]
13. The Sadducees' question concerning marriage in the resurrection (22:23-33; cf. Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40)
23 That same day Jesus was approached by some Sadducees—religious leaders who say there is no resurrection from the dead. They posed this question: 24 "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies without children, his brother should marry the widow and have a child who will carry on the brother's name.'[*] 25 Well, suppose there were seven brothers. The oldest one married and then died without children, so his brother married the widow. 26 But the second brother also died, and the third brother married her. This continued with all seven of them. 27 Last of all, the woman also died. 28 So tell us, whose wife will she be in the resurrection? For all seven were married to her."
29 Jesus replied, "Your mistake is that you don't know the Scriptures, and you don't know the power of God. 30 For when the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage. In this respect they will be like the angels in heaven.
31 "But now, as to whether there will be a resurrection of the dead—haven't you ever read about this in the Scriptures? Long after Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died, God said,[*] 32 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.'[*] So he is the God of the living, not the dead."
33 When the crowds heard him, they were astounded at his teaching.
## NOTES
22:23-24 Jesus had been telling parables, so the Sadducees approached him later that same day with a sort of parable of their own (cf. Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40).
**who say there is no resurrection from the dead.** A major feature of the Sadducees' beliefs was the denial of an afterlife (Acts 23:8; Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.12-17; _War_ 2.162-166). This seems to have been due to their rejection of the Pharisees' oral tradition and their prioritization of the Torah, which does not explicitly address the afterlife.
**Teacher.** Like others who were not Jesus' disciples, they addressed Jesus as "teacher" (cf. 8:19; 9:11; 12:38; 17:24; 19:16; 22:16, 36). They came to Jesus with a hypothetical case based on Deut 25:5-10, the law of levirate marriage in which a brother was responsible to have a child with his childless, deceased brother's widow so that the deceased brother would have an heir (cf. Gen 38:6-11; Ruth 4:1-10; _m. Yevamot_ ). But as the extreme circumstances of the story develop in the following verses, it is clear that the story was meant to ridicule the idea of life after death. The Pharisees and Jesus both agreed that there is life after death, so this is a rare case of agreement between them. (Their shared belief could be based on Dan 12:2; Job 19:25-27; Isa 26:19.) But in asking the question, the Sadducees were not sincerely inquiring about religious truth. Rather, they too were looking to trap Jesus and discredit his teaching.
22:25-28 **suppose there were seven brothers.** Having set up the topic from Deut 25:5, the Sadducees posed the highly unlikely scenario in which a woman was successively married to seven brothers, each of whom died childless (cf. Tob 3:7-8). Finally, the woman herself died, and the question was raised as to which of the brothers she would be married to in the resurrection. (For the "resurrection" as the beginning of the afterlife, see Luke 14:14; John 5:29; 11:24-25; Acts 23:6; 24:15, 21; 1 Cor 15:12-24; Heb 11:35; Rev 20:5-6).
22:29 **you don't know the Scriptures, and you don't know the power of God.** As usual, Jesus did not directly answer the Sadducees' question. Instead, he told them that their ignorance of Scripture and of God's power had caused them to err. This was a strong rebuke.
22:30 **when the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage.** Jesus first responded to their anti-resurrection argument from Deut 25:5. He affirmed that people do not exist as married couples in the afterlife.
**In this respect, they will be like the angels.** The Sadducees' error assumed that the afterlife would be just like the present life. Their extrapolation from the present to the future is mistaken (Hagner 1995:641). They did not take into account the power of God to transform human existence. Since the Sadducees did not believe in angels (Acts 23:8), Blomberg (1992:333) may be correct that Jesus' reference to angels in 22:30 was meant to irritate the Sadducees, but see Davies and Allison (1997:227) for a contrary view.
22:31-32 **I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.** Second, Jesus proved the resurrection from the Scriptures, specifically from the Torah favored by the Sadducees. He cited Exod 3:6, where God speaks from the burning bush to identify himself as the God of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jesus reasoned that God's loyalty to his covenant with the patriarchs did not end at their death because death was not their end. Hundreds of years after the patriarchs, during the time of Moses, God told Moses that he "is" still their God (cf. 4 Macc 7:19; 16:25). This description of God's ongoing covenantal relationship with the patriarchs implies their eventual resurrection. God's claim to be the God of the patriarchs during their "intermediate state" between death and resurrection is tantamount to (and guarantees) his relationship with them in their final resurrected state (cf. _1 Enoch_ 20:8; 22:1-14; 60:8; 62:15; 2 Macc 7:9; 36; _4 Ezra_ 7; Josephus _War_ 3.374).
22:33 **they were astounded at his teaching.** The Sadducees had not a word to say by way of rejoinder to this argument (22:34), and the watching crowd was amazed (cf. 7:28; 13:54).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This encounter with the Sadducees is similar to the previous episode with the Pharisees. In both instances, Jesus was asked a difficult question by people who wanted to trap or discredit him, but his answer discredited them and resulted in amazement. In this case, however, the question revolved not around a hot political issue, taxation, but around the interpretation of Scripture. The Sadducees asked Jesus to deal with the notion of an afterlife in view of the command for levirate marriage in Deuteronomy 25:5. They apparently believed that Torah-based levirate marriage could not be squared with the Pharisees' notion of an afterlife. Perhaps they wanted to get Jesus to come over to their side against the Pharisees (Hagner 1995:640). Whatever their agenda, Jesus told them that their denial of the resurrection was an error caused by ignorance. Their view of resurrection and the afterlife was evidently one of mere reanimation to life as before. They were ignorant of the power of God to transform people at their resurrection so that they are no longer sexually active beings (cf. 1 Cor 15:35-40). Sexuality is part of the goodness of the initial creation but life in the "regeneration" (19:28) or "resurrection" (22:30) will transcend this aspect of the original creation. This transformation renders the Sadducees' citation of the levirate law irrelevant. The Sadducees were also ignorant of the Scriptures, specifically Exodus 3:6. Jesus argued from this verse that God's covenantal loyalty to the patriarchs implies their eventual resurrection, along with that of all God's people. In sum, "Jesus treats his opponents' cunning objection as the product of culpable ignorance and bad theology" (Davies and Allison 1997:226).
Those with a modernist, rationalistic mind-set also deny the power of God to miraculously resurrect and transform humanity, albeit for very different reasons. The fact of the resurrection of Jesus, predicted several times by Jesus and narrated afterward by Matthew, confronts this skepticism. Those with a postmodern, relativistic mindset also have a way of denying the power of the resurrection. They do not necessarily deny that the resurrection happened but deny its universal significance as taught in the New Testament (Craig in Wilkins and Moreland 1995:141-176). For Paul, the resurrection of Jesus guarantees the resurrection of the followers of Jesus. Belief in the future resurrection, with the judgment and reward that follow it, is therefore a strong motivation for faithful discipleship in the present (5:3-12; 8:11; 13:40-43; 16:27; 19:28; John 5:28-29; Acts 17:30-31; 1 Cor 15:51-58; Heb 11:35).
## TEXT [Commentary]
14. The Pharisee lawyer's question concerning the greatest commandment (22:34-40; cf. Mark 12:28-34; Luke 10:25-28)
34 But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees with his reply, they met together to question him again. 35 One of them, an expert in religious law, tried to trap him with this question: 36 "Teacher, which is the most important commandment in the law of Moses?"
37 Jesus replied, "'You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.'[*] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 A second is equally important: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[*] 40 The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments."
## NOTES
22:34-36 **they met together.** When the Pharisees learned that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they got together for yet another attempt to trap him (cf. Mark 12:28-34). There may be an allusion to the gathering of the nations against the Lord's anointed in Ps 2:2 here. It will be their last. Ironically, the Pharisees would have agreed with Jesus' response to the Sadducees, but this was a small matter in comparison to their many problems with Jesus.
**an expert in religious law.** This was a Pharisaic legal expert, not merely a disciple of the Pharisees (22:16).
**the most important commandment.** The request that Jesus identify the greatest commandment in the law may reflect a debate within Judaism at that time (Blomberg 1995:334), but its purpose was to trap Jesus, not to gain insight into the law (cf. 16:1; 19:3; 22:15). The OT itself at times presents summaries of the crucial demands of the law (e.g., Mic 6:8). A different view is found in the Mishnah, where the idea is expressed that the more commandments, the better, since there is more potential for merit for Israel ( _m. Makkot_ 3:16; _m. Avot_ 6:11). On the other hand, Montefiore and Loewe (1974:199-201) cite several passages from the Talmud and Midrashim where certain key commandments are prioritized. Of these, _b. Makkot_ 23b-24a in the Babylonian Talmud is most noteworthy, since it progressively reduces the 613 commandments of the Torah, 365 negative and 248 positive commandments, to one commandment: "the just will live by faith" (Hab 2:4).
22:37-39 **You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.** This is the most straightforward of all Jesus' answers to questions in this section of Matthew. Jesus immediately replied by citing Deut 6:5 as the greatest commandment. The words "with all your heart, . . . soul, and . . . mind" stand for the whole person; they do not distinguish aspects of one's being which are responsible to love God from those which are not. Jesus' description of Deut 6:5 as the "first and greatest commandment" is similar to the phrase "the more important aspects of the law" in 23:23.
**Love your neighbor as yourself.** Jesus followed the greatest commandment with another of similar import, Lev 19:18. The former text enjoins love for God with one's entire being, and the latter love for one's neighbor (cf. 5:43; 19:19; Josh 22:5; Luke 10:25-28). The description of Lev 19:18 alongside Deut 6:5 is striking because the second text echoes the obligation of love from the first but changes the object from God the Creator to humans as God's creatures (cf. Lev 19:34). Both of these passages were crucial to the Judaism of Jesus' day. Pious Jews recited the Shema, a prayer named for the first word of Deut 6:4, twice daily ( _m. Berakhot_ 1:1-2). Rabbinic sources allude to Lev 19:18 as the fundamental principle of the law ( _Sifra_ Lev 19:18; _b. Shabbat_ 31a; cf. Philo, _On the Special Laws_ 2.15, 63).
22:40 **The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.** After citing these two texts, Jesus stated that all of the law and prophets depend (lit. "hang") on them. In other words, the entire OT may be viewed as an exposition of the ideals expressed in these two verses. There is no mention here of the lawyer's response (but see Mark 12:32-34), or even of his departure. In contrast to the two preceding interviews, the lawyer probably found no fault with Jesus and had no rejoinder to him. Perhaps 22:46 describes this interchange as well as that of 22:41-45. At any rate, the episode closes with the words of Jesus still ringing in the reader's ears.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This third story concerning Jesus' interaction with the religious leaders is the least controversial. In this exchange, reminiscent of the teaching of 7:12, Jesus succinctly synthesized the ethical teaching of the Old Testament. A prominent part of Jesus' teaching has been his relationship to the law (5:17-48). The legal expert's question indicates how Jesus' view of the law compares with that of his contemporaries (Hagner 1995:644). Jesus did not set love over against the law but, as always, got to the heart of obedience to the law, which is love for God and for those who are created in God's image. If one truly loves God, one will love those created in his image (cf. Jas 3:9-10). When one loves human beings, one indirectly expresses love to their Creator. This basic principle is the basis of the specific stipulations of the Mosaic code, and of the message of the prophets who sought to call Israel back into obedience to Moses (9:13; 12:7; 23:23). Other New Testament texts echo this one in affirming that love is the root obligation of the law (Rom 13:9-10; Gal 5:14; Col 3:14; Jas 2:8; cf. Furnish 1972).
The Theological Significance of These Commandments. The NLT's description of Leviticus 19:18 as "equally important" to Deuteronomy 6:5 may be a bit overstated, although it has strong scholarly support (cf. _omoios_ , BDAG 706; Davies and Allison 1997:243). Literally, the expression is "similar to" or "of the same nature as." One could argue that by labeling Deuteronomy 6:5 as the "first and greatest commandment" Jesus intended it to be viewed as foundational for Leviticus 19:18. Can fallen humans begin to love their neighbors as themselves if they have not first acknowledged God's grace to them and their prior obligation to love God? Divine love to humans enables them to respond in love to God and their fellow humans. It would appear, then, that the theocentric or vertical obligation is the basis of the anthropocentric or horizontal obligation. This is the reason why the statement "I am the Lord your God" appears at the beginning of the ten commandments (Exod 20:2; Deut 5:6). While Leviticus 19:18 may be equally important as Deuteronomy 6:5, it cannot stand apart from the foundation of Deuteronomy 6:5. And without Leviticus 19:18, one cannot practice Deuteronomy 6:5, since one expresses love to God by obeying his commandments, many of which concern relationships with people. Hagner (1995:648) correctly notes that loving God involves reverence and obedience, while loving humans involves serving them and seeking their well-being.
Leviticus 19:18 and its New Testament echoes assume that one will instinctively love oneself. The modern psychological jargon about the necessity of learning to love oneself as a prerequisite for loving God and one's neighbor seems to turn the biblical pattern on its head (cf. Eph 5:28-29). No doubt one must have a biblical view of oneself as a flawed yet redeemed individual, but this hardly amounts to uncritical self-affirmation. For Paul, it is crucial to view oneself as a new creation "in Christ" (e.g., Rom 6:1-4; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 3:1-4), but this amounts to self-crucifixion, which is not far from the counsel of Jesus to take up one's cross (Gal 2:20; 6:14). For Jesus, self-love is death, and self-denial is life (10:38-39; 16:24-25).
## TEXT [Commentary]
15. Jesus questions the Pharisees concerning the Messiah's sonship (22:41-46; cf. Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44)
41 Then, surrounded by the Pharisees, Jesus asked them a question: 42 "What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?"
They replied, "He is the son of David."
43 Jesus responded, "Then why does David, speaking under the inspiration of the Spirit, call the Messiah 'my Lord'? For David said,
44 'The LORD said to my Lord,
Sit in the place of honor at my right hand
until I humble your enemies beneath your feet.'[*]
45 Since David called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?"
46 No one could answer him. And after that, no one dared to ask him any more questions.
## NOTES
22:41-42 **What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?** After enduring three insincere questions from his enemies and silencing them with his wise answers, Jesus took the initiative and reciprocated with three questions of his own (cf. Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44). Jesus' first question regarding the sonship of the Messiah was an easy question and is answered correctly by the Pharisees. The Messiah is "the son of David" (2 Sam 7:8, 13-14; Ps 89:3-4; Isa 11:1, 10; Jer 23:5; Matt 1:1; 9:27-28; 20:30; 21:9, 15; John 7:42; Rom 15:12; Rev 5:5; 22:16). However, this is not the whole truth of the matter, as the next question shows. Evidently, the Pharisees viewed Davidic messianic sonship in nationalistic, militaristic terms. They looked for a powerful human being to liberate them from their Roman oppressors. In so doing they looked past Jesus, whose Kingdom promised no such thing.
22:43-44 **why does David . . . call the Messiah 'my Lord'?** Jesus' second question focuses on the more profound truth that David called his son (the Messiah) "my Lord." Normally, sons speak in such terms of their fathers, not fathers of their sons. How can David's son be his Lord? How can someone possess higher authority than the king of Israel?
**For David said, 'The Lord said to my Lord.'** This reference to Ps 110 is theologically significant in that it affirms and depends upon the Davidic authorship of the psalm and the Spirit's moving David to write it (cf. Acts 1:16; 2:25-31; 4:25; Josephus _Antiquities_ 6.166). If David did not write the Psalm, Jesus' argument evaporates, since a third party is speaking about what God said to David (or another king), described as "my Lord." There are two different Heb. words for "Lord" in Ps 110:1, cited in 22:44—"The LORD ( _yhwh_ [TH3068, ZH3378]) said to my Lord ( _'adonay_ [TH136, ZH151])."
**Sit in the place of honor at my right hand.** The reference to David's Lord ( _'adonay_ ) sitting at the LORD's (Yahweh's) right hand speaks of messianic authority in terms reminiscent of Ps 2:7-9 and Dan 7:13-14. This reference foreshadows 26:64, where Jesus' application of Dan 7:13-14 to himself is taken by the high priest as blasphemous. For further discussion of the messianic interpretation of Ps 110, see Fitzmeyer (1997:113-126) and Hay (1973). For other NT citations and allusions to this psalm, see Acts 2:34-35; 1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:20; Col 3:1; Heb 1:3, 13; 5:6, 10; 7:17, 21; 8:1; 10:12-13; Rev 3:21.
22:45-46 **Since David called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?** Jesus' third and final question reverses the second question: how can David's Lord be his son? The answer to the enigma is found in Jesus' dual "paternity." He is David's son because he is humanly descended from David, but he is David's Lord because he is God's Son. Jesus' transcendent sonship is prominently featured in Matthew (1:23; 2:15; 3:17; 4:3, 6; 7:21; 8:29; 11:25-27; 16:16; 17:5; 21:37-39; 22:2; 24:36; 26:29, 39, 42, 53, 63-64; 27:40, 43, 46, 54; 28:19). It is also found in OT texts other than Ps 110, featuring a Messiah who transcends human limitations (Ps 45:6-7; Isa 9:6; Jer 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Zech 12:10), especially Isa 11:1, 10, where the Messiah is both David's offshoot and David's root. The Pharisees and other religious leaders cease interrogating Jesus at this point. They cannot refute the truth of his interpretation of the OT, yet they are unwilling to accept his divine sonship. Their plot against him continues (cf. 26:3-5, 14-16; 27:62). Jesus had been temporarily vindicated, but in view of his repeated predictions about what would happen in Jerusalem, there is no reason for celebration.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus took the initiative to question the Pharisees, but he was not merely attempting to trap them, as they were him. He was not involved in trying to win a debate, but in trying to win their hearts with his teaching of the Old Testament (23:37). The issues they raised, the validity of Rome's taxes, eschatological speculation, and even fundamental ethical obligations, were not of paramount importance at this decisive point in Israel's history. The paramount issue was that they were in the process of rejecting the true Messiah—Jesus himself. His relationship to King David was worthy of their consideration at this critical moment. The religious leaders and Jesus agreed in affirming that the Messiah is David's son (22:42), but the real question is what this affirmation of messianic identity means. Jesus' second and third questions unpack the matter.
Jesus' second and third questions address the same issue from opposite directions. The second question in 22:43 seems to assume the humanity of the Messiah as David's descendant. Assuming the Messiah is the human descendant of David, how does David call him Lord in Psalm 110:1? The third question puts it the opposite way, if the Messiah is David's Lord, how can he be David's descendant? In Matthew's theology, Jesus' humble family and Davidic roots (1:1, 16-17, 20; cf. Luke 1:27, 32, 69; 2:4, 11) are not the whole story. Jesus is also the miraculously-born, divinely-attested Son of God (1:23; 3:17; 16:16; 17:5). Matthew had previously implied that Jesus is greater than David (Matt 12:1-4; cf. 12:6, 8, 41), and now he explains why. The son of David is also the Son of God. But the Pharisees would not accept a Davidic Messiah who was greater than David—who is David's Lord. On this sad note, Matthew's story of Jesus' conflicts with the religious leaders ends. Nothing more could be said. Even today this is the basic difference between Judaism's and Christianity's respective messiahs.
Summary and Transition. Matthew 22 continues to describe the heated controversies between Jesus and the religious leaders in Jerusalem that began soon after the Triumphal Entry. The parable of the wedding feast (22:1-14) is the third in a series begun in 21:28. All three parables stress the fact that the leaders rejected the rule of God in Messiah Jesus, using the images of a disobedient son, wicked tenant farmers, and rebellious subjects who refuse their king's invitation.
Following the parable sequence, there are three controversy stories. The Pharisees plotted to trap Jesus in his words and sent their disciples to ask him about the payment of the poll tax (22:15-22). Then the Sadducees attempted to confound Jesus with their question about a woman who had seven husbands (22:23-33). A Pharisaic legal expert then came to ask Jesus about the greatest commandment in the law (22:34-40). Finally, the chapter concludes as Jesus "turns the tables" with three questions of his own on the paternity of the Messiah and the interpretation of Psalm 110. The Pharisees were unable to answer, and from then on they did not ask Jesus any more questions (22:41-46). This final confrontation left Jesus and the religious leaders in a hopeless impasse, thereby leading to Jesus' pronouncement of woes against them in the next chapter (23).
All in all, Matthew 22 takes the verbal hostilities between Jesus and the religious leaders to its sorry end. Jesus' parables magnify Israel's rebellion and guilt in not submitting to the rule of God in Christ. The religious leaders attempted to trap Jesus and to discredit his teaching. If there was ever any doubt, it is now abundantly clear that there can be no rapprochement between Jesus and the leaders of Israel. His final question to them was unanswerable; the only way that David can call his messiah-son "Lord" is if his son is divine. The Pharisees who wanted to trap Jesus by challenging his identity were now themselves trapped by Jesus who had identified himself as David's descendant and his exalted Lord. At this point, all dialogue ceased, with ominous implications.
## TEXT [Commentary]
16. Jesus' teachings on leadership (23:1-12; cf. Mark 12:38-40; Luke 20:45-47)
1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 "The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses.[*] 3 So practice and obey whatever they tell you, but don't follow their example. For they don't practice what they teach. 4 They crush people with unbearable religious demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden.
5 "Everything they do is for show. On their arms they wear extra wide prayer boxes with Scripture verses inside, and they wear robes with extra long tassels.[*] 6 And they love to sit at the head table at banquets and in the seats of honor in the synagogues. 7 They love to receive respectful greetings as they walk in the marketplaces, and to be called 'Rabbi.'[*]
8 "Don't let anyone call you 'Rabbi,' for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters.[*] 9 And don't address anyone here on earth as 'Father,' for only God in heaven is your Father. 10 And don't let anyone call you 'Teacher,' for you have only one teacher, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you must be a servant. 12 But those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted."
## NOTES
23:1-2 **The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses.** The various religious leaders with whom Jesus had been in conflict since 21:12 are no longer in view, evidently because they were incorrigible (cf. Mark 12:38-40; Luke 20:45-47). Jesus' words to the crowds and his disciples surprisingly seem to authenticate the role of his opponents, the scribes (NLT "teachers of religious law") and Pharisees. The scribes were teachers of the law who frequently espoused the Pharisaic oral traditions. The two groups were previously associated in Matthew (5:20; 12:38; 15:1) and in chapter 23 they receive the brunt of Jesus' denunciation (23:2, 13-15, 23, 25, 27, 29). But here, Jesus acknowledges their capacity as "the official interpreters of the law of Moses" (lit. "they have seated themselves in the seat of Moses"). The seat of Moses may refer to an actual seat in the synagogues where authoritative teaching occurred, but the evidence for this comes from times later than the first century (Davies and Allison 1997:268). In any event, occupying the "chair" signified continuity with Moses and the ongoing exercise of the authority which came from Sinai ( _m. Avot_ 1:1, 3-4, 6, 8, 10, 12; 2:8).
23:3 **practice and obey whatever they tell you.** Jesus' counsel that his disciples obey the teachings of the scribes and Pharisees echoes Deut 17:10 (23:3, cf. 23:23), but it is truly surprising in light of his earlier confrontations with them. Therefore, interpreters tend to downplay the words by adding implied qualifications to them. France (1985:324) views this language as tongue in cheek, and Carson (1984:473-474) views 23:2-3a as irony or sarcasm, followed by Jesus' true intent in 23:3b-4, but these interpretatations are not convincing.
**but don't follow their example.** Jesus enjoins total obedience to the leaders' teachings in spite of their hypocritical example. What they teach should be followed because of their authoritative position, but their example was inconsistent with this teaching and should not be imitated (cf. Rom 2:21-24).
23:4 **unbearable religious demands.** This interprets Jesus' metaphor, which lit. speaks of heavy burdens being loaded on people's shoulders (cf. Luke 11:46). The heavy burden of the Pharisaic system contrasts with the light load of Jesus, expressed in 11:30 (cf. Acts 15:10, 28; 1 John 5:3).
23:5 **Everything they do is for show.** Jesus exposes Pharisaic externalism with its shallow purpose of garnering human applause. The disciples must not imitate the motives of the scribes and Pharisees any more than their example. The general statement of 23:5a is illustrated by six examples arranged in three pairs in 23:5b-7. Compare this passage to 6:1-18, where Jesus contrasts such externalism with the norms of the Kingdom for genuine religious practice.
**prayer boxes . . . tassels.** The prayer boxes and tassels were public displays of piety. "Prayer boxes" (lit. "phylacteries"; so NLT mg), are small leather boxes containing Torah portions and are worn due to a literal interpretation of the law (Exod 13:9; Deut 6:8; 11:18). "Tassels" or fringes on robes or prayer shawls have been mentioned previously in Matthew and are based on the OT laws (Num 15:37-39; Deut 22:12; Matt 9:20; 14:36).
23:6 **head table . . . seats of honor.** Seeking prominence in public gatherings was another indication of these leaders' desire for prestige (Luke 11:43; 14:7-11; 20:46; cf. Jas 2:1-4).
23:7 **respectful greetings . . . 'Rabbi.'** The third pair of examples concerns the love of being addressed with prestigious titles in public. At that time "Rabbi" was a respectful greeting which lit. meant "my great one" (cf. 26:25, 49; Mark 9:5; 11:21; John 1:38, 49; 3:2). After the events of AD 70, it would come to describe someone who occupied an ordained position of religious and civil leadership.
23:8-10 **Don't let anyone call you 'Rabbi.'** At this point Jesus turns from denouncing the religious leaders' false piety to commanding true piety among his disciples (23:8 is lit. "But don't let . . ."). Responding to the final Pharisaic practice mentioned in 23:7, Jesus forbade disciples of the Kingdom to use ostentatious greetings involving lofty titles. Each verse in this section consists of a prohibition followed by a reason. The disciples are forbidden the use of respectful titles such as "Rabbi," "Father" (Acts 7:2; 22:1), and "Teacher," (or "leader"), because no human being is worthy of such honor. Rather, such titles should be reserved for the heavenly Father and Jesus the Messiah.
23:11-12 **must be a servant.** Lit., "will be your servant." Here the contrasting norms of the Kingdom are explained in words reminiscent of Jesus' answer to the request of the mother of James and John (20:25-28; cf. 18:4). True greatness is a matter of service, not title. Those, like the scribes and Pharisees, who seek to exalt themselves will be humbled, but Jesus' disciples who seek humble service will be exalted. This is the language of the eschaton—those who respond to God's rule in Jesus the Messiah have humbled themselves now and will be exalted in the last days. The Pharisees' vain attempt to exalt themselves over God's rule in Christ will result in their being humbled.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Introduction to Matthew 23. Matthew 23 is difficult to place in the flow of argument in Matthew. Since it is discourse, it is tempting to connect it with chapters 24–25 (e.g., Blomberg 1992:25, 49, 339). If this is done, the discourse follows the pattern of Matthew 13 (cf. 13:34-36), with initial public teaching (ch 23) followed by private instruction for the disciples (chs 24–25). However, the public and private portions of Matthew 13 are united in theme, genre, and literary structure, whereas there are obvious differences between chapters 23 and 24–25 in terms of audience (compare 23:1, 13 with 24:1-3), content, and tone. Therefore, it is probably better to view chapter 23 as the climax of Jesus' confrontations with the religious leaders in Jerusalem, which began in 21:15 (Hagner 1995:654). At the same time, one must note that there are clear connections between chapters 23 and 24–25, primarily the references to persecution of Jesus' disciples (23:29-36; cf. 24:9-13, 21-22; 25:34-40), the desolation of the Temple (23:38; cf. 24:1-3, 15) and the return of Jesus (23:39; cf. 24:3, 30, 37, 39, 42, 44; 25:6, 13, 19, 31).
Matthew 23 seems to involve three major sections. First, Jesus warns the crowds and his disciples against the errors of the scribes and Pharisees (23:1-12). Then he denounces the scribes and Pharisees with prophetic woe—oracles against their sin that tie their rebellion to that of their ancestors (23:13-36). Finally, he poignantly speaks to rebellious Jerusalem in words of lament that depict his longings for her people, as well as their deserved judgment (23:37-39).
Beginning in 21:12, Jesus has argued successively with the following: (1) the chief priests and scribes (21:12-17); (2) the chief priests and elders of the people (21:23-22:14; according to 21:45, this included Pharisees); (3) certain Pharisees (specifically, their disciples, 22:15-22); (4) certain Sadducees (22:23-33); (5) certain Pharisees (specifically, a lawyer; 22:34-46). These arguments take the form of questions by the various religious leaders (21:16, 23; 22:17, 28, 36), and responses by Jesus, which include scriptural quotations (21:16, 42; 22:32, 37, 39, 44), parables (21:28-30, 33-39; 22:1-14), and questions directed back at the leaders (21:16, 24-25, 28, 31, 40, 42; 22:18, 20, 42-45). Finally, the disputes come to the point where no further dialogue is possible, and the indictments of Matthew 23 ensue.
Matthew 23 also serves as a sort of introduction to the eschatological discourse of Matthew 24–25. Jesus' disputes with the religious leaders in Jerusalem end in an impasse (22:46). Jesus then warns his followers against being like those leaders (23:1-12) and pronounces woes upon them (23:13-36). He laments Jerusalem's fate, yet he holds out hope for its future (23:37-39). As he departs the Temple, perhaps reenacting the departure of the Shekinah, his disciples nervously point out to him the glorious architecture (24:1). At this point he speaks bluntly about the coming destruction of the Temple, and the disciples respond with the question that gives rise to the discourse, "when will all this happen? What sign will signal your return and the end of the world?" (24:3). Thus the judgment of Jerusalem, primarily its leaders and its Temple, is justified in Matthew 23 before it is predicted in Matthew 24–25. (For further study of Matt 23, see Davies and Allison 1997:257-263; Garland 1979 and Newport 1995.)
Matthew 23 and Anti-Semitism. It is a fact that Matthew 23 looms large in discussions of the New Testament and anti-Semitism. Matthew 23 has been called "a unique, unparalleled specimen of invective" (Sandmel 1978:68; cf. Beare 1981: 461). Matthew presents Jesus' disputes with the Jewish religious leaders in bold relief, and those disputes come to a head with Jesus' prophetic pronouncements of woe against them in Matthew 23. These strident denunciations disturb many people today, but heated rhetoric in the service of religious disputes was quite the norm in ancient times (Johnson 1989; Saldarini 1992a). In fact, it can be argued that such rhetoric was used in Jewish circles since the days of the biblical prophets, and that it continued to be used in the days of the Second Temple as various Jewish groups critiqued the religious establishment in Jerusalem. It has been argued in the Introduction to this commentary that Matthew wrote his Gospel before the "parting of the ways" between the Christian church and Judaism. At the time of his writing, "Christianity" (viewed today as a separate religion from Judaism) was still a sect of the diverse Judaism(s) of the period before the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. Therefore, Matthew must not be viewed anachronistically as a Christian critic of the Jewish people but as a Christian Jew who was engaged in a vigorous intramural dispute with other Jews over the identity of the Jew, Jesus (Davies and Allison 1997:260-261; Harrington 1991:303-305; Overman 1990; 1996:302-304; Saldarini 1994:59-63; Sim 1999:148-149).
Matthew was not attacking Jews or Judaism as an Gentile outsider claiming that his new religion has superseded the outdated religion of the Jews. This mistaken approach may be traced to the polemical writings of some of the early church fathers, but it is anachronistic to find it in Matthew on the lips of Jesus. On the contrary, Matthew presents the dispute of Jesus with the religious leaders as a thoroughly _Jewish_ prophetic critique of the Jerusalem religious establishment. This must not be misconstrued as an attack on the Jewish people of all times or even of Jesus' day. Rather, Jesus' stringent critique was directed against certain scribes and Pharisees who were prominent in the religious establishment of Jerusalem. Davies and Allison (1997:260-261) explain this perspective very well:
The ferocity of rhetoric in Jewish texts, and especially the volatile language of the Dead Sea Scrolls, shows that Matthew's polemic need not signal a break with Judaism. So far from that being the case, we indeed deny that Matthew is a Christian critique of Judaism. It is rather a Jewish-Christian critique of Jewish opponents—and therefore no more "anti-Semitic" than the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Exposition of Matthew 23:1-12. Matthew 23:1-12 is directed to the crowds and disciples, not to the religious leaders with whom Jesus had been in conflict. But the leaders were still very much in the picture, as Jesus commanded his disciples not to imitate their hypocrisy (23:3b), oppressive demands (23:4), and love of prestige and power (23:5-7). In contrast, Jesus' disciples are to reverence only the Father and the Messiah (23:8-10). Their community must imitate the egalitarian model of the family, not the hierarchical model of the Jewish religious leaders (cf. 20:25). That Jesus himself as their teacher or leader humbly practiced what he preached is not stated here, but it is clear from 20:28.
In contrast, the scribes and Pharisees did not practice what they preached. This inconsistency is the reason why Jesus warned his disciples against them. Jesus did not attack the legitimacy of their authority, but he told his disciples to follow their exposition of the Torah and the halakha (23:3a, 23). Many expositors have great difficulty with this point because they assume that Matthew's community had already broken from Judaism. But 23:3a makes good sense if Matthew's community was still engaged in an intramural dispute with the leaders of formative Judaism.
## TEXT [Commentary]
17. Jesus' prophetic woes against the religious leaders (23:13-36)
13 "What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you shut the door of the Kingdom of Heaven in people's faces. You won't go in yourselves, and you don't let others enter either.[*]
15 "What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you cross land and sea to make one convert, and then you turn that person into twice the child of hell[*] you yourselves are!
16 "Blind guides! What sorrow awaits you! For you say that it means nothing to swear 'by God's Temple,' but that it is binding to swear 'by the gold in the Temple.' 17 Blind fools! Which is more important—the gold or the Temple that makes the gold sacred? 18 And you say that to swear 'by the altar' is not binding, but to swear 'by the gifts on the altar' is binding. 19 How blind! For which is more important—the gift on the altar or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 When you swear 'by the altar,' you are swearing by it and by everything on it. 21 And when you swear 'by the Temple,' you are swearing by it and by God, who lives in it. 22 And when you swear 'by heaven,' you are swearing by the throne of God and by God, who sits on the throne.
23 "What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens,[*] but you ignore the more important aspects of the law—justice, mercy, and faith. You should tithe, yes, but do not neglect the more important things. 24 Blind guides! You strain your water so you won't accidentally swallow a gnat, but you swallow a camel
25 "What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are so careful to clean the outside of the cup and the dish, but inside you are filthy—full of greed and self-indulgence! 26 You blind Pharisee! First wash the inside of the cup and the dish,[*] and then the outside will become clean, too.
27 "What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people's bones and all sorts of impurity. 28 Outwardly you look like righteous people, but inwardly your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness.
29 "What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed, and you decorate the monuments of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. 30 Then you say, 'If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would never have joined them in killing the prophets.'
31 "But in saying that, you testify against yourselves that you are indeed the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead and finish what your ancestors started. 33 Snakes! Sons of vipers! How will you escape the judgment of hell?
34 "Therefore, I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers of religious law. But you will kill some by crucifixion, and you will flog others with whips in your synagogues, chasing them from city to city. 35 As a result, you will be held responsible for the murder of all godly people of all time—from the murder of righteous Abel to the murder of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you killed in the Temple between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 I tell you the truth, this judgment will fall on this very generation."
## NOTES
23:13-14 These verses are the first of seven prophetic denunciations against the Pharisees (23:13, 15, 16, 23, 25, 27, 29; cf. 11:21; 18:7; 24:19; 26:24). Each woe, except that of 23:16 which refers to the "blind guides," is spoken to the "teachers of religious laws and you Pharisees. Hypocrites!" The general pattern seems to be (1) pronouncement of woe, (2) reason for pronouncement, and (3) explanation of the reason for the pronouncement. The stark contrast between Pharisaic "righteousness" and Kingdom norms is reminiscent of the antitheses of the Sermon on the Mount in 5:21–6:33.
**What sorrow awaits you.** This renders the words "woe to you," a phrase that reminds the reader of prophetic oracles in the OT. See the commentary below for discussion of this motif.
**you shut the door of the Kingdom of Heaven in people's faces.** The first woe goes right to the heart of the matter with the ironic charge that the scribes and Pharisees who claim to open the door actually keep people out of the Kingdom. The scribes and Pharisees "are not leaders but misleaders" (Davies and Allison 1997:285). Not only do they not enter the Kingdom, they prevent others from doing so. This language is similar to that of Jer 23:2 and Ezek 34:2-8, which likens the wicked leaders of Israel to shepherds which feed themselves and scatter the flock rather than feed them.
The textual authenticity of 23:14 is extremely doubtful; thus, it is not included in the NLT text (see mg). Many early and diverse manuscripts ( B D L Z 33 ita syrs copsa) do not include it, and those manuscripts that do include it have disparity in placement (some place it after 23:12). The verse was likely interpolated from Mark 12:40 and/or Luke 20:47 (Metzger 1994:50). Whatever its textual authenticity, 23:14 resonates with the prevalent prophetic theme of justice for widows (cf., e.g., Isa 1:23).
23:15 **cross land and sea to make one convert.** The second woe builds on the theme of the first. The efforts of the scribes and Pharisees to convert others (lit. "to make proselytes," cf. Acts 2:10-11; 6:5; 13:43) are tragically ironic. It is not certain whether this refers to efforts to convert Gentiles to Judaism or efforts to convert Jews to Pharisaism. Possibly both are in view. McKnight (1991:106-108) concludes that the Pharisees did not actively pursue new converts from among the Gentiles, but that they urged that "God-fearing" Gentiles (cf. Acts 10:22; 13:16, 43; 16:14; 17:17; 18:7) become full converts to Judaism and observe the Pharisaic halakha. The description of the extent of their efforts ("land and sea") recalls Jonah 1:9; Hag 2:6, 21.
**then you turn that person into twice the child of hell you yourselves are.** Since they themselves were not entering the Kingdom, their efforts only result in others not entering it. Far from their converts becoming children of the Kingdom (18:3), they become children of hell (8:12).
23:16-24 While the first two woes deal with the general matter of preventing access to the Kingdom, the next two (23:16, 23) speak of specific legal rulings or _halakhot_ (Heb. plural of halakha). This woe regarding oaths (cf. 5:33-37) is the most extensively developed of the seven oracles. It takes the form of pronouncement of woe (23:16a), description of the two acts that occasion the woe (23:16b, 18), two rhetorical questions underlining the falseness of the Pharisaic distinctions (23:17, 19), and three concluding statements on oaths (23:20-22).
23:16-19 **Blind guides.** The bitingly sarcastic reference to the Pharisees as "blind guides" is repeated in 23:24 (cf. 15:14).
**you say that it means nothing to swear 'by God's Temple' but that it is binding to swear 'by the gold in the Temple.'** This casuistry of the Pharisees amounted to an evasion of duty before God and was roundly condemned. Two different loopholes involving empty distinctions are exposed, one in 23:16-17 concerning the Temple and gold within it, and another in 23:18-19, involving the altar and what is sacrificed on it. Although the scribes and Pharisees viewed some oaths as binding and others as non-binding, Jesus taught that this distinction was meaningless and that all oaths are valid (23:20-22). He totally rejected their halakhic distinctions on valid and invalid oaths. Previously in this Gospel, Jesus flatly denied the need for any oaths at all (5:33-37). It is well known that the halakha on oaths and vows was very important in Second Temple Judaism ( _m. Nedarim_ and CD 15).
23:20-22 These verses draw three conclusions from the preceding two examples. When it comes to oath-taking, there is no valid distinction between the altar and what is offered on it (23:20, against 23:18). There is also no difference between the Temple and him who dwells in it (23:21; against 23:16). Finally, there is no difference between heaven and the throne of God and the One who sits on it (23:22; cf. 5:34). A person may not reduce his obligation to be true to an oath by constructing facile distinctions between the objects mentioned in that oath. Personal integrity means that one does what one says one will do (cf. 5:33-37).
23:23 **you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens.** Lit., "you tithe the mint, the dill, and the cumin" (so NLT mg). For the Pharisees, only food that had been tithed was ritually pure and lawful to eat. Cf. _m. Avot_ 1:16; _Demai_ 2:1.
**but you ignore the more important aspects of the law—justice, mercy, and faith.** Here the Pharisees were condemned not for tithing herbs, understood as a crop (Lev 27:30; Deut 14:22-23), but for tithing herbs without attending to the weightier matters of the law (cf. Luke 11:42). _M. Shevi'it_ 9:1 exempts certain herbs from the tithing requirement. NLT's "important aspects" might be taken to imply that tithing herbs is not important. But Jesus did not say this—he said justice, mercy, and faith are more important than tithing herbs. Jesus did not support a hierarchical ethic but cut through the external observance to the central value or ethic which supports that observance: justice, mercy, and faithfulness (cf. Hos 6:6, cited in Matt 9:13; 12:7, and also Mic 6:8; Zech 7:9-10).
23:24 **You strain your water so you won't accidentally swallow a gnat, but you swallow a camel!** In terms of hyperbolic metaphor, the Pharisees were scrupulous in straining out gnats (tithing herbs), but they should have been more concerned to guard against swallowing camels (omitting the weightier matters). It is interesting to note that the Aramaic words for "gnat" (qalma) and "camel" (gamla) are quite similar, so Jesus' hyperbole was also a pun. Additionally, this language speaks to the inconsistency of the Pharisees, since both gnats and camels were unclean and could not be eaten (Lev 11:4, 23).
23:25-26 The fifth and sixth woes together address the Pharisees' neglect of heart piety in favor of mere outward piety.
**you are so careful to clean the outside . . . but inside you are filthy.** In the fifth woe, the scribes and Pharisees are described metaphorically as those who clean the outside of tableware but neglect the inside (cf. Luke 11:39-41). Despite their zeal for the Torah and their traditions, they were people characterized by extortion and self-indulgence. Davies and Allison (1997:296-299) are probably correct in saying that Jesus was not disputing existing Pharisaic tradition here but was simply using the washing of tableware metaphorically (cf. Blomberg 1992:347). Pharisaic fastidiousness about such matters renders the metaphor fitting, but Jesus was not attacking that fastidiousness per se.
23:27-28 **you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people's bones.** Jesus turned from the metaphor of cups and dishes to the macabre simile of tombs (cf. Luke 11:44). Tombs are made beautiful on the outside, but on the inside there are only bones and decaying corpses (which, by the way, ritually defile the Pharisees). It is not clear whether the whitewash on the tombs was intended to further beautify their architecture or to indicate that the bones inside were a cause of ritual impurity (Davies and Allison 1997:300-302; Garland 1979:152-157).
**Outwardly you look like righteous people, but inwardly your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness.** The scribes and Pharisees appeared to men as righteous, but their hearts were full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. For Jesus the law must be obeyed from the heart. Outwardly lawful behavior may conceal a lawless heart (5:20, 22, 28; 6:1; 7:22-23; 12:34; 13:41; 15:7-9, 19; 18:35; 24:12, 48).
23:29-30 **you build tombs for the prophets.** The simile of tombs from the sixth woe becomes the transitional motif which links the sixth to the seventh. But here the tombs are those of the prophets, which the Pharisees adorn while claiming that they would never have taken part with their ancestors in killing the prophets. This seventh woe is climactic in that it addresses the root problem of all the others. If Israel had listened to the prophets whom God sent to them, they would not have faced the consequences of God's judgment announced by the prophets. This theme is developed in the commentary below. For references to well-known tombs in ancient sources, see Acts 2:29; 1 Macc 13:27-30; Josephus _Antiquities_ 7.392; 13.249; 18.108; 20.95; _War_ 4.531-532.
23:31 **you are indeed the descendants of those who murdered the prophets.** Jesus pointed out that their disavowal of complicity in the murder of the prophets unwittingly implicated them in the guilt of their ancestors (cf. Luke 11:47-48). Jesus was using the word "descendants" to imply inherited character traits, not just physical descent. Modern sayings such as "a chip off the old block" or "an apple does not fall from the tree" speak to the same point.
23:32 **finish what your ancestors started.** Jesus' ironic imperative (cf. Amos 4:4-5 in light of Amos 5:5) is lit. "fill up the measure of your ancestors," and should be viewed in the context of Matthew's characteristic motif of OT fulfillment. (See the discussion in the Major Themes section of the Introduction.) Jesus was speaking of his impending crucifixion as the culmination of Israel's historical pattern of rejecting its own prophets. The motif of sin coming to its full measure is found elsewhere (Gen 15:16; 1 Thess 2:16). Stephen, Paul, and the author of Hebrews also reflect on Israel's sad history of rejecting its own prophets (Acts 7:52; 1 Thess 2:14-16; Heb 11:32-38).
23:33 **Snakes! Sons of vipers! How will you escape the judgment of hell?** Jesus' epithets recall 3:7; 12:34. The sobering "judgment of hell" recalls 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15.
23:34-35 This section takes Israel's rejection of God's messengers one step further to the persecution of Jesus' disciples after his death. This continues the seventh woe but also forms a sort of summary of all seven woes. Just as the murder of Jesus was anticipated by that of the prophets, so the murder of Jesus augurs the persecution and death of his followers, who succeed him in the ministry of the Kingdom (cf. 10:16-33; 20:23; Acts 7:52; 12:1-3). The murder of Jesus will bring horrible judgment because it is the ultimate atrocity in an atrocious sequence which began when Cain murdered his brother Abel (Gen 4:8ff).
**righteous Abel to . . . Zechariah son of Berekiah.** The final woe and its development concerning Zechariah assumes that Jesus is the climactic prophet of God. Abel and Zechariah were the first and last martyrs of the Heb. Bible, which ends not with Malachi but with 2 Chronicles. The mention of the martyrdom of Zechariah son of Berekiah (cf. Zech 1:1) causes some problems in identification, but clearly Matthew has in mind the murder of Zechariah the son of Jehoida, whose martyrdom is recorded in 2 Chr 24:21. (For discussions of this problem see Blomberg 1987:193-195; Gundry 1967:86-88; Hagner 1995:676-677.)
23:36 **this judgment will fall on this very generation.** Jesus solemnly reaffirmed that the wicked generation which rebelled against his words and works will bear the brunt of the woes he has just uttered (11:16; 12:39, 41, 42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 24:34). Since they are in solidarity with those who murdered Zechariah, it is as though they did it themselves. Though the woes are directed against the leaders, the entire generation that followed the leaders gave tacit approval to the leaders and became implicated in their guilt.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Prophetic Oracles of Woe. The Old Testament prophets frequently cried woe against Israel's sins. For example, see Isaiah 5:8, 11, 18, 20, 21, 22 (a series of six woes); Amos 5:18; 6:1, 4; Habakkuk 2:6, 9, 12, 15, 19 (a series of five woes); Zechariah 11:17. These oracles spoke with a blend of anger, grief, and alarm about the excruciating consequences that would come upon Israel due to her sin. After the pronouncement of woe, such oracles contain a description of the persons upon whom the woe will come. This description amounts to the reason why the woe is merited. Thus, a woe oracle states the conclusion before the premises on which it is based. Woe oracles may have developed from covenant curses (Deut 27:15) or even from funeral lamentations (Jer 22:18). The New Testament contains oracles of woe in other places besides Matthew 23 (Luke 6:24-26; Rev 18:10, 16, 19). Woe oracles are also found in Second Temple Jewish literature. The Qumran literature has notable woe oracles, including some against Jerusalem and its leaders (2Q23 1:2; 4Q179 1 i 4, 1 ii 1; 4Q511 63 iii 4-5). _1 Enoch_ contains four series of woes ( _1 Enoch_ 94:6-95:7; 96:4-8; 98:9-99:2; 100:7-9). _2 Enoch_ 52 contains a series of alternating blessings and cursings (cf. Luke 6:20-26). The Talmud also contains exclamations of woe.
It is important to note that the prophet's attitude in oracles of woe is not simply one of anger. Clearly the prophet's anger at Israel's sin is tempered at times by his grief and alarm at the horrible price Israel will pay for that sin. The prophet speaks for God against sin and this explains his anger. But that anger is directed toward his own people, and this explains the grief. The palpable pathos of woe oracles was due to the prophet's dual solidarities. Isaiah, for example, pronounced woe upon himself, not only because he himself was a person of unclean lips but also because he lived among a people of unclean lips. The prophet must speak for God, but in announcing oracles of judgment, he knew that he was announcing the doom of his own people.
Two important conclusions flow from this brief sketch of prophetic woe oracles. First, Jesus' pronouncements of woe upon the religious leaders were not innovative. His severe language must have sounded familiar to the religious leaders, given their ostensible acquaintance with the Old Testament. To the extent that these leaders were aware of Second Temple sectarian literature, Jesus' woes would have sounded rather contemporary. Second, Jesus' pronouncement of woe oracles was not merely an exercise in spiting his enemies. Rather, as is made clear in 23:37, his words come from at least as much grief as anger.
The Charge of Hypocrisy. Matthew spoke explicitly of hypocrites thirteen times in his Gospel (6:2, 5, 16; 7:5; 15:7; 22:18; 23:13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29; 24:51). All but one (23:16) of the seven pronouncements of woe in Matthew 23 speak of the scribes and Pharisees as hypocrites, and even 23:16 portrays the scribes and Pharisees as hypocrites—"blind guides." The various words related to "hypocrite" come not from the Hebrew Bible but from the Graeco-Roman world, describing someone who gave an answer, interpreted an oracle, mimicked another person, or acted a part in a drama. At times, the idea of pretending in order to deceive is present, but the word itself does not have a negative connotation (BDAG 1038). In Matthew hypocrites are more specifically those who live for fleeting human applause rather than for eternal divine approval (6:2, 5, 16). Hypocrites honor God outwardly, while their hearts are far from God (15:7-8). A hypocrite pretends to have sincere religious interest while questioning Jesus with evil intent. Further, such a person says one thing but does another (23:3; cf. Rom 2:21-24). Thus, in Matthew, hypocrisy involves religious fraud, a basic discrepancy or inconsistency between one's outwardly godly behavior and one's inner evil thoughts or motives.
Isaiah 29:13 may be the most important prophetic text condemning religious fraud. This passage, cited by Jesus in 15:7-9, concerns the religious leaders (Isa 29:1, 10, 14, 20-21) of Jerusalem ("Ariel"; Isa 29:1, 2, 7). The fraud described there involves seemingly pious words and traditional rulings which in reality disguise hearts that are far from God and plans that are thought to be hidden from God's sight (Isa 29:15). Israel's charismatic leaders, the prophets, were mute (Isa 29:10-12) and its judges were corrupt (Isa 29:20-21). But in spite of this, Israel's outward religious observances went on (Isa 29:1). Jesus applied this passage to certain Pharisees and scribes, who insisted on the ritual washing of hands before meals but dishonored their parents by the fraudulent claim that what might have been given to the parents had already been promised to God (15:5). For Jesus, this "corban" practice, evidently sanctioned by the "tradition of the elders," violated and set aside God's law (15:6). Additionally, the practice of ritual washing of hands made the fundamental error of viewing defilement as coming to humans from external sources rather than coming from humans due to an internal problem, an evil heart (15:11-20).
Jesus' rebuke of hypocrisy is not only deeply rooted in the Old Testament (cf. Ps 50:16-23, 78:36-37; Isa 48:1-2; 58:1-9; Jer 3:10; 7:4-11; 12:2; Ezek 33:30-33; Mic 3:11; Mal 1:6-10), it is also similar to rebukes found in Second Temple Jewish literature. For example, _Psalms of Solomon_ presents a withering critique of hypocritical religious and political leaders, including the wish that crows would peck out their eyes and that their corpses would not be buried (4:19-20). _Assumption of Moses_ 7 predicts the demise of hypocrites who behave unjustly and sensuously while at the same time being concerned for ritual purity. _Rule of the Community_ , from Qumran, divides humanity into the righteous who will be eternally rewarded and the deceitful who will be eternally punished, and includes hypocrisy in a list of the vices of the deceitful (1QS 4:10). The later Rabbinic literature was also sensitive to the problem of hypocrisy, even among the Pharisees. The Talmudic discussions of seven types of Pharisees, of whom only the one who acted out of love was approved, is illuminating ( _y. Berakhot_ 14b; _y. Sotah_ 20c; _b. Sotah_ 22b). The "shoulder" Pharisee, who conspicuously carries his good deeds on his shoulder so that people can see them, is particularly relevant to the charge of hypocrisy in Matthew 23. See also _b. Sotah_ 41b and 42a which affirm respectively that hypocrites will go to hell and never see the Shekinah.
The Charge of Rejecting the Prophets. The charge that Israel had rejected its own prophets (23:29-31) is perhaps the most serious accusation found in Matthew 23, since it addresses the root cause of the other problems confronted there. If Israel had listened to its prophets, the Pharisees would not have prevented people from entering the Kingdom. If Israel had listened to its prophets, casuistry in oaths and the elevation of trivial duties over basic duties would not have become commonplace. If Israel had listened to its prophets, matters of the heart would have remained primary, not the external appearance of righteousness. But Israel had rejected its prophets throughout its history, and that rejection would reach its horrible culmination in the rejection of its Messiah (23:32) and his messengers (23:34). This would bring all the guilt of the innocent blood shed from the first to the last book of the Old Testament upon Jerusalem (23:35-36).
This is not the first time Matthew pointed out that Israel had rejected its prophets. The genealogy of Jesus stressed the exile to Babylon, which of course was due to rejection of the prophets (1:11-12, 17). The ministry of John the Baptist is presented in terms of prophetic rebuke (3:7-12), and Israel's rejection of John is explained as the rejection of an Elijah-like figure who is more than a prophet (11:7-18; 17:12; 21:32). When Jesus' disciples are persecuted, they are to be encouraged because the prophets were similarly persecuted (5:12). Rejection or reception of the ministry of Jesus' disciples is described as that of a prophet (10:41-42; 25:35-45). Jesus also repeatedly cited prophetic literature, sometimes with an introduction that stressed his incredulity at the religious leaders' ignorance of the prophets' message (9:13;12:7; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; 21:13, 16, 42). All these factors combine to make it clear to the reader of Matthew that Israel had rejected its prophets.
Jesus' charge that Israel has rejected its prophets clearly echoes many similar charges in the Old Testament itself. The Chronicler's sad commentary on the end of the southern kingdom stresses Israel's obstinacy in not only ignoring but even mocking God's messengers. It had come to the place where there was no remedy, and the exile to Babylon ensued (2 Chr 36:15-16). Daniel's great prayer of confession is centered on the admission that "we have refused to listen to your servants the prophets" (Dan 9:6, 10; cf. Neh 9:26, 30; Jer 25:4; 26:5). Israel abandoned the Torah and rejected the prophets whom God sent to remind her of her obligations (Deut 28:15-68; 1 Kgs 8:46-51). Notable examples of the rejection of the prophets include Ahab and Jezebel's rejection of Elijah and Micaiah (1 Kgs 19:1-3; 22:7-38), Amaziah's rejection of Amos (Amos 7:10-17), Pashhur's persecution of Jeremiah (Jer 20:1-6), Jehoiakim's murder of Uriah son of Shemaiah (Jer 26:20-23), and Zedekiah's imprisonment of Jeremiah (Jer 37:11–38:28). Even Jesus' "ironic imperative" telling the religious leaders to fill up the measure of their ancestors' guilt by killing him (23:32) has a prophetic ring to it (Jer 7:21; Amos 4:4-5; Nah 3:14-15). His allusion to the murders of Abel and Zechariah effectively sums up the entire history of the murder of God's prophets in the Old Testament, which in its Hebrew text ends with 2 Chronicles (23:35; cf. Gen 4:8ff; 2 Chr 24:21).
Israel's rejection of the prophets is also mentioned in Second Temple literature. The book of _Jubilees_ , probably to be dated around 150 BC, predicts the judgment which will come to Israel when they refuse to listen to the prophets (here called "witnesses") and instead kill them ( _Jubilees_ 1:12-14). _4 Baruch_ (a.k.a. _Paraleipomena of Jeremiah_ ), which is probably a Jewish work with Christian interpolations or a Jewish-Christian work, mentions at the outset that the prophet Jeremiah must leave Jerusalem before God can allow the Babylonians to destroy it due to its sins. This is because Jeremiah's prayers buttress the city against its enemies ( _4 Baruch_ 1:1-8). This same work ends with a note about the desire of the people to kill Jeremiah as they had previously killed Isaiah ( _4 Baruch_ 9:19-31). The Jewish work of the first century AD, _Lives of the Prophets_ , recounts how 23 prophets died. Most are reported to have died peacefully, but seven are reported to have been martyred (chs 1-3, 6-7, 15, 23). The composite Jewish-Christian book, _Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah_ , is relevant here also. The deuterocanonical book of Tobit describes Tobit's belief in the words of the prophets, and his conviction that the Second Temple would be destroyed and Israel scattered, and then finally that Israel would be restored, the Temple rebuilt, and the nations converted (Tob 14:3-7).
Materials from Qumran also refer to Israel's rejection of the prophets. 4Q166 2:1-6, commenting on Hosea 2:10, states that Israel forgot the God who gave them commandments through his servants the prophets and blindly revered false prophets as gods. 4Q266 3 iii 18-19 states that Israel despised the words of the prophets (cf. CD 7:17-18). 4Q390 2 i 5 predicts a coming time of evil when Israel will violate the statutes given to them by God's servants the prophets.
The mention of the martyrdom of Zechariah son of Berekiah in Matthew 23:35 causes some problems in identification, but clearly Matthew had in mind the murder of Zechariah the son of Jehoiada in 2 Chronicles 24:21. This murder is recounted in _Lamentations Rabbah_ (Proems 5, 23; cf. 1.16.51; 2.2.4; 2.20.23; 4.13.16) and in other Rabbinic works ( _Midrash Tanhuma Yelamdenu_ on Lev 4:1; _Ecclesiastes Rabbah_ 3:16; 10:4; _Targum Lamentations_ 2:20; _y. Ta'anit_ 69a; _b. Gittin_ 57b; _b. Sanhedrin_ 96b). Matthew's use of this story is not unlike that of the Rabbinic materials in that the murder of Zechariah is a particularly egregious sin, one for which the victim implored God's retribution. For Matthew, as well as for the rabbis, that retribution was put into the context of lament over the destruction of Jerusalem.
## TEXT [Commentary]
18. Jesus' lament over Jerusalem (23:37-39)
37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me. 38 And now, look, your house is abandoned and desolate.[*] 39 For I tell you this, you will never see me again until you say, 'Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the LORD!'[*]"
## NOTES
23:37-39 These verses constitute "the climax of Jesus' public ministry to Israel" (Garland 1993:232). The tone of 23:37-39 changes from accusation to lament, but the element of lament is not lacking entirely from the woe oracles.
**I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me.** These final public words of Jesus to his contemporaries strike a note of unspeakable sadness at their unwillingness to respond to his motherly concern (cf. Luke 13:34-35). The feminine image is striking (cf. Deut 32:11; Ruth 2:12; Ps 17:8; 36:7; 91:1-4; Isa 31:5).
**your house is abandoned and desolate.** The prediction of the desolation of "your house" in 23:38 probably refers to the Temple itself (21:13; 24:1-2; cf. 1 Kgs 9:7-8), although this language may be a metaphor for Jerusalem or the nation itself (Jer 12:7; _1 Enoch_ 89:56). Although some take 23:39 as only stressing the certainty of judgment (e.g., Meier 1980:274-275), the image of the mother hen gathering her chicks (23:37) speaks of compassion, not rejection (Davies and Allison 1997:323-324; Garland 1993:232-233).
**you will never see me again until you say, 'Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the Lord!'** There is a glimmer of hope for salvation if only Israel will acknowledge Jesus to be her Messiah. Israel sinned in rejecting Jesus, and there will be punishment for that sin. But here, as throughout biblical history, repentance after sin and judgment brings grace and redemption (cf. Rom 11:1-2, 11-12, 15, 23-27). Jesus will return only when Israel in true repentance utters the words which were uttered without adequate understanding in 21:9. (See the balanced discussion in Bruner 1990:835-837.)
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' lament over Jerusalem is a remarkably sympathetic conclusion to his antipathetic denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees. In this lament the compassion of Jesus for his people and his city is palpable (cf. 9:36; 11:28). Other touching biblical laments (e.g., 2 Sam 1:17-27; 18:33; 19:4; Rom 9:1-3; Rev 18:10, 16-19) pale in comparison with it. Jesus was deeply moved for his people and for his city in spite of the shameful manner in which its leaders had treated him and in spite of the horrible sufferings that he knew still lie ahead. Christians today must ponder their Lord's compassion for the Jewish people and reflect on their own level of concern for the people of the Messiah (Rom 10:1). An arrogant attitude toward those who are lost is always despicable, but it is especially so when it concerns the Jewish people (Rom 11:16-24).
This passage also illustrates the mysterious relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. The same Greek word ( _thelō_ [TG2309, ZG2527]) is used in 23:37 for Jesus' desire to gather the people of Jerusalem ("I have _wanted_ to gather") and for their refusal to be gathered ("you _wouldn't_ let me"). Yet, in 11:27 Jesus appears to accomplish his purpose in revealing the Father to whomever he wills (cf. 16:17). Despite the judgment announced in 23:38, according to 23:39 the tension continues into the future. Unless and until the people of Jerusalem utter in faith the words of Psalm 118:26, they will not see Jesus again. But the implication is that if they do bless the one who comes in the name of the Lord, they will ultimately receive the Kingdom blessings they have rejected up to this point.
Matthew 23 and Jewish-Christian Relations. No one can doubt that the language of Matthew 23 is severe, and that it castigates certain Jewish religious leaders of Jesus' day in terms that make genteel modern folks extremely uncomfortable. And no one should deny that through the centuries misguided Christians have used this language as a justification of anti-Semitic attitudes and, worse yet, inquisitions, pogroms, and even the holocaust of World War II. But all this is due to a misunderstanding of Matthew 23 by the early Gentile Church, a misunderstanding borne out of an arrogance against which Paul warned in Romans 11:18-21. Ironically, this has become the (mis)understanding of modern Jews as well as modern Christians. Perhaps this history of a "Gentilized" misunderstanding of Matthew 23 can be alleviated somewhat by a "Judaized" understanding, stressing the Jewishness of the woe oracles and the concerns about hypocrisy and the rejection of the prophets.
But the intellectual understanding which has been outlined above will fall on deaf ears unless it is conveyed with a sensitive and loving spirit. Unless Christians today are willing to love Jewish people and grieve for the sad state of Jewish-Christian relations, as did Jesus (23:37) and Paul (Rom 9:1-3), there is little reason to think that intellectual arguments will make any difference at all. In light of the sad history of Jewish-Christian relations, Christians have much to live down. Matthew 23 itself, especially 23:8-12, would be a good place to start a much needed check of Christian character. Christians must not read Matthew 23 as only a critique of Jerusalem's ancient leaders. It is also clearly intended to warn Jesus' disciples, both ancient and modern, not to follow the example of the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 1 Pet 2:1). "All of the vices here attributed to the scribes and Pharisees have attached themselves to Christians, and that in abundance" (Davies and Allison 1997:262). Those who want be salt and light in this world will get nowhere if their testimony is ruined by hypocrisy and vanity. But the integrity and humility of Christians, modeled on that of the Jewish Messiah, can alleviate the damage done by the attitudes and atrocities which mar Jewish-Christian relations today.
Summary and Transition. At Jesus' entry into Jerusalem, the crowds shouted Psalm 118:25-26: "Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the Lord" (21:9) and the leaders looked on angrily. According to 23:39, Jesus pronounced judgment on those same leaders and used the same words that the crowds shouted a few days earlier. The sinful rebellion of the leaders outlined in 23 is made all the more monstrous by their official capacity: they "are the official interpreters of the law of Moses." This is the context in which Jesus spoke his final discourse about the end of the ages. The impressive Temple precinct, where the spiritless leadership officiated, would be totally destroyed by a desolating sacrilege before Jesus would come again and the nation would genuinely turn to him with the words "blessings on the one who comes in the name of the Lord."
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. The Judgment of Jerusalem and the Coming of Christ (24:1–25:46)
1. The first pains of childbirth: life in the present age (24:1-14; cf. Mark 13:1-13; Luke 21:1-19)
1 As Jesus was leaving the Temple grounds, his disciples pointed out to him the various Temple buildings. 2 But he responded, "Do you see all these buildings? I tell you the truth, they will be completely demolished. Not one stone will be left on top of another!"
3 Later, Jesus sat on the Mount of Olives. His disciples came to him privately and said, "Tell us, when will all this happen? What sign will signal your return and the end of the world?[*]"
4 Jesus told them, "Don't let anyone mislead you, 5 for many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Messiah.' They will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and threats of wars, but don't panic. Yes, these things must take place, but the end won't follow immediately. 7 Nation will go to war against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in many parts of the world. 8 But all this is only the first of the birth pains, with more to come.
9 "Then you will be arrested, persecuted, and killed. You will be hated all over the world because you are my followers.[*] 10 And many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other. 11 And many false prophets will appear and will deceive many people. 12 Sin will be rampant everywhere, and the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved. 14 And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations[*] will hear it; and then the end will come."
## NOTES
24:1 **Jesus was leaving the Temple grounds.** After summarily denouncing the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus left the Temple (cf. Mark 13:1-4; Luke 21:5-7). This departure takes on symbolic overtones of divine abandonment. Jesus had just announced the desolation of the Temple, and now he acted it out (Ezek 11:22-23).
**his disciples pointed out to him the various Temple buildings.** As they walked away east toward the Mount of Olives, the disciples pointed out the magnificence of the Temple to Jesus, perhaps to break the tension or even because they found his prediction of its judgment incredible (Davies and Allison 1997:334). The beauty of Herod's extensive renovation was well known (Mark 13:1; John 2:20; Josephus _War_ 5.184-226; _Antiquities_ 15.391-402; Tacitus _Histories_ , 5.8; _b. Sukkah_ 51b).
24:2 **they will be completely demolished. Not one stone will be left.** Any doubts as to the Temple's destruction were dispelled by Jesus' graphic statement in 24:2b that not one stone would be left standing (cf. 26:61; 27:40; Acts 6:14; Josephus _War_ 6.300ff; 7.1).
24:3 **Jesus sat on the Mount of Olives.** When the walk to the Mount of Olives had been completed, Jesus sat down (cf. 5:1; 13:1; 15:29; 19:28; 22:44; 23:2; 25:31). From the Mount of Olives, Jesus could look westward right at the entrance to the Temple's holiest place ( _m. Berakhot_ 9:5; _m. Middot_ 2:4). This mountain is prophetically significant (Zech 14:4). Here the disciples approached Jesus privately (cf. 17:19) and asked him what is best understood as a two part question (not three parts as in Walvoord 1974:182), concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and his coming to end the age.
**when will all this happen?** Lit., "When will these things occur?" A reference to what Jesus had just said about the total destruction of the Temple.
**What sign will signal your return and the end of the world?** In the disciples' thinking the end of the Temple would have epochal significance and could only augur the end of the present world (cf. 13:39-40, 49; 28:20; Hagner 1995:688). Modern readers of Matthew should not artificially superimpose their chronological hindsight on this text. Although such hindsight reveals the historical distance between the past destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and the yet future coming of Jesus, at the same time it obscures the conceptual linkage between the two events. (See the commentary below and Turner 1989.) Jesus' answer to this two-part question does not stress chronology (24:36-44), but ethics (24:45ff). The signs are imprecise to the extent that they cannot be used to determine the date, so disciples must always be alert.
24:4-5 Jesus' prophetic words in 24:4ff are in character with what he had already spoken—he had already repeatedly spoken of the future (5:3-12; 7:21-23; 8:11-12; 10:23; 11:22-24; 13:36-43, 47-50; 16:27-28; 19:28-30; 22:29-32; 23:39; cf. 26:13, 21, 29, 64).
**Don't let anyone mislead you, for many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Messiah.'** Jesus' answer to the disciples' twofold question begins with a warning against deception by false messiahs (cf. Mark 13:5-13; Luke 21:8-19; 2 Thess 2:3). Future deceivers who come "in my name" need not claim to be Jesus himself but only to be the Messiah. This warning is expanded later in the discourse (24:23-27).
**They will deceive many.** The double use of the word "many' is sobering—not only will there be many false messiahs, there will also be many who are deceived by them (cf. 24:24; 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7). The well-known Jewish messianic pretender Bar Kochba led a second Jewish revolt against Rome that ended in AD 135 with the total banishing of all Jews from Jerusalem (Josephus _Antiquities_ , 20:97-99, 160-172, 188). Other pretenders were Theudas, Judas of Galilee (Acts 5:36-37), and one known as "the Egyptian" (Acts 21:38). There have also been numerous nominal Christians who have claimed in Jesus' name to be the Messiah.
24:6-7 **you will hear of wars and threats of wars.** Religious error will coincide with political upheavals.
**these things must take place.** Because God has predestined them (cf. 26:54; Dan 2:28-29, 45; Rev 1:1; 4:1).
**Nation will go to war against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.** International aggression, real and rumored (cf. Jer 51:46; Dan 9:26; 11:44), should not frighten the disciples, since such disturbances do not signify the end. The Jewish War of rebellion against Rome in AD 66–70 looms large here. Rather, these are merely the first stages of the messianic woes to come upon the world.
**famines and earthquakes.** Famine is mentioned elsewhere in the NT and would inevitably result from war in ancient times (Acts 11:27-30; Rev 6:8; 18:8; 2 Esdr 9:3-4). Earthquakes are an additional ominous matter, as chaos extends to nature itself (cf. 8:24; 27:54; 28:2; Joel 2:10; Hag 2:6; Zech 14:4-5; Acts 16:26; Rev 6:12; 8:5; 11:13, 19; 16:18; _1 Enoch_ 1:6-7; 102:2; 1QHa 11:12-15).
24:8 **the first of the birth pains.** The use of the pains of a woman in labor as a metaphor for eschatological troubles and/or the woe of God's judgment is found elsewhere in Jewish literature and the NT (Isa 13:8; 26:17; 66:7-8; Jer 4:31; 6:24; 22:23; 30:5-6; 48:41; Hos 13:13; Mic 4:9-13; Mark 13:8; 1 Thess 5:3; Rev 12:2; cf. John 16:20-22; Gal 4:19; 1QHa 11:7-11; _1 Enoch_ 62:4; 2 Esdr 4:42; _Targum Psalms_ 18:14).
24:9 **persecuted.** The dangers from false messiahs and wars will be accompanied by persecution (cf. 10:17ff; 23:34). The disciples will be universally hated because of their affiliation with Jesus (cf. 5:11; 10:18, 22, 25, 32-33, 38). The hatred and persecution will even result in murder (cf. 10:28; 21:35; 22:6). The Gr. word underlying "persecution" is _thlipsis_ [TG2347, ZG2568], usually translated "tribulation." A perusal of the use of this word in the NT indicates that it sometimes describes the typical generic troubles which Christians have often faced, but other times describes severe, unparalleled eschatological troubles (e.g., 13:21; 24:21, 29; John 16:33; Acts 14:22; 20:23; Rom 2:9; 8:35; 12:12; 2 Thess 1:6; Heb 10:33; Rev 1:9; 2:9-10, 22; 7:14; cf. Dan 12:1; Joel 2:2; Zeph 1:15).
24:10 **many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other.** The external pressure will have devastating internal consequences as some disciples fall away (lit. "to be offended" or "caused to stumble;" cf. 5:29-30; 13:21; 18:6, 8-9) from their commitment to Jesus and hatefully betray genuine disciples.
24:11 **many false prophets will appear.** The false prophets here (cf. 7:15; 24:24; Acts 13:6; 20:29-30; 2 Pet 2:1ff; 1 John 4:1; Rev 16:13; 19:20; 20:10) are evidently promoters of the false messiahs with whom they are associated in this passage (cf. 24:5, 23-26).
24:12 **Sin will be rampant.** Lit., "the increase of lawlessness." The false religious teachings result in the increase of lawlessness (7:23; 13:41; 23:28; cf. 2 Thess 2:8).
**the love of many will grow cold.** True love for God and truth will decline (2 Thess 2:10; 2 Tim 3:4; Rev 2:4). If loving God and neighbor is the quintessence of the law and prophets (22:34-40), its decline amounts to lawlessness and is devastating for God's people.
24:13 **the one who endures to the end will be saved.** The response of Jesus' disciples to all these horrifying circumstances—false messiahs and prophets, wars, famines, earthquakes, apostasy, betrayal—is fidelity to the bitter end. Perseverance in obedience to Jesus contrasts with lawlessness and is the true test of discipleship. The salvation promised to those who endure is not merely physical deliverance from persecution (Walvoord 1974:184) but the future salvific reward for those whose endurance demonstrates their genuine faith, in contrast to those in 24:10-12 who fall away or promote false teaching (Blomberg 1992:356; Carson 1984:498-499). This verse contains a verbatim echo of 10:22 (cf. 12:32; 13:21, 41; Rom 12:12; 2 Tim 2:3, 10, 12; Jas 1:12; 5:11; 1 Pet 2:20; Rev 1:9; 3:10; 13:10; 14:12).
24:14 **the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world.** The perseverance of the believers will result in the Kingdom message (3:2; 4:17, 23; 9:35; 10:7; 13:19; 26:13) being preached to all the nations before the end comes. Note the similarities of this passage with 10:22-23 and 28:18-20.
**the end will come.** This statement should be compared with statements about the end in 24:6, 8.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Introduction to the Olivet Discourse: Various Interpretations. The crucial question in interpreting the discourse concerns the relationship between the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and the eschatological judgment of God at Christ's second coming. There are essentially three views, although there are shades of difference within each of them. According to the _preterist_ (past) view, most or all of the predictions of the discourse were all fulfilled in AD 70, when the Romans destroyed the Temple (France 1985:333ff, Kik 1948; Sproul 1998; Tasker 1961:223ff). In the view of partial preterists, 24:1-35 describes the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, and only 24:36ff refers to the return of Jesus. However, full or comprehensive preterists attempt to explain the entire discourse as fulfilled in AD 70.
According to an opposite approach, the _futurist_ view, the discourse concerns only the return of Christ to the earth (Barbieri 1983:76ff; Toussaint 1980:266ff; Walvoord 1974:179ff). According to this view, Christ does not answer the first part of the disciples' question in 24:3, which concerns the destruction of the Temple. For several reasons which are mentioned in the notes on Matthew 24 (cf. Turner 1989), it seems best to conclude that both of the above views are one-sided and inadequate to handle the complexities of the passage. After all, the disciples asked not only about the destruction of Jerusalem but also about the end of the world. Only an approach which deals carefully with both of these matters is acceptable.
According to the _preterist-futurist_ view, the predictions of the discourse intertwine both the historical destruction of Jerusalem and the yet future return of Jesus. Some advocates of this view distinguish between portions of the discourse having to do with AD 70 from other portions having to do with the end times, and others view the events of AD 70 as a partial or anticipatory fulfillment of that which will be consummated at Christ's return (Blomberg 1992:352; Carson 1984:495; Hagner 1995:685). Involved in this view is the prophetic perspective of foreshortening or double (near and far) fulfillment (Broadus 1886:479-480; Hendriksen 1973:846ff; Ladd 1974:309ff). This is the approach I follow. Jesus' eschatological discourse answers both parts of the disciples' question. His words about the fall of the Temple provide the reader with a preliminary picture which anticipates and forecasts the eventual end of the world.
According to 24:1, Jesus left the Temple after an extended conflict with various groups of Jewish religious leaders (cf. 21:17). His authority had been clearly demonstrated in the Temple in numerous confrontations with them; however, as he put it in 23:38, they would not believe in him. The disciples' preoccupation with the grandeur of the Temple stands in contrast to Jesus' words of judgment upon Israel. They called Jesus' attention to the glorious Temple precinct, but Jesus spoke only of its demolition. The disciples' question about the time of this demolition and (they assumed) Jesus' return (24:1-3) leads into the body of the discourse.
Jesus' Olivet Discourse begins with an initial section which is didactic in nature (24:4-31). It seems best to view the "first pains of childbirth" in 24:4-14 as preliminaries that characterize the entire period between the comings of Jesus (Blomberg 1992:353ff; Carson 1984:495; Hagner 1995:684-685). In 24:15-28, the language is more ominous, with descriptions of the desecration of the Temple (24:15), as well as unparalleled great tribulation (24:21). It seems best to see this section as envisioning the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, which becomes a token of the ultimate judgment which ends the present world. The coming of Jesus to judge humankind after that tribulation is described with standard Old Testament apocalyptic imagery in 24:29-31. At 24:32 the tone becomes more paraenetic (or hortatory) as the stress shifts from the "what" to the "so what." Jesus speaks in parabolic imagery to stress the urgency and unknown time of his coming (24:32-36). This leads to an emphasis upon alertness in the reference to Noah (24:37-44) and in the parables of the wise servant (24:45-51) and the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13). The parable of the talents emphasizes faithful use of God's gifts (25:14-30), and the picture of the last judgment (25:31-46) indicates that Jesus is still concerned for the "little ones."
The Olivet Discourse makes it clear that biblical prophecy includes more than mere prediction. The knowledge of what God will do in the future (24:1-31) must have a profound effect upon God's people in the present (24:32–25:46). In other words, if we have properly understood this prophetic Scripture, we will avoid date-setting and will be characterized by alertness, faithfulness, fruitfulness, and service to the little brothers of Christ. As Davies and Allison (1997:337) put it, "the question 'when' does not elicit a date but help to maintain the disciples' faith."
The Synoptic Problem. In seeking any solution to the synoptic problem (see the discussion of this matter in the Introduction to the commentary), it must be acknowledged that Matthew's version of the discourse is much longer than that of Mark and Luke (see the table below). The three treatments of the setting (#1 in the table below) and the beginning of birth pains (#2 below) are rather similar. Matthew's version of the abomination of desolation (#3 below) is slightly longer than Mark's, and Luke's section on armies surrounding Jerusalem is much shorter than either Matthew or Mark. Matthew's treatment of the coming of the Son of Man (#4 below) is slightly longer than Mark's or Luke's. The three versions of the lesson of the fig tree (#5 below) are similar, but Matthew also has material at this point on the days of Noah. The versions of #6, "Necessity of alertness," are rather different, although of similar length. Matthew 24:45-25:46 (comprising 7–10 below) has no parallel in the other Gospels. (For further study of the discourse, see Beasley-Murray 1993, Burnett 1981, Carson 1984:488-495; Gaston 1970, Hartman 1966, Turner 1989, and D. Wenham 1984.)
Brief Synopsis of the Olivet Discourse
Content: Matthew/Mark/Luke
1. Setting: 24:1-3/13:1-4/21:5-7
2. Beginning of birth pains: 24:4-14/13:5-13/21:8-19
3. Abomination of desolation: 24:15-28/13:14-23/21:20-24
4. Coming of the Son of Man: 24:29-31/13:24-27/21:25-28
5. Lesson of the fig tree: 24:32-41/13:28-32/21:29-33
6. Necessity of alertness: 24:42-44/13:33-37/21:34-36
7. Parable of the servant: 24:45-51
8. Parable of ten virgins: 25:1-13
9. Parable of the talents: 25:14-30
10. Judgment of the nations: 25:31-46
Exposition of Matthew 24:1-14. After Jesus' blunt comments on the coming destruction of the Temple (24:2), Jesus' disciples asked him when it would happen (24:3). They linked the destruction of the Temple with the return of Jesus and the end of the age, so they wanted to know about the sign that would indicate that these things were about to happen.
Of course, one might wonder whether the disciples had comprehended enough of Jesus' previous teaching in order to ask a question that reflected a grasp of his departure and return. Matthew makes it clear that their grasp of certain matters was weak at best, but by now they knew enough to realize that Jesus was about to go. They had heard Jesus' three passion predictions (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19), and their comprehension is indicated by their indignation (16:22) and grief (17:23). So, whatever their subjective lack of perception at various points, Matthew has shown that they knew enough to ask a question about Jesus' coming.
Their question was primarily concerned with timing, since they wanted to know "when" and they wanted to know how to know "when" by discerning a preliminary sign. But Jesus did not answer their question in a precise way (24:4-14). He mentioned several matters—false messiahs and prophets, wars, famines, earthquakes, persecution, apostasy, betrayal, and lawlessness—but all these are so general that they are of no help in calculating when the Temple will be destroyed. Jesus also warned them against assuming that the turmoil he mentioned is an indicator that the end is imminent. He stated that such matters do not signify the end (24:6). They are but the first pains of childbirth, which intimates that there may be an extended time of labor before the end (24:8; cf. 25:5). There will be enough time for the Kingdom message to be preached throughout the world before the end comes (24:14). Therefore, the disciples needed to ponder not the chronology of the end times but their own ethical responsibility to persevere in faithful discipleship and Kingdom ministry (24:13). They have asked the wrong question, but Jesus has given them the right answer. Paul also warned about the danger of coming to the premature, false conclusion that the church's present woes are to be identified with the onset of the end of the world (2 Thess 2:2-3).
Matthew 24:4-14 should be viewed as a summation of the difficulties the church will face in its early days before AD 70—and indeed throughout its existence until Jesus returns (Blomberg 1992:356-357; Hagner 1995:693-694). Expositors frequently note the similarities between Matthew 24:4-14 and Rev 6:1ff, which speaks in terms of the breaking of seals, of which the first four are the famed four horsemen of the Apocalypse. If the view presented here is correct, these horsemen also portray events that typify the church's present experience in the world, not the final days of tribulation at the end of the age.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. The desecration of the Holy Place: the Temple destroyed (24:15-28; cf. Mark 13:14-23; Luke 21:20-24)
15 "The day is coming when you will see what Daniel the prophet spoke about—the sacrilegious object that causes desecration[*] standing in the Holy Place." (Reader, pay attention!) 16 "Then those in Judea must flee to the hills. 17 A person out on the deck of a roof must not go down into the house to pack. 18 A person out in the field must not return even to get a coat. 19 How terrible it will be for pregnant women and for nursing mothers in those days. 20 And pray that your flight will not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For there will be greater anguish than at any time since the world began. And it will never be so great again. 22 In fact, unless that time of calamity is shortened, not a single person will survive. But it will be shortened for the sake of God's chosen ones.
23 "Then if anyone tells you, 'Look, here is the Messiah,' or 'There he is,' don't believe it. 24 For false messiahs and false prophets will rise up and perform great signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even God's chosen ones. 25 See, I have warned you about this ahead of time.
26 "So if someone tells you, 'Look, the Messiah is out in the desert,' don't bother to go and look. Or, 'Look, he is hiding here,' don't believe it! 27 For as the lightning flashes in the east and shines to the west, so it will be when the Son of Man[*] comes. 28 Just as the gathering of vultures shows there is a carcass nearby, so these signs indicate that the end is near.[*]"
## NOTES
24:15 **The day is coming when you will see what Daniel the prophet spoke about.** This is the closest Jesus comes to answering the disciples' question about the Temple (24:3; cf. Mark 13:14-23; Luke 21:20-24).
**the sacrilegious object that causes desecration.** This is an allusion to Dan 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11 (cf. _Testament of Levi_ 15:1; _Apocalypse of Elijah_ 2:41; 4:21). Perhaps 23:38 also hints at this. Daniel's prophecy of the desecration of the Temple is often tied to the pagan altar set up in the holy place by the Seleucid King Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 BC (1 Macc 1:54, 59; 6:7; 2 Macc 6:1-5), but a desecration of the Temple had occurred long before Antiochus IV when in 597 BC Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, conquered the city, destroyed the first Temple, and carried off its treasures (Dan 1:1-2; 5:2-4, 22-23; cf. 2 Kgs 24:10-15). Jesus envisioned a future desecration here (cf. 2 Thess 2:4).
**Reader, pay attention.** This may be Jesus encouraging his hearers to read Daniel, or it could be Matthew's editorial words to his own readers. In either view, these words underline the gravity of the desecration of the holy place as a signal of the horrible events described in the following verses.
24:16-18 **those in Judea must flee to the hills.** When the Temple is desecrated, the only course of action for Jesus' disciples is flight to the Judean hill country (24:16, 20). Evidently the situation envisioned is the siege of Jerusalem (Luke 21:20-24; cf. Deut 28:53-57). Verse 16 is a general command, and the specific commands of 24:17-18 enforce its urgency (cf. Luke 17:31). The urgency of the hour would preclude packing or even getting a coat. Whether one is on a flat clay rooftop (Josh 2:6; 1 Sam 9:25; 2 Sam 11:2; Mark 2:4; Acts 10:9, 20) or in a field, there is no time to return to one's house for supplies (cf. 1 Macc 2:28).
24:19-20 **pregnant women** **and for nursing** **mothers . . . on the Sabbath.** Fleeing would be especially difficult for women with young or unborn children and for everyone if it occured on the Sabbath. The rigors of the time will be even more horrible for pregnant women and nursing mothers (cf. Luke 23:28-31; 1 Cor 7:26; _2 Baruch_ 10:13-14). With winter came colder weather and the rainy season, and muddy roads would mean slower, more laborious travel. It is uncertain why flight on the Sabbath is especially difficult; most likely, Matthew's Christian Jewish community would have scruples against breaking the traditional Sabbath travel restrictions (cf. Exod 16:29; Acts 1:12; _m. Eruvin_ ). Or perhaps it would be difficult to get out of walled cities or to obtain supplies on the Sabbath. In any event, movement on the Sabbath would be more noticeable than on other days. According to Eusebius's _Ecclesiastical History_ (3.5.3), the Christians in Jerusalem fled to Pella, just east of the Jordan River about 65 miles northeast of Jerusalem, prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
24:21-22 **there will be greater anguish than at any time since the world began.** Here it is made clear that the unparalleled severity of these times is the reason for the urgent warnings of the previous verses. Unlike the generic troubles mentioned previously, which do not augur the end (24:9), such anguish (lit. "great tribulation") has never been seen before and will never be seen again (cf. 24:29; Dan 12:1; Joel 2:2; Rev 7:14; 16:18; 1QM 1:9-14; 1 Macc 9:27; _Testament of Moses_ 8:1; Josephus _War_ 1.12). But God's care for his chosen ones (22:14; 24:24, 31; cf. 13:38) will result in the shortening of this most horrible of times so that they might be saved (Dan 12:1; 4Q385 3 i 1-7; _Barnabas_ 4:3; cf. _2 Baruch_ 20:1-2; 54:1; 83:1). It is difficult to accept the preterist view that this language was totally fulfilled by the events of AD 70. Hagner (1995:702-703) is probably correct in viewing the language as a hyperbolic reference to the catastrophe of AD 70 that will be literally true of the eschatological horrors.
24:23-25 **false messiahs and false prophets will rise up.** The topic of false messiahs and false prophets has been mentioned previously (24:4-5, 11), and it is developed at length in 24:23-28.
**so as to deceive, if possible, even God's chosen ones.** Their miraculous signs and wonders would deceive God's chosen ones if that were possible (cf. Exod 7:11; Deut 13:1-5; 2 Thess 2:9; 2 Pet 2:1; 1 John 2:18, 4:1; Rev 13:3; 19:20; _Didache_ 16:4). Jesus had been reticent to perform and publicize miracles merely to gain a following (4:1-11; 12:15-21, 39; 16:1-4; 27:40), but the false messiahs will not be. Jesus' warning the disciples about this danger ahead of time is evidently one of the means God uses to preserve his chosen ones.
24:26-27 **don't believe it!** The general warning mentioned in 24:25 is spelled out in detail here. The disciples are not to believe claims that the Messiah is in some obscure place, like the desert or a hidden chamber in a building (cf. Luke 17:23-24). Messianic pretenders frequently hid out in the desert, away from the threat of Roman soldiers (Acts 21:38; Josephus _War_ 2.258-263; _Antiquities_ 20.97-99, 167-172, 188).
**as the lightning flashes in the east and shines to the west, so it will be when the Son of Man comes.** In contrast to false claims, the genuine coming of Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15-17; Jas 5:7; 2 Pet 3:4; 1 John 2:28) will be unmistakably clear, like lightning which flashes across the sky from east to west (cf. Zech 9:14). There will be no doubt as to the identity of the Messiah when this happens.
24:28 **as the gathering of vultures shows there is a carcass nearby, so these signs indicate that the end is near.** The meaning of the proverb about the vultures and the carcass in 24:28 is difficult (cf. Luke 17:37). The NLT spells out the most common interpretation with its rendering "so these signs indicate that the end is near" (France 1985:343), but this comparative clause is not in the Gr. text. It is doubtful that this is intended as a picture of moral corruption (Hendriksen 1973:861; Walvoord 1974:190), or the consumption of lifeless Israel by false prophets (Lenski 1961:946; Toussaint 1980:276). Perhaps Jesus simply intended his hearers to envision the grisly picture of vultures hovering over the bodies of those who rebel against God in the final eschatological battle (Rev 19:17-18).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 24:15-29 is a warning of intense, unparalleled persecution and false prophecy that will arise in connection with the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple (24:15). This warning involves instructions for flight (24:16-20), a promise that God will shorten those days for the sake of his elect (24:21-22), and a renewed warning against false messiahs and false prophets (24:23-28). In the view taken here, this warning primarily relates to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, but there is good reason (esp. 24:21-22) to see it as ultimately intended for God's people in the end times who will face the ultimate Antichrist. Certainly, the disciples of Jesus throughout history have realized the constant relevance of his warning against false prophets and false messiahs. The suffering which confronts disciples inevitably causes them to long for the Messiah's appearance, but they must not allow that longing to lead them to be deceived by messianic pretenders.
Despite the space often given to discussing it, the most profound question in this section is not the chronological referents of the prophecy according to the various preterist and futurist views. The real question here is an existential one, and it concerns the need for wisdom in grasping the providence of God. Somehow, one must reconcile God's permitting his elect to suffer with his concern that their suffering not result in their spiritual ruin. Suffering is a way of life for Jesus' disciples throughout this age (5:10; 10:16ff; John 16:33; Acts 14:22; 2 Tim 3:12), and it will intensify as that age comes to an end. But God, for the sake of his elect, will somehow wisely permit that suffering to accomplish his own goals, rather than those of the persecutors (Acts 4:27-28; Rom 8:28-39). Although the disciples of Jesus may never fully grasp why their suffering is necessary, they may be assured from the example of Jesus himself that God will enable them to endure it and that in the end they will reign victoriously with Jesus (4:1-11; 10:24-33; 1 Cor 10:13; 2 Pet 2:9; Rev 2:26-28; 3:21-22; 17:17).
The Sacrilegious Desecration. Jesus' reference to the sacrilegious desecration of the Temple in 24:15 calls up a complex typology of prophecy and fulfillment, stretching all the way from Nebuchadnezzar to the ultimate eschatological antichrist. Several historical events comprise a sort of continuum of fulfillment, including (1) Nebuchadnezzar's conquest in 605 BC (Dan 1:1-2; 5:1-4, 22-23), (2) Antiochus IV Epiphanes' outrageous sacrilege which led to the Hasmonean revolt (167 BC), (3) the Roman conquest of the Hasmonean Kingdom in 63 BC, (4) the planned but unaccomplished setting up of a bust of Caligula in the Temple (AD 40–41), (5) the zealots' misuse of the Temple precincts in the days preceding the Roman destruction of AD 70, (6) the Roman destruction of AD 70 itself, (7) the further desolation of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 135 due to the Bar Kochba revolt (Dio Cassius 69.12.1-2), and (8) the ultimate sacrilege of the Antichrist (Matt 24:15; 2 Thess 2:3-4; Rev 13:8; _Didache_ 16).
In light of these things, there is no warrant for supposing that the desecration of 24:15, echoing Daniel, is a narrow prediction that is fulfilled solely by either the past AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem or by the future antichrist. Rather, there is good reason to believe that the various historical desolations of Jerusalem and the Temple all provide anticipatory fulfillments which lead up to the ultimate desolation in the end times. If it be objected that this scenario involves an implausible future rebuilding of the Temple, such a rebuilding was envisioned in ancient sources, both Jewish ( _m. Pesahim_ 10:6; _b. Sukkah_ 41a; _b. Shabbat_ 12b) and Christian ( _Barnabas_ 16:3-4; Irenaeus _Against Heresies_ 5.30.4; _Apocalypse of Elijah_ 4:1-6). Second Thessalonians 2:4 and Revelation 11 also imply that the Temple will be rebuilt.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. The coming of the Son of Man (24:29-31; cf. Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)
29 "Immediately after the anguish of those days,
the sun will be darkened,
the moon will give no light,
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.[*]
30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.[*] 31 And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world[*]—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven."
## NOTES
24:29 **Immediately after the anguish of those days.** This is the period of ultimate, unparalleled anguish (lit. "tribulation") described in 24:15ff (cf. Dan 12:1).
**the sun will be darkened, the moon will give no light, the stars will fall from the sky.** Significant heavenly disturbances will occur after the great tribulation (cf. Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28). This cosmic upheaval is expressed through apocalyptic imagery. The heavenly signs delineated here develop the statement of 24:27 that Jesus' coming will be like a flash of lightning from the east to the west. The sun and moon will be darkened, and the stars will fall from the sky. See the chart in the commentary below for the OT passages alluded to here (cf. Acts 2:20; Rev 6:12-13; 8:12). It is commonly believed that 24:15-28 speaks of events accompanying the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, although some, including myself, see an additional eschatological fulfillment. In 24:29ff, despite the prevalence of apocalyptic imagery, it seems that the coming of Jesus to the earth is in view. Preterist scholars disagree and take this language as speaking of Jesus' enthronement in heaven and/or the destruction of Jerusalem on earth, but their arguments are not convincing (Davies and Allison 1997:329). Hagner (1995:711-713) takes the "anguish" spoken of here as a reference to the events of AD 70 and thus concludes that Matthew believed that Jesus would return immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem. But this is doubtful in view of the preceding argument that 24:15-28 describes both the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the ultimate eschatological persecution of God's people.
24:30 Here begins the description of the event to which all the signs point, the coming of Jesus. This verse is a conflation of Jer 4:13; Dan 7:13-14; and Zech 12:10, 14.
**the sign that the Son of Man is coming.** Lit., "the sign of the Son of man." This may mean that the appearance of Jesus is itself the sign. Taken with the blowing of the trumpet in 24:31, the "sign" may refer to a military ensign or insignia, possibly the cross, which musters troops for the eschatological battle (Isa 11:10-12; 18:3; 62:10; Jer 4:21; 51:27). Or the "sign" may be a reference back to the disciples' question in 24:3.
**will appear in the heavens.** After the description of the heavenly disturbances, it is not surprising that this sign appears in the heavens.
**mourning among all the peoples of the earth.** It is not clear whether the mourning of the nations (Zech 12:10; Rev 1:7) is an indication of true repentance or of despair because they are not prepared to meet Jesus.
**the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.** This is familiar from other passages, and may allude to the presence of God in terms of "the cloud" signaling a theophany (16:27; 25:31; Acts 1:9-11; Rev 1:7; cf. Exod 13:21-22; 40:35-38).
24:31 **his angels . . . will gather his chosen ones from all over the world.** The purpose of the coming of the Son of Man is the gathering of his chosen ones. It is noteworthy that Jesus, as Son of Man, exercises divine prerogatives in sending _his_ angels (cf. Dan 7:10) for _his_ elect.
**The mighty blast of a trumpet.** In the OT a trumpet was sounded for religious and military purposes (Exod 19:16; Josh 6:5; Ps 81:3; Isa 27:13; Ezek 33:3-6; Joel 2:1; Zeph 1:16; cf. 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thess 4:16; _Didache_ 16:6; _Shemoneh Esreh_ 10).
**gather his chosen ones.** The people who comprise God's elect are from all the nations, judging from the two ways they are described here. They are literally "from the four winds" (cf. Isa 43:6; Dan 7:2; Zech 2:6; Rev 7:1) and "from one end of the sky to another." The gathering of the elect here is similar to John's words about the gathering of the wheat into the barn (3:12), and may imply a sort of "rapture," as in 1 Thess 4:17. It is a bit different from Jesus' parabolic language about the tares or wicked people being gathered out of his Kingdom (13:40-41; cf. 25:46). The description of one being taken and another being left is similar (24:40-41). Whatever the specific imagery, the point of all these passages is the separation that will be effected at Christ's return.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 24:29-31 describes the climactic heavenly signs immediately preceding the coming of Jesus, the glorious coming itself, and the purpose of the coming—to gather God's elect for their reward. The glorious coming of Jesus has been mentioned several times in Matthew (10:23; 16:27-28; 23:39; 24:3, 27, 37, 39, 42, 44, 46, 48, 50; 25:6, 13, 19, 31; 26:64), but here it is placed most clearly in its eschatological context. While the date of this coming is unknown, Jesus' disciples must not assume that it is in the distant future. Rather, they must alertly expect Jesus' return and faithfully serve him until that day. This coming is placed after the tribulation (24:29), which may give advocates of the pre-tribulational rapture theory some pause (but see notes and commentary on 24:40-41). Jesus' coming creates reversal: there will be mourning among all the nations who caused the disciples to mourn, but joy among all the formerly mourning disciples (cf. 2 Thess 1:6-10). At this time, the reign of heaven will come to earth more fully (6:9-10; 25:34). All nations will be judged, and the disciples of Jesus will be rewarded (5:5; 5:6-9; 13:40-43; 16:27-28; 19:27-30; 25:46).
A very different scenario is presented by the preterist understanding of 24:29-31. Preterists interpret these verses as speaking symbolically of the theological significance of the destruction of the Temple (France 1985:345; cf. Lightfoot 1997:2.319-320; Tasker 1961:225-228). The coming of Jesus is viewed as his coming to heaven to be exalted after the resurrection (Dan 7:13-14). The significance of this exaltation is played out in the judgment on Israel demonstrated by the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in AD 70. The tribulation or anguish mentioned in the passage is taken to be the horrific conditions experienced by the zealots in Jerusalem during the days prior to the Roman attack. The heavenly disturbances are interpreted as symbolically fulfilled by phenomena observed during those days. The sending of the angels to gather the elect is viewed as the mission of the church in discipling all the nations (24:14; 28:19).
Preterists are motivated by their understanding of 24:34, which they take as Jesus' promise that everything he has spoken of will be accomplished during the lives of his contemporaries. Since he did not literally return during their lifetimes, a different solution is sought, and the entire passage is viewed as a prediction of the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, which did occur during the lifetime of Jesus' contemporaries. (See the notes and commentary on 24:34 for a different interpretation of this crucial matter.) Additional difficulties with preterism are due to its truncation of Christ's eschatological program, which is to bring the reign of heaven to earth. Since that program is viewed by preterists as already fulfilled, one is tempted to ask, "Is that all there is?" It also seems very doubtful that the global language of Matthew 24 (e.g., 24:3, 7, 14, 21-22, 27, 30-31; 25:31-32) can be explained satisfactorily by a local event that occurred in AD 70, as significant as that event was (Blomberg 1992:363).
Old Testament Allusions. Matthew 24:29-31 is permeated with imagery drawn from the Old Testament. The chart below lays out some of the significant citations and allusions. Although several Old Testament passages are clearly alluded to here, it seems that Daniel 7 is the crucial text. In this passage, God is pictured as an awesome judge, "the Ancient One" (Dan 7:9), who passes sentence in favor of the Son of Man, giving universal dominion to him and his people (Dan 7:14, 22, 27). All this is in the context of reversal, in which the eschatological enemy of God and Israel, the "little horn" (Dan 7:8, 20, 24-25) is judged and defeated. As in Daniel 7, in Matthew 24 the coming of the Son of Man ends the persecution and suffering of God's saints, who then begin their glorious rule with Jesus.
MATTHEW 24:29-31 AND THE OLD TESTAMENT
---
Matthew | Content | Old Testament Passage(s)
24:29a | Tribulation | Dan 12:1
24:29b | Sun and moon darkened | Isa 13:10; 24:23; Ezek 32:7; Joel 2:10, 31; 3:15; Amos 5:20; 8:9; Zeph1:5a
24:29c | Stars fallen, shaken | Isa 34:4; Hag 2:6
24:30a, c | Son of Man coming on the clouds | Dan 7:13-14
24:30b | Tribes mourn | Zech 12:10, 14
24:31a | Trumpet | Isa 27:13
24:31b | Elect gathered | Deut 30:4; Zech 2:6
24:31b | Four winds | Dan 7:2; Zech 2:6
24:31b | Ends of the sky | Deut 4:32
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. The parable of the fig tree (24:32-35; cf. Mark 13:28-31; Luke 21:29-33)
32 "Now learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branches bud and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near. 33 In the same way, when you see all these things, you can know his return is very near, right at the door. 34 I tell you the truth, this generation[*] will not pass from the scene until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will disappear, but my words will never disappear."
## NOTES
24:32 **lesson from the fig tree.** "Lesson" here is lit. "parable." This is more like the short parables of 13:31-33, 44-46 than the longer narrative parables in that chapter. The parable proper is stated in 24:32, and it is applied in 24:33 ("in the same way . . .").
**when its branches bud and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near.** The budding of the fig tree in the spring is a sure sign of the nearness of summer. Similarly, the matters of which Jesus had been speaking are reliable indicators that he is near (cf. Isa 13:6; Ezek 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:1; Zeph 1:7, 14; Jas 5:8), ready to walk through the door, so to speak (cf. Jas 5:9; Rev 3:20).
24:33 **when you see all these things.** A crucial matter here is the referent of the expression "all these things." In the commentary to follow, it will be argued that "all these things" refers to the signs about which the disciples asked and of which Jesus spoke in 24:4ff. For another parabolic statement on the signs of the times, see 16:1-4.
24:34-35 **this generation will not pass from the scene until all these things take place. Heaven and earth will disappear, but my words will never disappear.** These verses contain two statements that stress the reliability of Jesus' promise about the signs of his coming in 24:32-33. The promise is so reliable that Jesus' contemporaries ("this generation") will not pass away until it is fulfilled. Secondly, heaven and earth will pass away, but his promise will not. This statement places the words of Jesus, the ultimate and definitive interpreter of the Torah, on a par with the Torah itself (cf. 5:18). Jesus' words are equivalent to the very words of God, which are as eternal and authoritative as God himself (Ps 119:89; Isa 40:8). There are two major issues in the interpretation of 24:34—the meaning of "this generation" and of "all these things." In the commentary to follow, it will be argued that Jesus promises his contemporaries that they will still be living when the signs he has mentioned, including the destruction of the Temple, occur (Turner 1989; Blomberg 1992:364). Thus, Jesus did not mistakenly predict his return during his lifetime (McNeile 1949:355), nor is this a piece of mistaken early church tradition (Beare 1981:473; Davies and Allison 1997:367-368).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
At this point, Jesus moved from speaking predictively to speaking paraenetically or hortatively. From this point on, his goal was not to provide additional information to answer the disciples' question (24:3) but to exhort them on the proper response to that information. This may not be what the disciples wanted to know, but it is what they needed to know. Matthew 24:32-35 parabolically expresses the nearness of the coming of Christ. Jesus' contemporaries were familiar with the process by which the fig tree in the spring buds, blossoms, and eventually in the summer bears fruit (24:32), so he compared his coming to that process (24:33). The signs about which the disciples asked in 24:3 are signified by the budding of the tree in the spring, and his coming by the summer, when fruit was borne. When the disciples see the signs (of spring), they know the coming (summer) is near. The certainty of these things is underlined by 24:34-35, which affirm that Jesus' contemporaries will observe the signs, and that Jesus' words are eternally trustworthy. In days of relative peace and prosperity, it is difficult to take these words of Jesus to heart. One may become so occupied with the details of everyday living and enjoying the fruits of one's labors that one forgets that it all may end abruptly (24:37-42). The skepticism of unbelievers compounds the problem by influencing disciples of Jesus to doubt his words (2 Pet 3:3-9). But genuine followers of Jesus dare not become too comfortable with the status quo because it will surely—if not speedily—give way to the Kingdom of Heaven's coming to earth.
Two crucial terms in these verses must be explained. First, what did Jesus mean by the expression "all these things" in 24:33-34? This expression refers to the preliminary signs that anticipate the coming of Jesus, not that coming itself. This is clear from the parabolic imagery used by Jesus. If "all these things" included the coming of Jesus, 24:33 would be saying, "when you see the coming of Jesus, you will know that he is near." This would be a tautology, a statement which belabors the obvious and goes without saying. If "all these things" refers merely to all the preliminary signs, the statement makes sense since viewing the signs confirms that the coming is near.
The second crucial term in these verses is "this generation." Although some futurist scholars argue that the word refers either to the nation of Israel as a whole or to the eschatological generation which is alive at Jesus' return (e.g., Toussaint 1980:279-280; Walvoord 1974:192-193), Matthew's use of the term clearly shows that Jesus was talking about his contemporaries (11:16; 12:39, 41-42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36). Scholars who argue otherwise opt for an understanding of "this generation" which is contrary to Matthew's clear usage because they want to protect Jesus from affirming that his coming will occur during the lifetime of his contemporaries, when, in fact, it didn't. If Jesus was speaking only of the preliminary signs which augur his coming, however, he did not err. As argued in the previous paragraph, "all these things" refers to the signs, not the coming itself, and Jesus predicted that his contemporaries would see those signs, including the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in AD 70.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. The necessity of alertness (24:36-51; cf. Mark 13:32)
36 "However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself.[*] Only the Father knows.
37 "When the Son of Man returns, it will be like it was in Noah's day. 38 In those days before the flood, the people were enjoying banquets and parties and weddings right up to the time Noah entered his boat. 39 People didn't realize what was going to happen until the flood came and swept them all away. That is the way it will be when the Son of Man comes.
40 "Two men will be working together in the field; one will be taken, the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding flour at the mill; one will be taken, the other left.
42 "So you, too, must keep watch! For you don't know what day your Lord is coming. 43 Understand this: If a homeowner knew exactly when a burglar was coming, he would keep watch and not permit his house to be broken into. 44 You also must be ready all the time, for the Son of Man will come when least expected.
45 "A faithful, sensible servant is one to whom the master can give the responsibility of managing his other household servants and feeding them. 46 If the master returns and finds that the servant has done a good job, there will be a reward. 47 I tell you the truth, the master will put that servant in charge of all he owns. 48 But what if the servant is evil and thinks, 'My master won't be back for a while,' 49 and he begins beating the other servants, partying, and getting drunk? 50 The master will return unannounced and unexpected, 51 and he will cut the servant to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
## NOTES
24:36 In 24:32-35, Jesus stressed the nearness of his coming, but in 24:36ff he begins to stress that the time of his coming is unknowable (cf. Mark 13:32). Thus, 24:36 is a "declaration of eschatological ignorance" (Davies and Allison 1997:374).
**no one knows the day or hour.** This expression is a general time indicator, not a precise expression (7:22; 10:19; 24:42, 44, 50; 25:13; 26:45). The word "day" ( _hēmera_ [TG2250, ZG2465]) may imply the eschatological significance of the OT "day of the Lord" (e.g., Isa 2:11-12; 61:2; Jer 30:7-8; 46:10; Ezek 7:10-19; 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:1-2; 3:14; Amos 5:18-20; Zeph 1:7, 14; Zech 14:1; Mal 3:2; 2 Thess 2:2; 2 Pet 3:10). How the time can be near and yet unknowable is difficult to articulate, but both are taught here.
**not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself.** In stating that no one knows the time of his coming, Jesus went so far as to state that not even the angels or even he himself have this information. Various scribes eliminated the words "or the Son himself" ( 1 L W f1 syr cop and MSS known to Jerome) in order to eliminate the notion that the Son did not know when he would return. The words, included in early and diverse manuscripts ( * B D f13 it and MSS known to Jerome), are certain (for further discussion, see Comfort 2007:[Matt 24:36]).
**Only the Father knows.** He alone is the one who controls the vicissitudes of human life. He alone can shorten the days of eschatological anguish (24:22), and he alone will bring Jesus back to earth in his own time.
24:37 **it will be like it was in Noah's day.** Humans living in the days preceding Jesus' return will be as unaware of it as Noah's contemporaries were of the flood (Gen 6:5ff; Isa 54:9; cf. 2 Pet 2:5; 3:6). The timing of God's judgment in both instances is totally unanticipated.
24:38-39 **right up to the time Noah entered his boat.** This clause comes from Gen 7:7. Jewish literature of the Second Temple period often portrayed Noah's generation as notorious sinners (Sir 16:7; _Jubilees_ 20:5-6; _1 Enoch_ 67:10; 2 Macc 2:4; Josephus _Antiquities_ 1.72-76).
**People didn't realize what was going to happen until the flood came.** In Noah's time, humanity was going about its business as usual (cf. Luke 17:26-30). People were caring for their daily needs and planning for what they perceived to be the future. But despite the preaching of Noah (2 Pet 2:5), they were oblivious to the imminent judgment which threatened them, and they were unexpectedly overtaken by the flood. At that point, their concern for matters such as food and drink and marriage became pathetically superfluous.
24:40-42 **one will be taken, the other left.** The illustration from the days of Noah is now applied to the days of Jesus' return (cf. Luke 17:34-35). The twin scenarios of 24:40-41 are expressed as exact parallels. Two men will be in the field, cultivating crops for food and drink, and the return of Jesus will suddenly overtake them, taking one and leaving the other. The same experience will overtake two women grinding grain at home. The prospect of such unexpected events underlines the absolute necessity of alert expectancy of the return of Jesus. Ignorance as to the time of his return must not lead to ambivalence as to the fact of his return, which will cause a sudden separation between those who alertly expect it and those who do not (25:31-46). The NT as a whole makes much of the necessity of watchful preparation for Christ's return (1 Cor 16:13; 1 Thess 5:6; 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 3:2-3; 16:15). There will be no leisure for repentance.
24:43-44 **be ready all the time.** The matter of alertness in the face of danger whose timing is unknown is further illustrated with a story (24:43) and its application (24:44). The story is about a thief unexpectedly robbing a house (cf. 6:19-20; 12:29; 1 Thess 5:2; 2 Pet 3:10; Rev 3:3; 16:15). If the head of the house (10:25; 13:27, 52; 20:1, 11; 21:33) had been warned as to the time of the burglary, it could have been prevented (cf. Luke 12:39-40).
**the Son of Man will come when least expected.** Similarly, Jesus' disciples do not know when he will return so they must be alert and prepared to meet him. He is coming at an unexpected time.
24:45 **A faithful, sensible servant.** Another household illustration underlines the necessity of alertness with the positive example of a faithful slave (24:45-47) and the negative example of a wicked slave (24:48-51). This time the unexpected factor is not a burglary but the return of a master who puts his slave in charge of feeding his household while he is away (cf. Luke 12:42-48). The disciples must be like that faithful and sensible slave (cf. 7:24; 10:16; 25:21, 23; 1 Cor 4:2), who is promoted to even greater responsibilities.
24:46 **If the master returns and finds that the servant has done a good job, there will be a reward.** This rendering obscures the literary form of the verse, which is a beatitude extolling the blessedness of the dependable slave who is found doing his master's will when the master returns (cf. 5:3-11; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; Luke 12:38).
24:48-51 An opposite scenario is now described. This time the slave put in charge of the household assumes that his master's return is a long way off (cf. 25:5). This speaks to the problem of delay in the fulfillment of prophecy (cf. Ezek 12:22; Hab 2:3; 2 Pet 3:4). Instead of faithfully discharging the duties assigned him by the master, the slave treats his fellow slaves violently (cf. 18:28-33) and over-indulges in food and drink (cf. 1 Thess 5:7).
**The master will return unannounced and unexpected.** The master arrives unexpectedly, catches the evil slave in mid-debauch, and punishes him severely with dismemberment (cf. Luke 12:46).
**assign him a place with the hypocrites.** This is quite serious as hypocrisy is presented as the most heinous sin in Matthew (cf. 6:2ff; 7:5; 15:7; 22:18; 23:13ff).
**weeping and gnashing of teeth.** This is a graphic picture of the horror of eschatological doom (cf. 8:12; 13:42, 50; 21:41; 22:13; 25:30, 41, 46). To avoid such a terrifying fate, one must be constantly obedient to the master because one does not know when he will arrive (24:36, 39, 42, 44; 25:13). Compare the solemn exhortation of Luke 21:34-36.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In Matthew 24:36-51, Jesus continues the parabolic and paraenetic (or hortatory) emphasis that began in 24:32. This passage has three parts, the first stressing that the time of Jesus' return is unknowable (24:36-42), the second that disciples must be ready for an unexpected appearance of Jesus (24:43-44), and the third that disciples must faithfully obey their master until he returns (24:45-51). The first part draws an analogy between the days of Noah and the last days (cf. 2 Pet 3:3-7), warning against a preoccupation with daily life that does not take imminent divine judgment into account. Instead, alertness is necessary (24:42). The second part speaks parabolically of a homeowner who does not know that his home is about to be burglarized. The disciples are implicitly told not to emulate the homeowner but to be prepared for the unexpected return of Jesus (24:44). The third part continues the parabolic imagery with the master of a household entrusting his slave with a duty to perform during his absence. Two hypothetical scenarios are laid out, the first involving a good slave who is rewarded for his faithfulness (24:47), the second an evil slave whose profligate behavior warrants the master's wrath (24:50-51). This imagery warns disciples not to deceive themselves into a sinful lifestyle with the notion that Jesus will not return for a long time. All three parts of the passage stress the necessity of Jesus' followers being alert, prepared, and busy with their master's business until his return. Matthew 25 will continue with this parabolic and paraenetic emphasis.
The teaching that Jesus' return will be unexpected exposes the folly of those whose eschatological alertness rises and falls with the latest news from around the world. There are those "dispen-sensationalists," whose notion of prophecy leads them into a constant scrutiny of world events, especially the latest events in the Middle East, in a near frantic search of supposed prophetic fulfillments that signal the end of the world. Those of this ilk evidently are under the impression that thieves attempt to burglarize homes when the owners are at home with all the lights and the electronic alarm turned on. Their voices wax and wane in direct proportion to the degree of tension between Israel and the Palestinians. But according to Jesus, moments of increased world tensions would be less likely to portend Christ's return than moments of relative prosperity and tranquility (1 Thess 5:1-3). In any event, the disciples of Jesus must constantly be about the master's business, vigilantly awaiting his return. The correctness of one's eschatology is ultimately a matter of one's ethics, not one's speculation.
The Christology of Matthew 24:36. It may be surprising for those who hold to the classical, orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and who, as a result, have a high view of Jesus to learn from this text that he claimed not to know the time of his return to earth. But this text, as well as its parallel in Mark 13:32 and Jesus' later comment to his disciples in Acts 1:7, all make the common point that the Father alone keeps this detail in his own inscrutable counsel. How this is possible, in light of the pre- existence and deity of Jesus, is not easily explained. However, it is clear that the incarnation of Jesus involved limitation of the use of his divine attributes (Phil 2:6-8; Gundry 1994:492). As a human being, Jesus became hungry and thirsty and tired (e.g., 4:2; 21:18; John 4:6; 19:28). He was empowered by the Spirit of God for his ministry and his miracles (3:16; 4:1; 12:18, 28; cf. Luke 3:22; 4:1, 14, 18; John 1:32; 3:34; Acts 10:38). After the temptation, he was in need of ministry from angels (4:11; cf. Luke 22:43). As he contemplated returning to the Father, he asked for the restoration of his glorious preincarnate prerogatives (John 17:1-5). Evangelical Christians are understandably concerned about this text, but they must recognize its emphasis of the genuine humanity of Jesus, whom Paul affirmed to be the _man_ who was the sole mediator between God and humanity (1 Tim 2:5). For a helpful study of the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of Jesus, see Hawthorne (1991).
Eschatology. One detail of this passage has come in for extended discussion among evangelicals of a futurist bent. This is the language of separation—in which one is taken and another left at the coming of Jesus (24:40-42). Those who hold to the theory of a pre-tribulational rapture of the church, distinct from the return of Jesus to the earth after the tribulation (24:29), debate whether 24:40-42 speaks of the rapture taking believers from the earth and leaving unbelievers. The difficulty in coming to a conclusion on this matter is twofold. First, Jesus did not speak here in terms that approximate the distinction between a pre-tribulational rapture and a post-tribulational coming to the earth, as Paul arguably does (compare 1 Thess 4:13-18 with 2 Thess 1:6-10). Second, the language of one being taken and another left is ambiguous. On the analogy of the flood of Noah, those taken were swept away by the flood, and those who were left were protected in the ark (24:38-39; cf. 13:41). But the imagery of 24:31 seems to involve the taking or gathering of God's chosen ones, not those about to be judged (cf. 3:12). The better part of wisdom on this question is to regard it as an unanswerable diversion from the message of the passage, which is to stress alertness (24:42-44; Carson 1984:509). Ironically, it is possible in cases like this for exegesis to degenerate into a pedantry that distracts the student from the teaching of the passage. Intellectual debate over the intricacies of a text must not occur at the expense of obedience to its ethical directives.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. The parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids (25:1-13)
1 "Then the Kingdom of Heaven will be like ten bridesmaids[*] who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish, and five were wise. 3 The five who were foolish didn't take enough olive oil for their lamps, 4 but the other five were wise enough to take along extra oil. 5 When the bridegroom was delayed, they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
6 "At midnight they were roused by the shout, 'Look, the bridegroom is coming! Come out and meet him!'
7 "All the bridesmaids got up and prepared their lamps. 8 Then the five foolish ones asked the others, 'Please give us some of your oil because our lamps are going out.'
9 "But the others replied, 'We don't have enough for all of us. Go to a shop and buy some for yourselves.'
10 "But while they were gone to buy oil, the bridegroom came. Then those who were ready went in with him to the marriage feast, and the door was locked. 11 Later, when the other five bridesmaids returned, they stood outside, calling, 'Lord! Lord! Open the door for us!'
12 "But he called back, 'Believe me, I don't know you!'
13 "So you, too, must keep watch! For you do not know the day or hour of my return."
## NOTES
25:1 **The Kingdom of Heaven will be like.** This parable begins with the familiar comparison formula seen in 13:24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52; 18:23; 20:1. The reference to a wedding reminds the reader of the allusion to the same activity in the days of Noah (24:38).
**bridesmaids.** Lit., "virgins," young unmarried women who in the custom of that day attended the bride. It is not clear whether they waited with the bride at her father's house or waited at the groom's house for him to bring the bride to the wedding feast (Song 3:11; 1 Macc 9:37-42; Josephus _Antiquities_ 13.20). The legal contract of betrothal or engagement would have already been executed, and the groom might take his bride at any time to celebrate their wedding and begin to live together (1:18).
25:2-5 **Five of them were foolish, and five were wise.** The wise and foolish bridesmaids are very similar to the faithful and evil servants in the previous parable (24:45, 48). The five foolish bridesmaids expect the groom to arrive rapidly, but the wise are prepared for a possible delay.
**lamps.** These may actually be torches, sticks with oil-soaked rags wrapped around one end.
**extra oil.** Lit., "oil in flasks."
**the bridegroom.** God's relationship with Israel is likened to a bridegroom's with a bride in the OT (e.g., Isa 54:4-6; 62:5; Jer 31:32; Ezek 16:7ff; Hos 2:16, 19), and in this parable Jesus portrays himself in an equivalent relationship with his disciples.
**was delayed.** As it happens, there is a delay (cf. 24:48), and the bridesmaids grow drowsy and fall asleep.
25:6 **Look, the bridegroom is coming!** In the middle of the night (24:43), a shout is heard announcing the bridegroom's imminent arrival (cf. the trumpet of 24:31). The bridesmaids are summoned to come out to meet him and join the procession to his house for the feast (22:2-14).
25:7-9 **prepared their lamps.** They prepared their lamps (perhaps torches) by trimming the wicks and adding oil. But the lamps of the foolish bridesmaids were going out for lack of oil ( Job 18:5; Prov 13:9). The wise bridesmaids could not give them oil from their flasks because there would not be enough to go around and everyone would be in the dark. The foolish bridesmaids have no choice but to go out to buy more oil. Such a task takes time, especially in the middle of the night.
25:10 **while they were gone to buy oil, the bridegroom came.** Once he arrived, the procession to the wedding feast occurred. Once everyone arrived at the groom's house, the door was locked (cf. 24:33).
25:11-13 **Open the door for us!** The foolish bridesmaids arrived too late to be included in the wedding feast. Their appeal to the groom and his refusal to permit their entry contain language that ominously recalls 7:21-23 (cf. Ps 1:6; Luke 13:25). This seems unrealistically harsh, but compare 22:11-14 for similar treatment of wedding guests.
**keep watch! For you do not know the day or hour of my return.** The unmistakable lesson is clearly stated at the end of the story: constant alertness is necessary because the time of the bridegroom's coming is not known (24:3, 36, 39, 42-44, 50; Acts 1:6-7; 1 Thess 5:2-6). The problem is not that the bridesmaids slept, since the groom's arrival was delayed. The problem is that the foolish bridesmaids were not prepared when he did come. The NLT's words "of my return" are a correct interpretation of 25:13, but they are not present in the Gr. text.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids demonstrates for the last time in the discourse that the time of Jesus' return is unknowable (cf. 24:3, 36, 39, 42-44, 50; 25:13). This thesis has been stated propositionally (24:36) and then illustrated historically from the days of Noah (24:37-42). It is also presented in the parables about the unexpected burglar (24:43), good slave (24:45-47), and evil slave (24:48-51). As if these previous demonstrations of the point were not enough, the present parable illustrates it from yet another familiar event, a wedding. Expecting the immediate arrival of the groom to begin the wedding feast, five of the ten bridesmaids foolishly did not prepare for nightfall by bringing oil for their lamps. But the five others wisely prepared for a delay. The foolishness of the former group resulted in their missing the bridegroom and being banned from the wedding feast, but the wise preparations of the latter group led to their sharing in the joy of the wedding (cf. 9:15).
The interpretation of this parable has been unnecessarily complicated by excessive allegorizing. It is true that wedding feasts and lamps are used metaphorically elsewhere in Scripture (Rev 1:12-13; 19:7, 9). Jesus himself indicates that the features of certain parables have detailed correspondences with reality (13:18-23, 37-43, 49-50), but in the case of the present parable, Jesus supplied only a generalizing conclusion (25:13). It seems clear enough that Jesus is the bridegroom whose arrival is delayed, and that the wise and foolish bridesmaids are alert and lackadaisical disciples, respectively. The expectation of the bridegroom lends itself perfectly to the point of alert preparedness for the coming of Jesus, but one should not be concerned with whether the rapture of believers or the return of Jesus to the earth is in view (Walvoord 1974:196-197). Neither should one succumb to the common temptation to identify the oil in the parable with the Holy Spirit (Green 1988:240; Hendriksen 1973:879), or stress that salvation cannot be transferred from one person to another (Tasker:1961:234). Perhaps such speculations are pleasant intellectual exercises, but they divert attention from the ethical imperative found in 25:13 and thus function like the distracting activities which diverted Noah's generation from awareness of their imminent judgment (cf. 24:38-39).
The foolish bridesmaids' lack of prudence is similar to the foolishness of the man who built his house on the sand, a portrayal of one who did not obey the words of Jesus (7:24-27). A comparison of 24:48 and 25:5 shows that the lesson of this parable is the same as that of the evil slave. In both cases, some delay in the return of Jesus is postulated. But the two reactions to the delay are opposites, and in these opposite reactions there is a crucial lesson. In the first case, the evil slave irresponsibly overestimated the delay of the master's return and was unpleasantly surprised by the master's seemingly early arrival. In the second case, the foolish bridesmaids frivolously underestimated the delay in the groom's arrival and did not prepare for it. The evil slave's lackadaisical approach to the master's return is similar to the generation of Noah and the homeowner, neither of whom expected a problem (24:36-44). Neither were alert and ready. The foolish bridesmaids were not prepared to persevere to the end (cf. 10:22; 13:20-21; 24:13). From these opposite errors, the church learns that it can assume neither that Jesus will return immediately nor that he will return eventually. Christians must expect Jesus constantly, yet at the same time they must persevere and plan for future ministry in case his coming is delayed. These two duties must be held in dynamic tension if the church is to be faithful to the teaching of its master (Luke 12:35-36).
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. The parable of the three servants (25:14-30)
14 "Again, the Kingdom of Heaven can be illustrated by the story of a man going on a long trip. He called together his servants and entrusted his money to them while he was gone. 15 He gave five bags of silver[*] to one, two bags of silver to another, and one bag of silver to the last—dividing it in proportion to their abilities. He then left on his trip.
16 "The servant who received the five bags of silver began to invest the money and earned five more. 17 The servant with two bags of silver also went to work and earned two more. 18 But the servant who received the one bag of silver dug a hole in the ground and hid the master's money.
19 "After a long time their master returned from his trip and called them to give an account of how they had used his money. 20 The servant to whom he had entrusted the five bags of silver came forward with five more and said, 'Master, you gave me five bags of silver to invest, and I have earned five more.'
21 "The master was full of praise. 'Well done, my good and faithful servant. You have been faithful in handling this small amount, so now I will give you many more responsibilities. Let's celebrate together '
22 "The servant who had received the two bags of silver came forward and said, 'Master, you gave me two bags of silver to invest, and I have earned two more.'
23 "The master said, 'Well done, my good and faithful servant. You have been faithful in handling this small amount, so now I will give you many more responsibilities. Let's celebrate together!'
24 "Then the servant with the one bag of silver came and said, 'Master, I knew you were a harsh man, harvesting crops you didn't plant and gathering crops you didn't cultivate. 25 I was afraid I would lose your money, so I hid it in the earth. Look, here is your money back.'
26 "But the master replied, 'You wicked and lazy servant! If you knew I harvested crops I didn't plant and gathered crops I didn't cultivate, 27 why didn't you deposit my money in the bank? At least I could have gotten some interest on it.'
28 "Then he ordered, 'Take the money from this servant, and give it to the one with the ten bags of silver. 29 To those who use well what they are given, even more will be given, and they will have an abundance. But from those who do nothing, even what little they have will be taken away. 30 Now throw this useless servant into outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'"
## NOTES
25:14-15 **Again, the Kingdom of Heaven can be illustrated by the story of.** This expansion comes from 25:1; this parable is lit. introduced only by the words "for it is like." This parable concerning an absentee master reminds the reader of two previous stories (21:33-39; 24:45-51). As the scene is set for this parable, three slaves are entrusted with the master's resources according to their individual abilities.
**five bags of silver to one, two bags of silver to another, and one bag of silver to the last.** The "bags of silver" are lit. "talents" (see NLT mg). The word translated "money" in 25:18 is lit. "silver," hence the NLT rendering. The talent ( _talanton_ ) was originally a measure of weight and is variously estimated at 50 to 75 pounds. As a monetary term, its value varied, but it always connoted a very large sum, evidently around six thousand silver denarii (BDAG 988). This would be as much money as a day laborer could expect to earn over the span of nineteen years! Thus, the amount of money involved here is very high, perhaps to "imply the greatness of God's gifts to his people" (Davies and Allison 1997:405). For a similar parable, see Luke 19:11-27.
25:16-18 The use each slave makes of what was entrusted to him is explained here. The first two slaves each invest or do business with their talents and gain a one hundred percent profit, but the third slave only hides the master's money by burying it in the ground. Evidently, this was a common practice (cf. 13:44; _b. Bava Metzi'a_ 42a).
25:19-22 **After a long time their master returned.** The matter of delay in the master's return occurs here for the third time in the context (cf. 24:48; 25:5). When the master finally returns, there must be an accounting of his resources (cf. 18:23); this portrays eschatological judgment. Each of the first two slaves demonstrate their one hundred percent profits.
25:23 **Well done, my good and faithful servant.** The master congratulates the first two slaves and heartily rewards them with additional responsibilities (cf. 24:47; 25:28-29; Luke 16:10; 19:17; _m. Avot_ 4:2).
**Let's celebrate together!** Lit., "Enter into the joy of your Lord," which probably portrays entrance into the Kingdom and the joy of the eschatological banquet (cf. 8:11; 26:29). The greatest joy of a follower of Jesus is to share in Jesus' joy.
25:24-27 **here is your money back.** As the reader anticipates from 25:18, the situation with the third servant is totally different. Fearful of his master's reputation as a harsh man, he states that he has preserved the master's talent by hiding it in the ground (cf. 13:44), and then he returns it to him. He appears to believe his caution is commendable and attempts to persuade the master that it is so. Yet, despite his calling his master "Lord" (cf. 7:21-23) in his attempt at justifying himself, he earns nothing. The third slave's estimate of the master's harshness ironically proved to be correct. The master was angry that this slave, whom he described as wicked (cf. 7:11; 13:49; 22:10) and lazy, had earned no interest on the money. The slave's laziness was shown by the fact that far from doing business with his talent, he did not even put the money in a bank where it could earn some interest. Hiding the master's resources in the ground is as senseless and useless as hiding one's lamp under a basket (5:15).
25:28-29 **Take the money from this servant, and give it to the one with the ten bags of silver.** Furious with the third slave, the master orders that the single talent be taken from him and given to the first servant, who now has eleven talents. These verses serve as a further explanation for the master's seemingly harsh actions (see 8:29). The slaves who have resources due to their faithful stewardship will receive more and will have an abundance (13:12; cf. Prov 9:9; Luke 12:48; 19:26), but the slave who earned nothing with the master's talent has even that talent taken away.
25:30 **throw this useless servant into outer darkness.** Since he had earned nothing for the master, he was useless and received an extremely severe punishment (cf. 8:12; 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51). The first two slaves show that trustworthiness leads to greater blessing, but the third slave demonstrates that a lack of trustworthiness leads to the removal of the original blessing.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The structure of this parable is completely symmetrical, with each of the three scenes dealing with the three slaves in the same order:
1a. Five talents entrusted (25:15)
1b. Two talents entrusted (25:15)
1c. One talent entrusted (25:15)
2a. Five talents invested and five more earned (25:16)
2b. Two talents invested and two more earned (25:17)
2c. One talent hidden and nothing earned (25:18)
3a. Good and faithful slave rewarded (25:20-21)
3b. Good and faithful slave rewarded (25:22-23)
3c. Wicked and lazy servant punished (25:24-30)
Each of the successive three scenes is longer that the preceding one, with the most stress placed at the end on the punishment of the wicked slave. Thus the parable, despite its positive elements in 25:21, 23, is more of a warning against irresponsibility than an encouragement to faithfulness.
The preceding parables have been about alertness, and this one is particularly about the faithful stewardship which alertness produces. This time the issue is not whether the slaves will be surprised by the master's return but whether they will be dependable in the use of his resources. His gifts lead to their tasks. A key detail of this parable is that the master entrusted his resources to the slaves according to their individual abilities (25:15). The third slave received only one talent, so the master evidently realized that he had less ability than the other two slaves. Nonetheless, he ought to have earned something with the talent, and he did not. He was not given five talents, and he was not expected to earn five talents, but he was not permitted to earn nothing at all. Blomberg (1992:371) points out that whereas the foolish bridesmaids thought their task was easier than it turned out to be, the lazy slave thought his task was harder than it turned out to be. The point is that if the followers of Jesus are faithful to him during his absence, they will be good stewards of the opportunities and abilities he has entrusted to them (cf. Luke 12:42; Rom 12:6ff; 1 Cor 4:1-2; 7:7; 12:4ff; Eph 4:7-8; Titus 1:7; 1 Pet 4:10). Alertness requires effort and active participation in the work of the Kingdom. Perhaps the familiar proverb attributed to William Carey is appropriate here: "Attempt great things for God, expect great things from God." Disciples must not make, as it were, shaky investments with their Lord's resources, but neither can they excuse their laziness with the false excuse that they have incurred no losses. "When Christ returns, he will not ask if one had the date right but 'What have you been doing?'" (Garland 1993:241).
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. The final judgment (25:31-46)
31 "But when the Son of Man[*] comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit upon his glorious throne. 32 All the nations[*] will be gathered in his presence, and he will separate the people as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep at his right hand and the goats at his left.
34 "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. 36 I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.'
37 "Then these righteous ones will reply, 'Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? 39 When did we ever see you sick or in prison and visit you?'
40 "And the King will say, 'I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters,[*] you were doing it to me!'
41 "Then the King will turn to those on the left and say, 'Away with you, you cursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demons.[*] 42 For I was hungry, and you didn't feed me. I was thirsty, and you didn't give me a drink. 43 I was a stranger, and you didn't invite me into your home. I was naked, and you didn't give me clothing. I was sick and in prison, and you didn't visit me.'
44 "Then they will reply, 'Lord, when did we ever see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and not help you?'
45 "And he will answer, 'I tell you the truth, when you refused to help the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were refusing to help me.'
46 "And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life."
## NOTES
25:31 **when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit upon his glorious throne.** After the grim picture of the judgment of the lazy slave (25:30), the stage is set for this account of the return of Jesus as the glorious Son of Man with his angels to judge the nations (13:41; 16:27-28; 24:31; 26:64; cf. Dan 7:13-14; Zech 14:5; John 5:27; 2 Thess 1:7; _1 Enoch_ 1:9; 61:8; 62:1-5; 69:27-29; 90:20-36). An added detail is the mention of his sitting on his glorious throne (19:28; cf. 5:34; 23:22; Luke 1:32; Rev 3:21).
25:32-33 **All the nations will be gathered in his presence, and he will separate [them].** All will be gathered before Jesus and separated (13:49) to his right and left as shepherds customarily separated sheep from goats (Ezek 34:17-20). In this context, unlike 20:23 where the right and left hands indicate second and third highest positions in the Kingdom, the right hand is the place of honor (22:44; 26:64) and the left hand is the place of shame (cf. 6:3; 27:38; 1 Kgs 2:19; 22:19). This "judgment" is not like a trial that involves suspense about the verdict but more like a hearing after the trial to pronounce the sentence. It is fitting, in view of other passages, for sheep to stand for genuine followers of Jesus (9:36; 10:6, 16; 15:24; 18:12; 26:31; cf. 2 Sam 24:1; Jer 23:3-4; Ezek 34:6; John 10:1-30; _1 Enoch_ 90:6, 30, 32). Sheep were probably more valuable than goats because of the wool they produced. Some believe that "all the nations" means all the Gentile nations, excluding the Jews, but this is doubtful (cf. 24:9, 14; Davies and Allison 1997:422-423; Hagner 1995:742). It is not easy to correlate this scene with other judgment scenes in the NT because there is no reference to a resurrection (cf. Acts 17:31; Rom 14:10-12; 1 Cor 15:51-57; 2 Cor 5:10; Rev 20:11-15). Perhaps the resurrection is assumed.
25:34-40 Jesus has been described as Son of Man and his judgment of the nations has been likened to a shepherd's activity. But here he speaks as the king who determines who will enter his Kingdom. He speaks first to the sheep on his right hand and announces that they, whom the Father has blessed (5:3ff), will inherit (5:5; 19:29) the Kingdom due to their merciful ministry to him when he was hungry, thirsty (10:42), homeless (Job 31:32; 1 Tim 5:10; Heb 13:2), naked, and imprisoned (Heb 10:34; 13:3).
**Lord, when did we ever see you hungry?** When the righteous (10:41; 13:43, 49) professed surprise and ignorance of their sixfold, merciful ministry, Jesus announced that it was done for him when it was done for one of his little brothers. The amazement of those on the King's right hand is evidently due to their lack of recollection of ministering to Jesus when he was in need, but ministry to his people is regarded as ministry to him (10:40). This is the central principle of judgment in this passage (cf. Prov 19:17). The preparation of the Kingdom for the blessed ones in 25:34 should be contrasted with the preparation of eternal fire for the devil and his demons in 25:41. (See the following commentary for discussion of the identity of "the least of my brothers and sisters.")
25:41-45 **Away with you, you cursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demons.** These verses are exactly symmetrical with 25:34-40, but those on the King's left are told to depart into eternal fire (cf. 7:23; 18:8) because they have not carried out the sixfold ministry to Jesus when he was in need. They too are amazed at the key principle of the judgment—that ministry to Jesus' little brothers amounts to ministry to him. Their judgment is due to a sin of omission, not commission. "Away with you" is similar to the strong language of 4:10 and 16:23. It is noteworthy that the eternal fire (3:12; 13:42, 50; 18:8-9) is not prepared for those on the king's left but for the devil and his demons (lit. "his angels"; cf. 2 Cor 12:7; Rev 12:7, 9). Unlike the Kingdom in 25:34, the place of eternal fire is not said to be prepared from the creation of the world.
25:46 **they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.** This summary recapitulates the treatment of those on the right and on the left, in inverted order. Those on the left go to eternal punishment, and those on the right go to eternal life (19:16, 29; cf. Dan 12:2; John 5:28-29). The unique gravity of this judgment is stressed by the repetition of the word "eternal." There is a clear parallel between the expressions used in this verse and those used earlier for the destinies of those on the right and left in 25:34 and 25:41.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Hagner (1995:740) rightly observes that "the final section of the eschatological discourse ends fittingly in a great judgment scene." This discourse began with the disciples' question about the coming of Jesus in 24:3, and it ends with his coming to judge all the nations in 25:31. But the disciples' question was primarily about the timing of Jesus' coming, and there is no chronology here. This passage deals with the significance of Jesus' coming, not its timing. It amounts to an exposition of 24:29-31.
Although some view Matthew 25:31-46 as a parable (e.g., Robinson 1928:208-209), its metaphorical elements (25:32b-33) are not extended throughout the discourse. One might describe it as a semi-parable, but it begins and concludes as a prose narrative of the judgment of the nations. The narrative appears to have four parts, which speak of the setting of the judgment (25:31-33), the invitation to the righteous to enter the Kingdom (25:34-40), the banishment of the wicked to eternal fire (25:41-45), and the chiastic conclusion (25:46). In general, this final section of the Olivet discourse adds the lesson of compassion to the lessons of alertness (24:32-25:13) and faithfulness (25:14-30), which have been inculcated as the proper ethical response to the coming of Jesus.
Jesus taught his disciples to love all people, even their enemies (5:43-47), but there must be a special love and concern for one's fellow disciples. Itinerant preachers would especially need the type of ministry mentioned in 25:35-36 (10:40; 3 John 5-8), but it is doubtful that they alone are in view here. Jesus is identified with his disciples and they with him. They are persecuted due to their connection with him (5:11; 10:18, 22, 25; 23:34). Thus, it is quite likely that the privation of Jesus' little brothers in 25:35-36 is due to their testimony for Jesus. When one shows mercy to a follower of Jesus, in a profound sense one is showing mercy to Jesus himself.
Interpretive Questions. The interpretation of this passage is earnestly debated (Gray 1989). Dispensationalists argue that the passage speaks not of a general judgment of resurrected mankind but of the judgment of living nations who are alive on earth at Christ's return. The standard of judgment is their treatment of the Jewish remnant during the tribulation (Toussaint 1980:288-289; Walvoord 1974:202). The context and language of the passage can lend themselves to this interpretation, but it is doubtful that Jesus was being as precise as the modern dispensational system is in regard to a series of judgments in the end times.
A more exegetically oriented issue is the identity of "the least of these my brothers and sisters" (lit. "these least of my brothers"). Some understand the nations assembled for this judgment as those who have never heard the gospel and who are judged on the basis of the light they had (Green 1988:243), but Jesus himself seems to discount this wishful thinking in 11:27. Those inclined to a socially-oriented gospel see the passage as stressing the necessity of deeds of mercy to anyone in need (Barclay 1975:2.325-326; Beare 1981:495; Davies and Allison 1997:429). No doubt, Jesus' disciples should perform deeds of mercy to those in need (9:13; 12:7), but it is doubtful that Jesus' little brothers are to be identified with the needy in general. The dispensationalist view that the passage speaks of the treatment of the Jewish remnant by Gentiles during the eschatological tribulation probably interprets it too narrowly but correctly understands the relationship between belief in Jesus and deeds of mercy to others. All these views, however, seem to miss or minimize the fact that in Matthew the "little ones" are the true family of Jesus (10:40-42; 12:46-50), and that Jesus' "brothers" are related to him spiritually (5:22-24, 47; 7:3-5; 12:48-50; 18:15, 21, 35; 23:8; 28:10; Hagner 1995:744-745). One dare not cause the spiritual ruin of these little ones (18:6), and one must genuinely forgive them when necessary (18:21, 35). In Jesus' community, the world's lust for status and prestige is out of place since all the disciples of Jesus are brothers (and sisters) in the same family (20:20-28; 23:8-10).
This passage also speaks to the awesome doctrine of eternal punishment. Although it seems that the doctrine of the annihilation of the lost is growing in popularity, the juxtaposition of eternal life and eternal punishment in 25:46 renders such a notion as wishful thinking. Matthew's descriptions of the destiny of the lost speak of "fire" (3:12; 13:40, 50; 18:8-9; 25:41, 46; cf. 2 Thess 1:8; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:7; Rev 14:10; 19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8) and/or "deep darkness" (8:12; 22:13; 25:30; cf. 2 Pet 2:4; Jude 1:6, 13). The dreadful horror of everlasting separation from God is vividly expressed by both metaphors.
Summary and Transition. The difficulties in interpreting Matthew 24–25 serve to remind us of our limitations as finite human beings. When Bible teachers of equal scholarship and devotion cannot agree on the particulars of a passage, one should shy away from dogmatism and keep an open mind toward further instruction. Matthew 24–25 shows that biblical prophecy is not mere prognostication or soothsaying. Only 24:4-31 directly responds to the disciples' question about the details of the future (24:3). Even this futuristic section of the discourse stresses the need for ethical obedience to Jesus (24:4, 13-14, 23, 26). The rest of the discourse (24:32– 25:46) is paraenetic and parabolic, stressing how one should live in light of the future. In this second part of the discourse, future events are indeed mentioned (24:33, 36-37, 39-42, 44; 25:13, 31, 46), but only to support the ethical characteristics mandated for Jesus disciples—alertness (24:32–25:13), faithfulness (25:14-30), and compassion (25:31-46). Jesus never spoke of the future to merely satisfy curiosity or provoke speculation. Rather, he opened up the future to God's people for the sake of their present obedience to God's plan.
Since there is a focus on eschatology in each of Jesus' first four discourses, especially at or near their conclusions (7:22; 10:32, 39-42; 13:49; 18:35), it is not surprising that Jesus ends _all_ his teaching in Matthew with eschatology (26:1). His teaching has equipped his disciples with ethics befitting his reign (chs 5–7), with warnings about the perils of ministry (ch 10), with awareness of the contrasting responses to the Kingdom message (ch 13), with values for the Kingdom family (ch 18), and with the proper perspective on the future (chs 24–25). This proper perspective takes into account both the unknown date of Jesus' return and the prospect of delay in that return. What is needed is a vigilance which does not veer into frivolous enthusiasm on one side or into cold apathy on the other (24:31–25:13). This vigilance is shown by faithful stewardship (25:14-30). This stewardship is exercised in helping those in need, especially one's brothers and sisters in Christ (25:31-46).
When Jesus concludes all his words, he has concluded the teaching that he commands his disciples to perpetuate and inculcate in his future followers from all the nations of the earth. With his magnificent body of teaching now concluded, events will now quickly move toward his being handed over to be crucified (26:2). He will give his life a ransom for many, to save his people from their sins and to inaugurate the new covenant in his blood (1:23; 20:28; 26:28).
## TEXT [Commentary]
VIII. Conclusion: Passion, Resurrection, and Commission (26:1–28:20)
A. The Plot to Kill Jesus (26:1-5; cf. Mark 14:1-2; Luke 21:37–22:1-2)
1 When Jesus had finished saying all these things, he said to his disciples, 2 "As you know, Passover begins in two days, and the Son of Man[*] will be handed over to be crucified."
3 At that same time the leading priests and elders were meeting at the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, 4 plotting how to capture Jesus secretly and kill him. 5 "But not during the Passover celebration," they agreed, "or the people may riot."
## NOTES
26:1-2 **When Jesus had finished saying all these things.** For the fifth and final time, Matthew concludes a section of Jesus' discourse with this formula (cf. 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1). Matthew portrays 26:1 not simply as the end of a discourse, but as the end of _all_ ( _pantas_ ) that Jesus has taught in this Gospel (28:20). His teaching about the rule of God, begun in 4:17, is completed.
**Passover begins in two days.** Evidently, Passover day (Nisan 14), when the lambs were killed, fell on a Thursday that year, and the following Feast of Unleavened Bread ran from Nisan 15–21 (Lev 23:5-6; Num 28:16-17). If so, the meal would have been held just after sundown on Thursday (Blomberg 1992:388; Davies and Allison 1997:437, although Hagner 1995:754 opts for Friday evening; but cf. 763, 767). In 26:2, Jesus was evidently speaking on Tuesday.
**the Son of Man will be handed over to be crucified.** His words serve to remind the disciples of all the previous passion predictions
26:3 **Caiaphas, the high priest.** In Second Temple times, the high priesthood had become a political appointment by Rome. Caiaphas, high priest from AD 18–36, was the instigator of the plot to kill Jesus (see John 11:49; 18:13-28).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Introduction to Matthew's Passion Narrative. The climactic events that have been repeatedly predicted since the Galilean ministry are now about to unfold (12:38-40; 16:4, 21; 17:12, 22-23; 20:17-19; 21:38-39; 23:32). Jesus was aware of the forces arrayed against him (26:2), yet he did not resist doing the will of the Father despite the suffering that would be involved (26:36-46). Ironically, the very religious leaders who opposed and sought to destroy Jesus were the unwitting instruments God used to fulfill his plan to exalt Jesus (Hagner 1995:755).
Jesus' last week in Jerusalem is given extended treatment in all four Gospels. This fact, along with the notable lack of material about Jesus' life before his public ministry, shows that the Gospels are not mere historical chronicles or biographies, but theologically motivated literary works. The Gospel narratives of events from Palm Sunday to the end of Jesus' earthly ministry take up Matthew 21–28, Mark 11–16; Luke 19–24, and John 12–21; the last week of Jesus' life occupies roughly one third of the total Gospel materials. It has been said that the Gospels are passion (suffering) narratives with extended introductions, and this is only a slight exaggeration.
Matthew's narrative of Jesus' suffering is prefaced with the stories of the Temple conflicts with the religious leaders (chs 21–23) and the Olivet or eschatological discourse (chs 24–25). In both of these sections, Matthew's material is more extensive than either Mark's or Luke's. When it comes to the passion narrative proper (chs 26–28), Matthew and Mark are parallel for the most part, with Luke and John, especially, contributing unique material. The general flow of Matthew's material is as follows:
1. Preparation of the disciples (26:1-46)
2. Arrest at Gethsemane (26:47-56)
3. Trial before Caiaphas (26:57-68)
4. Peter's three denials (26:69-75)
5. Trial before Pilate (27:1-2; 11-26) with interwoven account of Judas' suicide (27:3-10)
6. Jesus mocked and crucified (27:27-56)
7. Jesus buried by Joseph of Arimathea (27:57-61)
8. Jesus' resurrection and its denial (27:62–28:15)
9. The great commission (28:18-20)
There are several events and elements in Matthew's passion narrative (some form entire portions) that are unique to his Gospel among the Synoptics and that presumably indicate his special literary and theological emphases:
1. Jesus reminds the disciples of his impending death (26:1-2)
2. The amount of money paid Judas is specified as thirty pieces of silver (26:15; cf. Exod 21:32; Zech 11:12)
3. Judas asks Jesus if he is the betrayer (26:25)
4. Jesus' blood is presented as being poured out for the forgiveness of sins (26:28)
5. The second prayer in Gethsemane is presented as a direct quotation (26:42)
6. Jesus' words to Judas after the kiss (26:50)
7. Jesus' comments after the high priest's servant's ear is cut off about violence, the availability of angelic help, and scriptural fulfillment (26:52-54)
8. The high priest's demand before God that Jesus speak (26:63)
9. Sarcastic reference to Jesus as Messiah (26:68)
10. Jesus is described as a Galilean (26:69)
11. Peter's second denial includes an oath (26:72)
12. The purpose of the morning consultation is already decided: execute Jesus (27:1)
13. Pilate describes Jesus as the one who is called the Messiah (27:17, 22)
14. Pilate's wife recounts a dream and calls Jesus innocent (27:19)
15. Pilate washes his hands and the crowd took responsibility for Jesus' death (27:24-25)
16. The sign at the cross specifies the name of Jesus (27:37)
17. Emphasis on Jesus as the Son of God (27:40, 43)
18. Allusion to Psalm 22:8 (27:43)
19. Account of the earthquake and opening of the tombs (27:51-53)
20. Joseph of Arimathea is called a disciple (27:57)
21. The Jewish religious leaders get Pilate to guard Jesus' tomb (27:62-66)
22. Jesus meets the women after the resurrection (28:9-10)
23. The conspiracy to deny the resurrection (28:11-15).
24. Jesus has all authority, all nations are to be discipled, trinitarian baptismal formula, disciples are to be taught to obey all that Jesus commanded, promise to be with the disciples until the end of the age (28:18-20)
The magisterial work of Brown (1994) provides an extremely thorough discussion of the death of Jesus in all four Gospels. Brown's handling of Matthew's passion narrative begins with 26:30.
The Plot to Kill Jesus. Jesus told his disciples that he would be crucified during Passover. This is the first prediction that connects Jesus' death to the Passover (cf. 1 Cor 5:7). These words also showed that Jesus was not going to be surprised by the nefarious events which transpire in this chapter (26:21, 31, 45-46, 50, 54, 56). For discussion of the historical and synoptic questions, including whether Jesus was crucified in AD 30 or 33, see Blomberg (1987:175-180), Carson (1985:528-532), Hoehner (1976:65-114), and Keener (1999:607-611).
Matthew's mention of the leader's plot in 26:3-5 serves to confirm what Jesus said in 26:2. A plot against Jesus had been in place for some time (cf. 12:14; 22:15), but given the conflicts in the Temple, there was more reason than ever for the chief priests and elders to meet with the high priest Caiaphas (cf. John 11:49; 18:13-14, 24, 28; Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.35) and plan to apprehend Jesus secretly and kill him. Secrecy was necessary because of Jesus' popularity with the multitudes of pilgrims who had arrived in Jerusalem for the Passover festival (21:26; 27:24). The leaders thought they would need to wait until after the Passover to arrest Jesus, but Judas' offer to betray Jesus would allow them to accomplish their goal more rapidly (26:14-16, 47ff).
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. The Anointing at Bethany (26:6-13; cf. Mark 14:3-9; John 12:2-11)
6 Meanwhile, Jesus was in Bethany at the home of Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy. 7 While he was eating,[*] a woman came in with a beautiful alabaster jar of expensive perfume and poured it over his head.
8 The disciples were indignant when they saw this. "What a waste!" they said. 9 "It could have been sold for a high price and the money given to the poor."
10 But Jesus, aware of this, replied, "Why criticize this woman for doing such a good thing to me? 11 You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me. 12 She has poured this perfume on me to prepare my body for burial. 13 I tell you the truth, wherever the Good News is preached throughout the world, this woman's deed will be remembered and discussed."
## NOTES
26:6 **Jesus was in Bethany.** Sandwiched between two sections of the betrayal story is the narrative of Jesus' anointing in Bethany (cf. Mark 14:3-9; John 12:2-11). Bethany was a village less than two miles east of Jerusalem on the Mount of Olives (21:17; John 11:1, 18).
**Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy.** Spending time in the home of Simon the leper, who is mentioned only here in the NT, would render Jesus ritually impure just before Passover (cf. 8:2). The NLT reflects the view of some that Simon was a former leper who had already been healed by Jesus. There may be four other Simons in this Gospel (4:18; 10:2, 4; 13:55; 16:16-17; 17:25; 27:32).
26:7 **a woman came in with a beautiful alabaster jar of expensive perfume and poured it over his head.** While Jesus was eating, an unnamed woman (but see John 12:3) surprisingly anointed his head with perfume.
26:8-9 **What a waste!** The disciples responded indignantly to what they perceived as an extravagance. They protested that the valuable perfume could have been sold and the money given to the poor (cf. 11:5; 19:21; cf. Luke 4:18; 21:1-4). But the next verses show that their apparent piety masked a serious lack of spiritual perception. The disciples were inexplicably oblivious to the absolutely exceptional nature of these days in Jerusalem.
26:10 **Why criticize this woman?** Jesus criticized the disciples for criticizing the woman. Her action might show her perception of the uniqueness of the hour (see note on 26:12), a perception the disciples lack.
26:11 **You will always have the poor.** Poor people will always be around (Deut 15:11), but Jesus' time on earth was short (26:2-3). Opportunities abound for helping the poor, but time was running out for honoring Jesus.
26:12 **She has poured this perfume on me to prepare my body for burial.** It is not clear how much the woman realized about Jesus' imminent betrayal, but Jesus interpreted her action as prophetic, a preparation for his burial (Davies and Allison 1997:447). In any event, Hagner (1995:758) goes too far in saying that the woman certainly did not intend to anoint Jesus for burial.
26:13 **this woman's deed will be remembered.** Her deed will be recounted and she will be remembered wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world (24:14; 28:19). The record of this story in Matthew, Mark, and John ensures that the act of the woman will continue to be remembered all over the world. Interestingly, Matthew does not mention that after the crucifixion Jesus' body was again anointed before it was placed in the tomb (27:59; cf. Mark 16:1; Luke 20:1; John 18:38-40).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this passage one is struck by the fact that an obscure, unnamed woman seems to have greater recognition of the shortness of Jesus' remaining time on earth than Jesus' disciples had. Though the disciples had a legitimate point—one should care for the needy—the disciples' timing was all wrong. Despite their being at Jesus' side and hearing his repeated passion predictions, including one that should still be ringing in their ears (26:2), they acted as though it was time for business as usual. As the story of this chapter proceeds, this woman is portrayed sympathetically as serving Jesus while the disciples are corrected. Judas is the foil to the unnamed woman.
Jesus' words about the poor should not be misused as substantiation for a callous attitude about their needs. His comment that the poor are always present alludes to Deuteronomy 15:11, which speaks realistically about needy people in the context of the sabbatical year of remission when debts were to be forgiven (Deut 15:1-2). God commanded the Jews not to withhold a loan because the sabbatical year was near and the loan would be forgiven before it could be completely repaid (Deut 15:7-10). God's blessing will make up for what is lost when the loan is not repaid (Deut 15:4, 6, 10, 14, 18). Overall, Deuteronomy 15 is about helping the needy so that there will be no poor people in the land (Deut 15:4). Jesus' allusion to Deuteronomy 15:11 in 26:11 is a reminder of an ongoing responsibility, not a stoic comment about an inevitable situation. But the ongoing responsibility of caring for the poor paled in comparison with the urgency of caring for Jesus during his last days on earth (9:15).
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus (26:14-16; cf. Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6)
14 Then Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve disciples, went to the leading priests 15 and asked, "How much will you pay me to betray Jesus to you?" And they gave him thirty pieces of silver. 16 From that time on, Judas began looking for an opportunity to betray Jesus.
## NOTES
26:14-16 **How much will you pay me to betray Jesus to you?** This passage returns to the betrayal narrative of 26:1-5. It supplies the missing link to the leaders' plan (cf. Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6). Now they need not wait until after the Passover festival is concluded to arrest Jesus (26:47ff). With Judas's aid, they could apprehend him privately without inciting a riot among the people. Prior to this point, Judas was mentioned only in 10:4, where his name occurs last in the list of disciples with the qualifier "who later betrayed him." Matthew makes it clear that Judas initiated the betrayal by going to the chief priests seeking money. See John 12:6 on Judas's theft from the disciples' funds.
**thirty pieces of silver.** The price paid to Judas for the betrayal was thirty silver shekels. In Exod 21:32 this is the price to be paid to the owner of a slave gored by an ox. Zech 11:12-13 speaks sarcastically of this amount of money. Joseph was sold by his brothers to the Midianites for twenty shekels (Gen 37:28). A shekel was evidently worth four denarii, so thirty shekels would be around four months wages for a day laborer. This sum is not insignificant but is rather paltry compared with the value of the ointment used by the woman to anoint Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Judas was a pathetically and enigmatically evil person (26:24; John 17:12), and the motivation for his betraying Jesus is one of the more inscrutable matters in the Bible (Davies and Allison 1997:451-452). Some believe he took this action out of greed, since Judas asked how much the leaders would pay him (cf. 6:19-21, 24). He was disgusted at the waste of money when Jesus was anointed with the expensive perfume by the woman at Bethany (cf. John 12:4-6). Others theorize that Judas was looking for a military-political type of Messiah and had become disillusioned when Jesus' spiritually-oriented message was not widely received, especially by the leaders of Israel. Perhaps both greed and disillusionment were involved; greed drove Judas to betray Jesus when he realized that Jesus was not a militaristic Messiah. Luke 22:3 and John 6:70; 13:2 cite satanic influence behind Judas' action. Blomberg (1992:387) is probably stretching things a bit in suggesting that Judas had perhaps committed the unpardonable sin (12:32), since there is no reason to suppose Judas attributed Jesus' miracles to the power of the devil. In any event, Judas sold out Jesus, later regretted doing so, and committed suicide (27:3-5).
The allusion to Zechariah 11:12-13 is subtle but important in that it connects Judas' betrayal to OT prophecy and thus supports the idea in Matthew 26 that God is in control of all the Passion week events, even the betrayal of Jesus (26:18, 31, 54, 56). This profound matter deserves reflection (cf. Acts 2:23; 4:27-28). Every follower of Jesus should also reflect on the monstrous treachery of Judas and grieve with the original disciples that one of the Twelve could betray the Lord (26:22).
## TEXT [Commentary]
D. The Last Supper (26:17-30; cf. Mark 14:12-25; Luke 22:7-20; John 13:21-30)
17 On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Where do you want us to prepare the Passover meal for you?"
18 "As you go into the city," he told them, "you will see a certain man. Tell him, 'The Teacher says: My time has come, and I will eat the Passover meal with my disciples at your house.'" 19 So the disciples did as Jesus told them and prepared the Passover meal there.
20 When it was evening, Jesus sat down at the table[*] with the Twelve. 21 While they were eating, he said, "I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me."
22 Greatly distressed, each one asked in turn, "Am I the one, Lord?"
23 He replied, "One of you who has just eaten from this bowl with me will betray me. 24 For the Son of Man must die, as the Scriptures declared long ago. But how terrible it will be for the one who betrays him. It would be far better for that man if he had never been born!"
25 Judas, the one who would betray him, also asked, "Rabbi, am I the one?"
And Jesus told him, "You have said it."
26 As they were eating, Jesus took some bread and blessed it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying, "Take this and eat it, for this is my body."
27 And he took a cup of wine and gave thanks to God for it. He gave it to them and said, "Each of you drink from it, 28 for this is my blood, which confirms the covenant[*] between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many. 29 Mark my words—I will not drink wine again until the day I drink it new with you in my Father's Kingdom."
30 Then they sang a hymn and went out to the Mount of Olives.
## NOTES
26:17-19 Here the narrative returns to Jesus' last hours with the disciples (cf. Mark 14:12-25; Luke 22:7-20; John 13:21-30). He was about to move from Bethany (26:6) to Jerusalem (26:18).
**Festival of Unleavened Bread.** Due to the requirement for all leaven to be removed from Jewish homes, Passover was also known as the Festival of Unleavened Bread (Exod 12:1-20; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:17; Deut 16:1-8; _m. Pesahim_ ; Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.29).
**Where do you want us to prepare the Passover?** On the first day of the eight-day feast, evidently Thursday (Exod 12:18-20; Gundry 1994:524), the disciples inquired as to where Jesus would eat the Passover meal. The way in which Jesus secured a room for the Passover celebration is similar to the way in which he had earlier secured a donkey for his entry into the city (cf. 21:2-3). A providential ordering of the circumstances mentioned in 26:18 is apparent.
**My time has come.** This is a cryptic reference to the impending arrest and crucifixion. It is quite difficult to reconcile the chronology implicit in this narrative with that of John 18:28, which implies that Jesus' trial before Pilate occurs before Passover (cf. Matt 27:11). For plausible explanations of this difference, see Carson 1984:528-532; Hoehner 1976:86-90; Ruckstuhl 1965:18-32.
26:20 **Jesus sat down at the table.** Lit., "he was reclining." The customary way to eat a formal meal in that day was to recline on cushions arranged in a U-shaped pattern (a triclinium) around food placed on a low table in the middle (9:10; 22:10; 26:7; BDAG 65).
**the Twelve.** The twelve disciples correspond to the twelve tribes of Israel in Exod 24:4.
26:21 **While they were eating.** After sundown on Thursday, the Passover meal was eaten. The Passover meal was celebrated at home, led by the head of the family, and Jesus would evidently serve as the head of the family of disciples in leading their meal. Thus, this passage illustrates Matt 12:46-50 in that those who do the will of the Father are Jesus' true family (Davies and Allison 1997:458).
**one of you will betray me.** At some point in the meal, likely near the beginning, Jesus made the arresting announcement that he would be betrayed by one of the Twelve. At this point, the disciples begin to learn what the reader of Matthew already knows from 26:14-16. Earlier comments had implied an act of betrayal (20:18; 26:2), but this statement is much more explicit. The reader is impressed that Jesus knew that his betrayal would be accomplished by Judas even though Judas had only recently agreed to do it.
26:22 **Am I the one, Lord?** The disciples had no inkling as to the identity of the betrayer, since they each began to ask Jesus whether they were the betrayer.
26:23-24 **One of you who has just eaten from this bowl with me.** Lit., "one who dipped his hand with me in the bowl," probably alluding to the custom of dipping food into _haroset_ , a sweet sauce or relish (John 13:26; _m. Pesahim_ 10:3).
**as the Scriptures declared long ago.** Lit., "as it is written concerning him."
**It would be far better for that man if he had never been born!** Jesus' comment on how terrible it will be for the betrayer is chilling (cf. 18:7; _1 Enoch_ 38:2).
26:25 **am I the one?** After waiting until all the others had spoken and following their example, Judas incredulously asked if he was the betrayer.
**You have said it.** Jesus responded with an ambiguous, qualified affirmation (cf. 26:64; 27:11) that stressed Judas's own words. A similar English idiom would be "You said it." This would let Judas know that Jesus was aware of his plot without alerting the other disciples to it.
26:26-30 As the meal proceeded after the dramatic announcement that the betrayer was present, Jesus attributed special significance to the unleavened bread and the wine (described as the cup in keeping with 20:22-23; 26:39). Evidently, the elements of the Passover meal were already viewed as symbolic ( _m. Pesahim_ 10:4-5), so Jesus' innovation relates to the symbolic referents, not to the use of symbolism itself. Although there is no explicit word of institution here, as in 1 Cor 11:24-25, Christians have universally viewed Jesus' implicit intent as establishing a practice which is to be repeated. Jesus instituted what Christians have come to call the Eucharist or Lord's Supper.
**Take this and eat it, for this is my body.** The broken bread (14:19; 15:36) represents his body.
**Each of you drink from it, for this is my blood.** The cup represents his blood.
**blood, which confirms the covenant.** Lit., "blood of the covenant." This phrase alludes to Exod 24:8 (cf. Zech 9:11; Heb 9:19-22; 10:29; 13:20). Some manuscripts (A C D W f1,13 ) read "blood of the new covenant," but this is likely an interpolation from Luke 22:20 (cf. 1 Cor 11:25; Metzger 1994:54). The best manuscripts ( 37 45vid B L Z) do not include the word "new." The newness is found in 26:29, where Jesus speaks prophetically of drinking new wine with his disciples in the future Kingdom. Thus, the institution of the Lord's supper is closely tied to the Passover, as well as to the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34). It also anticipates the ultimate eschatological feast in the future Kingdom (26:29; cf. 8:11; 22:2; 25:10; Rev 19:7ff).
**It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many.** See 1:21; 20:28; cf. Exod 12:21-27; Isa 53:4-12. The phrase "as a sacrifice" is not found in the Gr. text.
26:30 This is a hinge verse, connecting the private last supper to the ongoing story, which develops on the Mount of Olives.
**they sang a hymn.** At the end of the meal, they sang psalms (probably the Hallel, Pss 115–118; cf. _m. Pesahim_ 10:6-7).
**[they] went out to the Mount of Olives.** Jesus and his disciples left the city for the Mount of Olives (cf. 21:17; 24:1-3). This shows that Jesus did not hide from his inevitable suffering. For additional discussions of the Passover meal in NT times and the relationship of the Lord's Supper to the Passover, see Chilton in Evans and Porter (2000:372-373, 376-377) and Stein in Green and McKnight (1992:444-450).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 26:17-30 contains four parts: (1) preparation for the Passover (26:17-19); (2) prediction of betrayal during the meal (26:20-25); (3) institution of the Lord's Supper (26:26-29); (4) transition back to the main plot (26:30).
Despite the confidence of some scholars, it is not clear at what point in the Passover meal Jesus predicted the betrayal and instituted his supper. Matthew's account does associate these events with a historical Passover meal, but he does not provide historical details which are extraneous to his theological purpose.
This Passover meal is both a beginning and an end. It was the last supper, Jesus' last meal with his disciples before his arrest, trials, and crucifixion. But it was also the first supper, the inauguration of the remembrance of Jesus by his new community. Jesus, in fulfillment of Old Testament pattern and prediction, was (as it were) bringing from his treasure things new and old (13:52). In this light, the Lord's Supper is not the Passover, but it is associated with the Passover (Stein in Green and McKnight 1992:446-447). In the future, when they reenact the last supper, as they eat the bread and drink the wine, the disciples will remember that Jesus did indeed shed his blood for them for the forgiveness of their sins. And they will remember his promise to share the table with them in the future Kingdom. As Paul put it, every time they eat the bread and drink the cup they will be announcing the Lord's death until he comes (1 Cor 11:26). The Lord's Supper is divinely ordained to remind Jesus' followers of what he has done and what he will do. Their present existence is framed by Jesus' past coming to redeem them and by his future coming to reign over the earth. These truths are powerfully impressed onto the hearts of his people when they participate in faith at the table. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper is neither an impotent memorial, an empty sign, nor an automatic source of saving grace. But when it is received in faith, it dynamically strengthens the people of God as it proclaims the central truth of the gospel of Jesus (Calvin 1960:2.1276-1303 [ _Institutes_ 4.14]; 1972:3.135-136). The early Christians probably observed the Lord's supper in the context of a regular fellowship meal or "love feast" (Acts 2:42; 20:7-12; 1 Cor 11:20-22; Jude 1:12; _Didache_ 9-10; 14:1).
Despite the current popularity of "Passover Seder" celebrations in Christian churches at Easter, the order of the meal in New Testament times is not known with certainty. Attempts to read later Jewish Passover liturgy back into the New Testament and to invest it with Christian typological significance may be edifying, but the practice rests on a weak historical foundation. Mishnah _Pesahim_ 10 is the earliest source for the seder liturgy, but the Mishnah was not compiled until around AD 200. Christians tend to identify the bread of the Lord's Supper with _m. Pesahim_ 10:3 and the cup with the third cup, over which a benediction was said ( _m. Pesahim_ 10:7; _m. Berakhot_ 6:1). But there is no mention of the roasted lamb, the four cups, or the traditional Jewish interpretation of these things. Also, it is not certain that the Mishnah preserves the same liturgy as that practiced by Jesus over one hundred and fifty years earlier (Davies and Allison 1997:469). It does seem clear that Jesus used the Passover meal as the context for the institution of his own supper, and one could say that for Matthew the Lord's Supper fulfilled the Passover, but the precise details of the correspondence are not known.
## TEXT [Commentary]
E. Prediction of the Disciples' Desertion (26:31-35; cf. Mark 14:26-31; Luke 22:31-34; John 13:31-38)
31 On the way, Jesus told them, "Tonight all of you will desert me. For the Scriptures say,
'God will strike[*] the Shepherd,
and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.'
32 But after I have been raised from the dead, I will go ahead of you to Galilee and meet you there."
33 Peter declared, "Even if everyone else deserts you, I will never desert you."
34 Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, Peter—this very night, before the rooster crows, you will deny three times that you even know me."
35 "No!" Peter insisted. "Even if I have to die with you, I will never deny you!" And all the other disciples vowed the same.
## NOTES
26:31 **Tonight all of you will desert me.** Cf. Mark 14:26-31; Luke 22:39-40a; John 13:31-38. "Desert" is perhaps a weak rendering of a term which means "to be caused to stumble" or "to be led into sin" ( _skandalisthēsesthe_ ; 5:29; 11:6; 13:21, 57; 15:12; 18:6, 8; 24:10; cf. BDAG 926). The image is that the disciples will seriously stumble in their faith.
**the Scriptures say.** Jesus cited this dire prediction by quoting Zech 13:7, which describes the scattering of the sheep that results when the shepherd is struck (cf. 9:36).
26:32 **after I have been raised from the dead, I will go ahead of you to Galilee and meet you there.** As serious as this desertion would be, it was not final, since Jesus promised to meet the disciples in Galilee after he was raised from the dead (cf. 28:7, 10, 16). Perhaps the picture of Jesus going ahead of the disciples to Galilee is intended to cause the reader to picture a shepherd going ahead of his sheep (cf. John 10:4). The resurrection of Jesus, previously mentioned several times (12:40; 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; 27:63-64; 28:6), would be a turning point in that Jesus would then bring the disciples as wandering sheep back into the fold.
26:33 **I will never desert you.** Peter has not been heard from for some time (19:27), but at this point he speaks up and becomes a prominent character throughout the rest of the chapter. Peter denied that he would deny the Lord (26:35; cf. 26:75). Peter put this very strongly, believing that he would be the last person to sin by deserting Jesus. Even if all the other disciples fell away, Peter believed he would remain faithful.
26:34-35 **you will deny three times that you even know me.** When Jesus told Peter that he would deny Jesus not once, but three times before a rooster crowed, Peter adamantly reaffirmed what he has just said, adding that he would die before denying Jesus. Peter's impetuous personality put him in the spotlight here (as in 14:28-31; 16:21-23), but in 26:35b it is added that all the disciples were saying the same thing Peter said.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage records another instance of Peter being against Jesus (cf. 16:22). Twice Jesus predicted Peter's future behavior (26:31, 34), and twice Peter strongly objected (26:33, 35). Told that all the disciples will scatter and be met by Jesus in Galilee, Peter insisted that he would never desert Jesus even if everyone else did. Told that he would do worse than desert Jesus, he would deny him three times, Peter affirmed that he would die first. The ensuing narrative shows just how wrong Peter was on both counts. But Peter had been wrong before, and had nevertheless overcome his momentary failing (16:22). The resurrection of Jesus would be the event that turned grief into joy, defeat into victory, and desertion into renewed allegiance (26:32; 28:7, 10, 16-20). At this point Peter did not know himself well enough to acknowledge his propensity to desert and deny Jesus. He would learn this bitter lesson (26:75) and be restored to fellowship with Jesus and ministry for Jesus (cf. John 21:15ff). According to tradition, Peter did eventually die a martyr's death rather than deny Jesus, though it was years after the crucifixion.
## TEXT [Commentary]
F. Jesus Prays in Gethsemane (26:36-46; cf. Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:39-46)
36 Then Jesus went with them to the olive grove called Gethsemane, and he said, "Sit here while I go over there to pray." 37 He took Peter and Zebedee's two sons, James and John, and he became anguished and distressed. 38 He told them, "My soul is crushed with grief to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me."
39 He went on a little farther and bowed with his face to the ground, praying, "My Father! If it is possible, let this cup of suffering be taken away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine."
40 Then he returned to the disciples and found them asleep. He said to Peter, "Couldn't you watch with me even one hour? 41 Keep watch and pray, so that you will not give in to temptation. For the spirit is willing, but the body is weak!"
42 Then Jesus left them a second time and prayed, "My Father! If this cup cannot be taken away[*] unless I drink it, your will be done." 43 When he returned to them again, he found them sleeping, for they couldn't keep their eyes open.
44 So he went to pray a third time, saying the same things again. 45 Then he came to the disciples and said, "Go ahead and sleep. Have your rest. But look—the time has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 46 Up, let's be going. Look, my betrayer is here!"
## NOTES
26:36-38 **Gethsemane.** The name is evidently derived from two Heb. words meaning "oil press."
**he took Peter and Zebedee's two sons, James and John.** Jesus left the group and prayed semi-privately with Peter and the two sons of Zebedee (26:36-37; cf. Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:40b-46; cf. Heb 5:7-9). The NLT goes beyond the Gr. text in spelling out the names of the sons of Zebedee.
**My soul is crushed with grief to the point of death.** Jesus' profound inner agony was like that of the psalmist in such Psalms as 3, 6, 31, 42.
26:39 **If it is possible, let this cup of suffering be taken away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine.** Jesus' prayer (cf. 26:42, 44) honestly voiced his wish to avoid the suffering of the cross and, more importantly, his realization that his own wish might be overridden by the Father's. It is the Father's will that must be done (Matt 6:10; 26:53-54). Jesus spoke of his suffering as a cup (NLT's "cup of suffering" makes the metaphor explicit), which must be drunk (20:22-23; cf. Ps 11:6; 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Jer 25:15; 49:12; Rev 14:10; 16:19; 17:4; 18:6).
26:40 **found them asleep.** After praying Jesus returned to find the three disciples sleeping. A pathetic cycle is repeated three times as Jesus prays alone and then finds the disciples sleeping instead of staying alert with him (26:38-41, 42-43, 44). His anguish in the face of death is contrasted with their total lack of awareness of the hour and of concern for their master.
**Peter** is specifically addressed because he protested the loudest in 26:33-35 and he will deny the Lord in 26:69-75.
**Couldn't you watch with me even one hour?** Jesus' response to their lack of alertness is twofold: a rhetorical question about their insensitivity (26:40b), followed by an exhortation to alertness (26:41; cf. 24:42-43; 25:13). His mention of "one hour" in 26:40 may mean that he had been praying (and they have been sleeping) that long.
26:41 **the spirit is willing, but the body is weak!** Temptation due to the weakness of the "body" (lit. "flesh") will result if they do not remain alert. Their willingness of spirit (Ps 51:12) is evidenced by their protests in 26:35b, their weakness of flesh (Rom 6:19) by their seeming inability to remain alert with their master during his final and most difficult hours on earth (cf. Rom 8:4-17; Gal 5:16-24).
26:42-43 **If this cup cannot be taken away unless I drink it, your will be done.** Jesus' second prayer was expressed in a way that implies a deeper resignation to the Father's will. There are parallels here to the Lord's prayer in 6:9. This time there is no request for the cup to pass away, only agreement with the Father's plan that the cup can pass away only by being drunk by Jesus.
**found them sleeping.** After this prayer, Jesus discovered the disciples sleeping again. This time there is no question or exhortation, only the editorial explanation that they just couldn't keep their eyes open.
26:44-46 **to pray a third time.** Jesus left them to pray a third time and he again prayed as before (cf. 2 Cor 12:8). Returning to the disciples, he found them still asleep. It is interesting to compare this cycle of three lost opportunities to stay alert with Jesus to the cycle of Peter's three lost opportunities to confess Jesus in 26:69-75.
**Go ahead and sleep.** It is not clear if Jesus' first words to the disciples should be viewed as a statement (as in the NLT) or as a question ("Are you still sleeping and resting?"), similar to 26:40. It is perhaps a bit strange for Jesus to tell them to sleep one moment and rouse them the next.
**the time has come. The Son of Man is betrayed.** Jesus roused them with the announcement that the time of his betrayal, and indeed the betrayer himself, was at hand.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage contains three cycles of Jesus praying and the disciples sleeping. The repetition makes the points about Jesus and the disciples very clear. The solitary prayers of Jesus in Gethsemane are remarkable for several reasons. First, in these prayers Jesus put the Father's will before his own. He realistically anticipated the pain and suffering ahead of him (cf. 27:46) and wished that he did not have to endure it. At the same time, he was resigned to obeying the Father's plan. In this, he models the prayer he taught the disciples (6:9ff). His prayer also models his own exhortation to pray alertly and recognize the weakness of the flesh (26:41). The God-centeredness of the Gethsemane prayers of Jesus should be put alongside the temptation of Jesus in 4:1-11. Jesus lived on God's words whether or not he had bread. He would not test the Lord his God. He would worship only the Lord his God. He would do the will of the Lord his God, even if it led to suffering and death.
If it is thought that this understanding of Jesus' prayer does not do justice to his deity, one has only to consult the book of Hebrews, which stresses how Jesus' sufferings equipped him to be a sympathetic high priest for his followers (Heb 2:14-18; 4:14-16; 5:7-9). In no way should a high Christology deter us from appreciating the reality of Jesus' distress in the garden (26:37-39, 42, 44). The wonder of the incarnation of the Son of God is that Jesus was truly divine and truly human.
Jesus' Gethsemane experience reminds us of the weakness of his disciples (cf. 6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8, 22; 17:20; 18:21; 19:13) as eloquently as it portrays his strength. Their lack of perception as to the significance of the anointing of Jesus at Bethany (26:10) shows that their minds were not focused on Jesus' reminder of the nearness of his death (26:2). Their unanimous denial that they would desert Jesus just after his prediction that they would do so amounts to outright unbelief caused by sinful self-confidence (26:31-35). One would think that such supposedly brave men would be able to keep watch with Jesus through the night, but even his inner circle of disciples failed him in his most vulnerable moment. The sons of Zebedee, James and John, who wanted the places of highest honor in the Kingdom, promised Jesus that they could drink his cup (20:22). But they couldn't even stay awake to share his grief. Given their performance in Gethsemane, their desertion when Jesus was arrested is not a surprise. The sleep of the disciples cannot help but remind the reader of the necessity for spiritual alertness in the face of moral testing (cf. 1 Cor 16:13; Eph 5:14; Col 4:2; 1 Thess 5:6-8; 1 Pet 5:8). The disciples' weakness reminds us of our own, yet the promises of our Lord sustain us as we serve him until he returns (e.g., 16:18; 19:28-29; 28:18, 20).
## TEXT [Commentary]
G. The Arrest of Jesus (26:47-56; cf. Mark 14:43-52; Luke 22:47-53; John 18:1-12)
47 And even as Jesus said this, Judas, one of the twelve disciples, arrived with a crowd of men armed with swords and clubs. They had been sent by the leading priests and elders of the people. 48 The traitor, Judas, had given them a prearranged signal: "You will know which one to arrest when I greet him with a kiss." 49 So Judas came straight to Jesus. "Greetings, Rabbi!" he exclaimed and gave him the kiss.
50 Jesus said, "My friend, go ahead and do what you have come for."
Then the others grabbed Jesus and arrested him. 51 But one of the men with Jesus pulled out his sword and struck the high priest's slave, slashing off his ear.
52 "Put away your sword," Jesus told him. "Those who use the sword will die by the sword. 53 Don't you realize that I could ask my Father for thousands[*] of angels to protect us, and he would send them instantly? 54 But if I did, how would the Scriptures be fulfilled that describe what must happen now?"
55 Then Jesus said to the crowd, "Am I some dangerous revolutionary, that you come with swords and clubs to arrest me? Why didn't you arrest me in the Temple? I was there teaching every day. 56 But this is all happening to fulfill the words of the prophets as recorded in the Scriptures." At that point, all the disciples deserted him and fled.
## NOTES
26:47 **Judas . . . arrived with a crowd of men armed with swords and clubs.** This crowd was commissioned by the religious leaders to arrest Jesus (cf. Mark 14:43-52; Luke 22:47-53; John 18:2-12).
**one of the twelve disciples.** The treachery of Judas is emphasized all the more by the description that he was one of the twelve disciples (26:14, 21; cf. Ps 41:9; John 13:18).
26:48-49 **"Rabbi!" he exclaimed and gave him the kiss.** Judas had arranged with the leaders that the kiss would identify Jesus, evidently because Jesus was not known personally to them and it was dark. Judas is the only one to refer to Jesus as "rabbi" in Matthew (26:25, 49; cf. 23:7-8), and his betraying kiss is a despicable perversion of an action which would normally express brotherhood, affirmation, and honor (cf. Luke 7:45; Rom 16:16; 1 Pet 5:14).
26:50 **My friend, go ahead and do what you have come for.** Jesus' response to Judas is difficult to translate. It could be either a command telling Judas to do what he had come to do (cf. John 13:27) or a question asking him what he was doing. His referring to Judas as "friend" is ironic, but the word used here ( _hetaire_ [TG2083, ZG2279]) refers only to an acquaintance and does not imply a close relationship (as the word _philos_ [TG5384A, ZG5813] would have; cf. 20:13; 22:12).
26:51 **struck the high priest's slave.** One of the disciples—identified as Peter in John 18:10—attempted to resist the arrest and managed only to cut off the ear of the high priest's slave.
26:52 **Those who use the sword will die by the sword.** Jesus commanded him to put his sword away with words that have since been used to support the view known as Christian pacifism or non-resistance (5:9, 39). In context, however, Jesus was speaking realistically about the ways of the fallen world (Gen 9:6; Jer 15:2; Rev 13:10). There is no mention of the arrest of the swordsman, evidently because the focus was on Jesus.
26:53 **thousands of angels.** Lit., "more than twelve legions of angels." A legion is a Roman military unit numbering six thousand soldiers (BDAG 587-588). The number twelve has obvious implications. Jesus had power available to him in the form of thousands of angels (cf. 4:6, 11; 13:41; 16:27; 25:31), but he would not oppose the plan ordained for him by the Father in the Scriptures (26:24, 56).
26:54 **how would the Scriptures be fulfilled?** The fulfillment of Scripture is a key motif in Matthew's theology (cf., e.g., 1:23 and the discussion of fulfillment under the heading "Major Themes" in the Introduction).
26:55-56 **the crowd.** In this context, this is the group that arrested him (26:47).
**revolutionary.** Gr. _lēstēs_. Given the context, this seems to be more likely than "bandit" (cf. 27:38; BDAG 594).
**Why didn't you arrest me in the Temple?** Jesus sarcastically told them that their stealth and use of force was unnecessary since he had been teaching publicly in the Temple every day (21:23). But the religous leaders could not arrest Jesus publicly in the Temple because of his popularity with the throngs of pilgrims who were in Jerusalem for the Passover (21:9-11, 15, 26; 26:5).
**fulfill the words of the prophets.** Their sinful plan mysteriously fulfilled the divinely ordained plan revealed in the prophetic Scriptures. As he uttered these words, they were immediately confirmed by the flight of the disciples in fulfillment of Jesus' words in 26:31, which cite Zech 13:7.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
With 26:47 "the preliminaries are over" (Hagner 1995:787). Jesus had finished preparing his disciples for his inevitable suffering and death and their own failings. In the middle of the night Jesus was arrested by the religious leaders and deserted by his disciples, whose departure illustrates 16:25 (dissociating from Jesus might save the disciples' earthly lives but could also cost them their souls). Jesus would be subjected to a heavily biased trial. In the morning he would appear before Pilate and be handed over for crucifixion. By three in the afternoon he would be dead. But even in the midst of all of this, one gets the unmistakable impression that Jesus, or rather his Father in Heaven, was in charge (cf. John 10:18; Davies and Allison 1997:511).
These verses seem to show quite clearly that Jesus and his disciples were not subversives or "zealots," although that is the implication of the false charges soon to be brought against Jesus (26:61). Jesus was resigned to drinking the cup the Father's will placed before him, and he taught his disciples that violence only leads to more violence. Despite their boasts (26:35), the disciples offered minimal resistance to Jesus' arrest, and then they all ran away. The group sent to arrest Jesus was probably composed of Temple guards commanded by the high priest. One can rightly explain the bravery of Jesus, the treachery of Judas, the cowardice of the disciples, and the aggression of the arrest party as voluntary actions in character with each of the involved parties. But one must also notice the strong emphasis on God's predetermined plan in this passage (26:2, 18, 24, 31, 39, 42, 54, 56). Here is another example of the scriptural pattern of the compatibility of divine sovereignty and human responsibility.
## TEXT [Commentary]
H. Jesus Appears before the Sanhedrin (26:57-68; cf. Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54-55, 63-71)
57 Then the people who had arrested Jesus led him to the home of Caiaphas, the high priest, where the teachers of religious law and the elders had gathered. 58 Meanwhile, Peter followed him at a distance and came to the high priest's courtyard. He went in and sat with the guards and waited to see how it would all end.
59 Inside, the leading priests and the entire high council[*] were trying to find witnesses who would lie about Jesus, so they could put him to death. 60 But even though they found many who agreed to give false witness, they could not use anyone's testimony. Finally, two men came forward 61 who declared, "This man said, 'I am able to destroy the Temple of God and rebuild it in three days.'"
62 Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, "Well, aren't you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?" 63 But Jesus remained silent. Then the high priest said to him, "I demand in the name of the living God—tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God."
64 Jesus replied, "You have said it. And in the future you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God's right hand[*] and coming on the clouds of heaven."[*]
65 Then the high priest tore his clothing to show his horror and said, "Blasphemy! Why do we need other witnesses? You have all heard his blasphemy. 66 What is your verdict?"
"Guilty!" they shouted. "He deserves to die!"
67 Then they began to spit in Jesus' face and beat him with their fists. And some slapped him, 68 jeering, "Prophesy to us, you Messiah! Who hit you that time?"
## NOTES
26:57 **the home of Caiaphas, the high priest, where the teachers of religious law and the elders had gathered.** Cf. Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54-55; John 18:13-14, 19-24.
26:58 **Peter followed him at a distance.** It is briefly mentioned that Peter followed from a distance and sat down in the high priest's courtyard to see what would happen. This sets the scene for the story of Peter's three denials in 26:69-75.
26:59-61 **high council.** Lit., "Sanhedrin" (5:22; 10:17).
**were trying to find witnesses.** They had evidently been trying for some time to obtain false testimony against Jesus (9:3; 12:10, 24, 38; 16:1; 19:3), but nothing admissible was found despite the fact that many were willing to testify falsely. Eventually two men (18:16; cf. Deut 17:6; 19:15) came forward who testified that Jesus claimed to be **able to destroy the Temple of God and rebuild it in three days** (26:61). There is no previous record of anything resembling this in the synoptic Gospels, not even 24:2 (cf. 27:40), but the false charge evidently came from a misunderstanding (or a twisting) of Jesus' teaching recorded in John 2:18-22 (cf. Acts 6:13-14). Action against the Temple would be viewed as treason by many Jews and as sedition by the Roman authorities. Jesus' actions against the money changers and merchants in the Temple (21:12ff) were public knowledge and perhaps were viewed as corroborating the false testimony. The leaders of the Sanhedrin appear to have already decided that Jesus was a blasphemer, so it was easy for them to justify their actions. (For a fine summary discussion of the trial of Jesus, see Corley in Green and McKnight 1992:841-854.)
26:62-64 **Jesus remained silent.** When Caiaphas asked Jesus to respond to these charges, he initially kept silent (cf. 27:14; Isa 53:7; Acts 8:32).
**I demand in the name of the living God—tell us whether you are the Messiah, the Son of God.** This has the force of putting Jesus under oath. The title "Son of God" was interpreted messianically (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7; 89:26-27). This question and Jesus' answer appear to have little relevance to the charge against Jesus, but the key Matthean motif of Jesus' divine sonship is raised.
**You have said it.** Jesus responded by ambiguously affirming the high priest's own words (cf. 26:25).
**you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God's right hand and coming on the clouds of heaven.** Jesus continued by citing Dan 7:13, with introductory words from Ps 110:1, to the effect that he is indeed the glorious Son of Man who will come from the right hand of God (cf. 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; John 1:51; _1 Enoch_ 62:5). The NLT's "sitting at God's right hand in the place of power" redundantly renders what is lit. "sitting at the right hand of the Power." Here "Power," an attribute uniquely associated with God, stands for God by metonymy. Blomberg (1992:403) is correct in pointing out that 26:64 is "the Christological climax of the Gospel thus far."
26:65-68 **tore his clothing to show his horror.** He showed his disgust by tearing his robes. This was a sign of extreme emotion, whether sorrow or anger (e.g., Gen 37:29; 2 Kgs 18:37-19:1; Job 1:20; Acts 14:14; _m. Sanhedrin_ 7:5; Jdt 14:19; 1 Macc 11:71; Josephus _War_ 2.316; but cf. Joel 2:13). The NLT brings this out by adding the words "to show his horror."
**Blasphemy!** The high priest regarded Jesus' speaking of himself in terms of Daniel's Son of Man as an outrageous blasphemy. He evidently viewed the Son of Man as a quasi-divine figure and believed that Jesus had arrogated divine prerogatives to himself. He asked why any more testimony was needed since he believed that Jesus' words in 26:64 were sufficient proof of his guilt. The Sanhedrin evidently agreed with his assessment that Jesus deserved to die (cf. Lev 24:16).
**they began to spit in Jesus' face.** See Isa 50:6.
**beat him with their fists.** Possibly some used whips or clubs (BDAG 903-904).
**Prophesy to us, you Messiah!** As they beat Jesus, they taunted him by sarcastically calling him the Messiah and asking him to prophecy to them about who was hitting him. Jesus exemplified his own teaching (5:38-42; cf. Isa 50:4-9).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage lays out the first of Jesus' two trials, although the term "trial" may be a misnomer here. The narrative of the trial before the high priest Caiaphas accomplishes two literary purposes. First, the sordid nature of the whole process is clearly exposed (26:59-61). Second, and more importantly, the claims of Christ to be Israel's Messiah are climactically pressed before the leaders of Israel. In a clear allusion to Daniel 7:13, Jesus acknowledges that he is the messianic Son of Man who will return to judge his false accusers and judges (26:64). Yet the leaders reject Jesus' testimony, accuse him of blasphemy, and treat him with sarcasm and utter contempt (26:65-68). It is Jesus' affirmation that he will return as the glorious Son of Man to judge his judges that seems to infuriate them. Such an eschatological reversal would be intolerable. Davies and Allison (1997:537) point out several aspects of the trial story that make irony its chief literary feature.
Christology. The terse exchange between Jesus and Caiaphas in 26:62-64 contains one of the most explicit affirmations of Jesus' identity in all of Matthew. Jesus' citation of Dan 7:13 (and perhaps Ps 110:1) shows that he understood his identity and future mission in terms of the glorious, exalted Son of Man. Hagner (1995:799) rightly says, "Nowhere does Jesus reveal himself more than here."
The time frame implied by Jesus' words "in the future" in 26:64 is rather broad. Jesus will be installed as the glorious Son of Man at his resurrection, and Caiaphas himself will be confronted with this reality—the person Caiaphas judged unjustly will someday judge him justly. After the resurrection, Jesus would speak as the exalted Son of Man, prefacing his commission to the disciples with the words, "I have been given all authority" (28:18).
But the resurrection only inaugurates the glorious reign of Jesus (cf. John 7:39; 12:23, 32-33; 17:4-5; Acts 2:32-33; 13:33-37; Phil 2:9-11; Rev 5:5-10). That reign will be consummated by his return to judge and rule the earth (6:10; 13:41-43; 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; cf. 2 Sam 7:12-16; Ps 2; Luke 1:32-33; Acts 17:30-31; 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 1:7; 2:26-27; 11:15; 19:11-16; 20:4-6). The resurrection vindicates Jesus' claims and seals the doom of his enemies. The return to earth realizes the final judgment, where all humanity will stand before the Son of Man. Unbelievers will be condemned, believers will be rewarded, and Jesus will reign in glory over his people in a new world from which the curse has been removed.
Anti-Semitism? On the historical level it is clear that this trial was not carried out according to the just legal procedures that are found in _m. Sanhedrin_ 4–7 (Brown 1994:357-363). According to this tractate, trials were not to be held at night, and capital cases could not be decided in one day. Several other details of Matthew's narrative are at odds with the Mishnaic laws for trials. One can explain this anomaly in different ways. One line of reasoning argues that the Mishnaic traditions were theoretical, not actual, and that they were written down over one hundred and fifty years after the trial of Jesus, but these traditions purport to be orally transmitted from earlier times. Non-evangelicals sometimes accuse Matthew of inventing much, or all, of the story for propaganda purposes (Beare 1981:519ff). In this view, Matthew's goal was to blame the Jews and exonerate the Romans in order to curry favor for Christianity with the Roman authorities.
But if Matthew and his community still identified themselves as Jews, this argument breaks down. Instead, Matthew preserves accurate historical information in his narrative in order to show that the religious leaders did not follow their own standards in dealing with Jesus (cf. the case of Stephen in Acts 6:11ff). It was expedient for them to break their own rules in order to quickly be rid of Jesus before the crowds became aware of what they were doing and before the Feast of Unleavened Bread went into full swing. Matthew did not want to indict Israel as a nation, not even all the Jews of his own day, let alone all Jews who have lived subsequently. Rather, the trial narrative must be seen as part of Matthew's consistent negative portrayal of the Jerusalem establishment as corrupt leaders who left Israel like scattered sheep without a shepherd (9:36). These leaders did not interpret the law and the prophets in a manner that focused on the weightier matters. Instead, they sought to follow human traditions, which obscured the righteousness of the law (15:1-14). When Matthew, as a Jew writing to Jews, highlighted the corruption of the Jerusalem establishment, he was not being anti-Semitic, and Christians who take him that way make a serious error. Those who support their own anti-Semitic bias by appealing to Matthew should be roundly condemned in the strongest possible terms.
From Matthew's own theological standpoint, it was not ultimately the corrupt religious leaders or the weak Roman governor who were responsible for killing Jesus. Rather, it was God's plan being accomplished by the deeds of sinful men, Jews and Gentiles alike, so that sinners from every ethnic group might believe in Jesus the Messiah and be forgiven their sins by the shedding of his blood.
## TEXT [Commentary]
I. Peter's three denials (26:69-75; cf. Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:55-62; John 18:25-27)
69 Meanwhile, Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard. A servant girl came over and said to him, "You were one of those with Jesus the Galilean."
70 But Peter denied it in front of everyone. "I don't know what you're talking about," he said.
71 Later, out by the gate, another servant girl noticed him and said to those standing around, "This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.[*]"
72 Again Peter denied it, this time with an oath. "I don't even know the man," he said.
73 A little later some of the other bystanders came over to Peter and said, "You must be one of them; we can tell by your Galilean accent."
74 Peter swore, "A curse on me if I'm lying—I don't know the man!" And immediately the rooster crowed.
75 Suddenly, Jesus' words flashed through Peter's mind: "Before the rooster crows, you will deny three times that you even know me." And he went away, weeping bitterly.
## NOTES
26:69-70 The narrative now returns to Peter in the courtyard (26:58); it seems the reader is to view Peter's "trial" as more or less synonymous with Jesus' trial. As Jesus confesses, Peter denies. His three denials fulfill Jesus' prophecy (26:31-35), yet they raise many questions as comparisons are made with the other Gospels (cf. Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:55-65; John 18:25-27).
**You were one of those with Jesus the Galilean.** As Peter sat outside the high priest's residence, he was accosted by a servant girl who accused him of being with Jesus the Galilean (cf. Luke 23:6), but he denied this before the crowd in the courtyard.
26:71-72 **This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.** As Peter was leaving the courtyard, another servant girl told the bystanders that Peter had been with Jesus of Nazareth (cf. 2:23).
**Again Peter denied it, this time with an oath.** Evidently Peter was falsely invoking God in some fashion (5:33-37; 14:7, 9; 23:16-22). The three accusations increasingly involve the bystanders. The first is made to Peter by a servant girl, and Peter denies it in the presence of bystanders. Another servant girl makes the second accusation to the bystanders, and the third accusation comes from the bystanders themselves (26:73).
26:73-75 The bystanders, a group more formidable than a servant girl, now charge Peter with being an associate of Jesus.
**we can tell by your Galilean accent.** His Galilean accent had given him away (cf. Acts 4:13).
**A curse on me if I'm lying—I don't know the man!** Peter was so upset that he punctuated his denial with vehement cursing and swearing, perhaps calling on God to curse him if he was lying. Davies and Allison (1997:548-549) argue plausibly that in a desperate attempt to prove he was not a disciple, Peter cursed Jesus.
**immediately the rooster crowed. Suddenly, Jesus' words flashed through Peter's mind.** At this third denial, a rooster crowed, and Peter was immediately and excruciatingly reminded of Jesus' prediction that he would deny him three times before a rooster crowed (26:34).
**deny three times that you even know me.** Lit., "deny me three times." Peter had claimed he would die before he denied Jesus, but he could not even respond truthfully to the question of a powerless servant girl. He wept bitterly as he went away, perhaps believing that the curse he had uttered would come upon him.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Sanhedrin had mocked Jesus' prophetic insight, but now Peter's denials vindicate it. This passage clearly consists of three accusations that Peter was a follower of Jesus followed by three increasingly intense denials. It is striking that Peter was intimidated by a mere servant girl, and that his denials became increasingly punctuated with oaths and expletives (26:70, 72, 74). The denials became more emphatic as Peter moved further away from Jesus, from the courtyard (26:69) to the gateway (26:71) to his departure (26:74). The disciples who left all to follow Jesus had now deserted him (yet see John 18:15). One could easily sympathize with Peter denying the Lord once due to fear or embarrassment, but it is impossible to justify this threefold, increasingly vehement denial.
The Bible in many cases (e.g., Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon) presents it heroes "warts and all," as the saying goes. Matthew's Gospel is no exception, since he did not attempt to exclude the inconsistencies and failures of the disciples from his narrative. He did not even mention Jesus' subsequent rehabilitation of Peter (cf. John 21:15ff), so the reader is left with yet another blunt testimony to the weakness of the disciples. This is tempered somewhat when one is reminded of the forgiveness mentioned in 12:32 and the promise that Jesus will later meet the disciples in Galilee (26:32; 28:7, 10, 16). Peter's denial underlines the weakness of all the disciples (26:35), but it will not terminate their messianic mission if they are true to the resurrected Messiah and live by his power and presence (28:18-20).
It is instructive to compare Peter and Jesus. As Jesus confessed his divine, messianic identity before the supreme leader of Israel, Peter denied any knowledge of Jesus before a servant-girl (cf. 10:32-33; 1 Tim 6:13). Peter was immediately grief-stricken over his sin, but so was Judas (27:3). Therefore, it is also instructive to compare Peter and Judas. Judas betrayed the Lord, just as Jesus predicted. Afterwards he felt remorse, was rebuffed by the religious leaders, and committed suicide (27:1-10). Peter also denied the Lord, just as Jesus predicted. Afterwards he felt remorse, was restored by Jesus, and resumed his role as the leader of the disciples (26:32; 28:10, 18-20). How can such opposite results come from such similar actions? In the case of Peter, human weakness led to momentary failure, but the pattern of Peter's life was one of discipleship. In all fairness to Peter, evidently he was the only disciple to follow Jesus to the High Priest's courtyard (yet see John 18:15). Granted, he failed miserably there, but the others did not go at all. On the other hand, Judas' remorse was not accompanied by deeds befitting true repentance.
In Matthew, Peter is first among the disciples of Jesus. He is singled out throughout the narrative as the representative disciple. He often speaks for the group (Turner 1989). His miserable failure in denying Jesus is a strong warning to all disciples. If Peter—of all people—could fall so low, so could anyone else. But if Peter—of all people—could be restored after falling so low, so could anyone else. All followers of Jesus should be horrified by Peter's denials and thrilled by his restoration.
Summary and Transition. As the plot to execute Jesus progressed (26:3-5, 14-16, 47-56), Jesus prepared his disciples for the end of his ministry on earth (26:6-13, 17-29). They still did not fully understand what was coming, and the inner circle of disciples could not even stay awake with Jesus during his agonizing struggle in Gethsemane (26:31-46). Judas then betrayed the Lord to the Jewish religious leaders (26:47-56), who led Jesus away for "trial" by Caiaphas the high priest (26:57-68). During this time Peter denied the Lord three times, just as Jesus predicted (26:69-75; cf. 26:33-35).
The plot of Matthew 26 interweaves Jesus' preparation of his disciples for his death and the Pharisees' scheme to hasten that death. As the events of the chapter rapidly unfold, Jesus remains in control as he repeatedly predicts his death (26:2, 12, 21, 23-24, 28, 32, 45, 54) and the trials it will bring to his disciples (26:31-35). Even his struggle in Gethsemane does not take away from the theme of his control, since he is always obedient to the will of the Father (26:39, 42, 44). Another strong theme is the sovereignty of God, especially as it relates to the fulfillment of the Old Testament (26:24, 31, 54, 56, 64). Thus, it appears that the monstrous treachery of Judas and the evil machinations of the religious leaders are both culpable acts (26:24, 64) and divine necessities that graciously provide forgiveness of sins (26:28; cf. 1:21; 3:6; 20:28). The chapter is therefore a profound testimony that the sovereignty of God and the responsible agency of people are compatible biblical truths, even though we may only articulate these truths feebly.
## TEXT [Commentary]
J. The Suicide of Judas (27:1-10)
1 Very early in the morning the leading priests and the elders of the people met again to lay plans for putting Jesus to death. 2 Then they bound him, led him away, and took him to Pilate, the Roman governor.
3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, realized that Jesus had been condemned to die, he was filled with remorse. So he took the thirty pieces of silver back to the leading priests and the elders. 4 "I have sinned," he declared, "for I have betrayed an innocent man."
"What do we care?" they retorted. "That's your problem."
5 Then Judas threw the silver coins down in the Temple and went out and hanged himself.
6 The leading priests picked up the coins. "It wouldn't be right to put this money in the Temple treasury," they said, "since it was payment for murder."[*] 7 After some discussion they finally decided to buy the potter's field, and they made it into a cemetery for foreigners. 8 That is why the field is still called the Field of Blood. 9 This fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah that says,
"They took[*] the thirty pieces of silver—
the price at which he was valued by the people of Israel,
10 and purchased the potter's field,
as the LORD directed.[*]"
## NOTES
27:1-2 **met again to lay plans.** After the night hearing, the leaders "lay plans" (12:14; 22:15; 27:7; 28:12) in the morning (cf. 26:20) to transfer Jesus to the jurisdiction of Pilate (cf. Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66–23:1; John 18:28), evidently because only the Roman governor had authority to order executions (John 18:31; Brown 1994:363-372). The NLT's "met again" indicates that these events occurred later at a second meeting, but this is doubtful. Perhaps the reference to the formal decision in the morning should be viewed in light of _m. Sanhedrin_ 4:1 which says that decisions in capital cases must be reached in the daytime (cf. Blomberg 1987:136-138).
**took him to Pilate, the Roman governor.** In 20:18-19, Jesus predicted that the religious leaders would hand him over to the Gentiles. This prediction is now fulfilled. Pilate served from AD 26–36 as one in a series of Roman governors (technically procurators or prefects) of Judea (cf. Luke 3:1;13:1; Acts 4:27; 1 Tim 6:13). He is viewed in a very bad light in extra-biblical sources, which portray him as insecure, insensitive to the Jews, and extremely harsh in the administration of justice (Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.35, 55-62, 85-89; _War_ 2.169-177; Philo _The Embassy to Gaius_ 299-305; Tacitus _Annals_ 15.44). (See Evans and Porter 2000:804 for a discussion of the inscription mentioning Pilate as prefect, which was discovered at Caesarea Maritima in 1961.)
27:3-4 Matthew inserts his unique narrative of Judas's suicide (cf. Acts 1:16-20; 2 Sam 17:23) between the Jewish (26:57-68; 27:1-2) and Roman (27:11-26) stages of Jesus' trial. It is difficult to establish the chronological relationship of Judas's remorse and suicide to the rest of the events in the chapter. The remorse was due to Jesus' being condemned, which may refer to Pilate's later decision. Or perhaps Judas was one of the bystanders in Caiaphas' courtyard and learned there that the Sanhedrin had condemned Jesus. In any event, the religious leaders in this passage had the time to receive Judas, which implies that they were no longer involved with Pilate (27:12, 20).
**he was filled with remorse.** It is difficult to understand why Judas felt remorse when Jesus had been condemned, since it seems obvious that this would be the result of the betrayal. Some commentators stress that the word used to express Judas's remorse is _metamelomai_ [TG3338, ZG3564] (cf. 21:30, 32; 2 Cor 7:8; Heb 7:21), not _metanoeō_ [TG3340, ZG3566] (cf. 3:2, 8, 11; 4:17; 11:20-21; 12:41), the word most often used for genuine repentance. Judas's subsequent actions, however, give us more insight into the state of his heart than the choice of Gr. vocabulary here.
**he took the thirty pieces of silver back.** Judas returned the thirty pieces of silver to the religious leaders and confessed his sin to them (Deut 27:25), but they harshly rebuffed him without care. They told him that his sin was his own problem (cf. 27:24), and they would have nothing to do with him.
27:5 **Judas threw the silver coins down in the Temple.** His action of throwing the money down in the Temple underlines his remorse and admission of guilt, but at this point it was too late to help Jesus.
**hanged himself.** Judas had found no peace of mind from his conversation with the religious leaders, so he chose suicide by hanging as a way of dealing with his guilt (cf. 2 Sam 17:23; _m. Sanhedrin_ 10:2).
27:6-7 **It would be illegal to put this money in the Temple treasury.** The scrupulousness of the religious leaders regarding the disposal of Judas' money is amazing, given their indifference to such matters as seeking false witnesses against Jesus and even to Judas' personal anguish. While they were concerned about ritual purity, they were oblivious to their blatant violation of the fundamental ethics of the Torah. This is a blatant illustration of Jesus' point in 23:23—attention to trivial details has superseded the weightier matters of the law.
**since it was payment for murder.** This could make it sound like Judas was an assassin, not a traitor. The expression is lit. "it is the price of blood" (cf. NLT mg).
**foreigners.** This may refer to Jews who came to Jerusalem for religious festivals and died there.
27:8 **Field of Blood.** The field purchased by the priests was still called the Field of Blood when Matthew later wrote.
27:9-10 **This fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah.** The pathetic end of Judas and the purchase of the burial field was seen by Matthew as a fulfillment of Scripture. Matthew referred primarily to Zech 11:12-13, though the additional allusion to Jer 19:1-13 (and possibly Jer 18:2; 32:6-9) led him to refer the prophecy to Jeremiah. Blomberg (1992:409) and Gundry (1994:557-558) seem to be correct in pointing out that in addition to Zech 11:12-13, several features of Jer 19:1-13 are viewed by Matthew as typological, providing a pattern that is reenacted by the leading priests. It is not unusual for OT citations to be a combination of two or more texts (Davies and Allison 1997:568-569). This is the final "fulfillment formula" citation in Matthew. Some view this passage as having a redemptive meaning, in that the blood money goes for the burial of strangers or foreigners (cf. 25:35), signifying the extention of salvation to the Gentiles (Bruner 1990:1023). This, however, seems to read too much into the text. Others think that Matthew composed a non-historical story in 27:3-10 as a midrash (commentary) on Zech 11:12-13. If that were the case, one would have expected much closer correspondence between the story and Zechariah. It is better understood that Matthew noticed the similarities between his historical tradition and Zech 11 (Hagner 1995:811), and so he viewed Zechariah typologically. He saw in Jer 19 and Zech 11 "a pattern of apostasy and rejection that must find its ultimate fulfillment in the rejection of Jesus" (Carson 1984:566). And with this notion of prophetic fulfillment comes once again the implicit corollary of divine sovereignty.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 27:1-10 begins with the continuation of the trial story of 26:57-68, which was suspended by the story of Peter's denials (26:69-75). After 27:1-2, the subject changes to the story of Judas' suicide (27:3-8), which was viewed by Matthew as a fulfillment of prophecy (27:9-10). Matthew's pattern throughout the passion narrative has been to interweave stories about supporting characters and issues (26:6-13, 20-35; 27:3-10) into the main story of the sufferings of Jesus. In 27:9-10, Matthew's characteristic typological understanding of the Old Testament, expressed with a fulfillment formula, occurs for the last time. Matthew apparently understood the shepherd doomed to slaughter in Zechariah 13:7 as corresponding to Jesus and the thirty pieces of silver thrown to the potter in the Lord's house in Zechariah 11:13 as corresponding to the money Judas threw down in the Temple being used to buy potter's field. Matthew did not make up this story to fit Zechariah but read the prophets with a view to finding patterns in which an Old Testament person or event anticipated something in the life and ministry of Jesus.
Judas' Betrayal and Peter's Denial. As noted in the commentary on 26:69-75, it is instructive to compare and contrast the remorse of Peter after his temporary lapse with that of Judas after his act of ultimate treachery. Both acts were no doubt despicable, but Peter's denial pales in comparison with Judas's act. Peter returned to a life of following Jesus and was restored to his special office in the church (28:18-20; John 21:15-17). To mention his prominent ministry in the early church is to belabor the obvious. The remorse of Judas, however, does not amount to anything approaching genuine repentance unto salvation. This is clear not so much from the use of _metamelomai_ [TG3338, ZG3564] in 27:3 (see notes above) as from the ensuing events. Granted, Judas acknowledged his sin and returned his blood money. Davies and Allison (1997:562, 565, 571) make much of this in their overly sympathetic portrayal of Judas, but he never attempted to seek Jesus' forgiveness or rejoin the disciples. His suicide is an indication of hopeless despair, not repentance. In Matthew repentance is shown by works, portrayed as fruit (3:8-10; 7:16-20; 13:38-40). Judas is remembered for his suicide, probably viewed as a violation of the sixth commandment (Exod 20:13; cf. _Genesis Rabbah_ on 9:5; b. _Avodah Zarah_ 18a; _Tractate Semahot_ 2:1-2; but see Davies and Allison 1997:561-563). In view of such texts as Matthew 26:24 and John 6:70; 17:12, one may not hope that he was saved. Rather, one must be warned because he was lost.
## TEXT [Commentary]
K. Jesus' Trial before Pilate (27:11-26; cf. Mark 15:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16)
11 Now Jesus was standing before Pilate, the Roman governor. "Are you the king of the Jews?" the governor asked him.
Jesus replied, "You have said it."
12 But when the leading priests and the elders made their accusations against him, Jesus remained silent. 13 "Don't you hear all these charges they are bringing against you?" Pilate demanded. 14 But Jesus made no response to any of the charges, much to the governor's surprise.
15 Now it was the governor's custom each year during the Passover celebration to release one prisoner to the crowd—anyone they wanted. 16 This year there was a notorious prisoner, a man named Barabbas.[*] 17 As the crowds gathered before Pilate's house that morning, he asked them, "Which one do you want me to release to you—Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?" 18 (He knew very well that the religious leaders had arrested Jesus out of envy.)
19 Just then, as Pilate was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent him this message: "Leave that innocent man alone. I suffered through a terrible nightmare about him last night."
20 Meanwhile, the leading priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas to be released and for Jesus to be put to death. 21 So the governor asked again, "Which of these two do you want me to release to you?"
The crowd shouted back, "Barabbas!"
22 Pilate responded, "Then what should I do with Jesus who is called the Messiah?"
They shouted back, "Crucify him!"
23 "Why?" Pilate demanded. "What crime has he committed?"
But the mob roared even louder, "Crucify him!"
24 Pilate saw that he wasn't getting anywhere and that a riot was developing. So he sent for a bowl of water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this man's blood. The responsibility is yours!"
25 And all the people yelled back, "We will take responsibility for his death—we and our children!"[*]
26 So Pilate released Barabbas to them. He ordered Jesus flogged with a lead-tipped whip, then turned him over to the Roman soldiers to be crucified.
## NOTES
27:11 **Are you the king of the Jews?** Here the story of Jesus' trial resumes from 27:2. Pilate's examination of Jesus (cf. Mark 15:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16) naturally begins with a concern about Jesus' kingship. Pilate's loyalty to Caesar would cause him to be concerned about any potential rivals (cf. John 18:36-37).
**You have said it.** In response, Jesus used the mild though enigmatic affirmation "you have said it" for the third time in the passion narrative (cf. 26:25, 64).
27:12-14 **Jesus remained silent.** Jesus did not say a word in response to the accusations of the Jewish religious leaders (26:60-66); this amazed Pilate, who urged him to defend himself. Although Jesus remained silent (cf. Isa 53:7), it was clear to Pilate that Jesus' kingship was no threat to Roman authority (27:17-18). The religious leaders persisted in hounding Jesus to death as they continued to accuse him, refused Pilate's offer of clemency for Jesus, and incited the crowd to pressure Pilate to execute him (27:12, 20).
27:15-17 **it was the governor's custom each year . . . to release one prisoner.** Matthew explains that it had become customary for the Romans to release a Jewish prisoner at Passover as a gesture of good will, and that they were currently holding "a notorious prisoner, a man named Barabbas." Pilate offered the crowd their choice of Barabbas or Jesus, probably thinking that the crowd would prefer the enigmatic Jesus to the notorious Barabbas. A fascinating feature of 27:17 is that a few ancient manuscripts have Barabbas' full name as "Jesus Barabbas" (Metzger 1994:56). This makes for an interesting contrast between Jesus Barabbas (which may mean "son of the father" or "son of the teacher") and Jesus who is called Messiah.
27:18 **the religious leaders had arrested Jesus out of envy.** Pilate had correctly perceived that there was nothing substantial in the charges against Jesus, and that the leaders were motivated by envy.
27:19 **Leave that innocent man alone.** Pilate's wife described Jesus as "innocent" (lit. "just, righteous"), and this no doubt contributed to Pilate's conclusion that Jesus was innocent.
**a terrible nightmare about him.** As Pilate learns of his wife's nightmare, another testimony to Jesus' innocence enters into the narrative. Dreams were often viewed as significant and prophetic in the ancient world, and the Bible contains many divine revelations in the form of dreams (1:20; 2:12, 13, 19).
27:20-23 **the leading priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for Barabbas.** Matthew parenthetically notes the nefarious influence of the leaders on the crowd. When Pilate asked again which prisoner should be released, they called for Barabbas.
**Crucify him!** When he asked about Jesus' fate, they demanded he be crucified. When Pilate protested that Jesus was innocent, this only incited the crowd to shout more loudly for Jesus to be crucified. Jesus' former popularity with the crowd has evaporated (21:9, 11, 26; 26:5), but this is not surprising in that the crowd's expectations of a political-military Messiah were dashed when Jesus was arrested. Jesus' messianic credentials had been discredited in their view. It is also possible that this crowd is composed of Jerusalem residents instead of the Passover pilgrims who had praised Jesus when he entered Jerusalem (Blomberg 1992:412).
27:24 **a riot was developing.** Pilate could see that he had a near-riot on his hands, so he gave in to the crowd.
**washed his hands.** This was done to signify Pilate's non-participation in the decision to crucify Jesus (Deut 21:6-8; Ps 26:6; 73:13).
**I am innocent of this man's blood.** Pilate affirmed that the crowd, not he, would be responsible for Jesus' blood, and the crowd responded by accepting that responsibility for themselves and their children.
27:25 **We will take responsibility for his death.** Lit., "his blood be on us"—an expression which occurs elsewhere in both Testaments (Lev 20:9; Deut 19:10; Josh 2:19; 2 Sam 1:16; Jer 26:15; 51:35; Ezek 18:13; 33:4; Acts 5:28; 18:6; 20:26).
**we and our children!** The statement that their children will also be responsible for Jesus' death assumes the solidarity of the family (Josh 7:24; 2 Kgs 24:3-4; Jer 31:29; Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2, 19-32). These awful incriminating words recall Jesus' prediction in 23:35-36 to the effect that the blood of all the righteous since Abel would come upon his contemporaries. It is likely that the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 was God's judgment upon the crowd and its children (Davies and Allison 1997:591-592). The view that this verse constitutes a blood libel for all Jews of every period of time is patently false. (See the commentary below for further discussion of this matter.)
27:26 **Pilate released Barabbas.** The notorious criminal Barabbas was preferred to the humble messiah Jesus.
**He ordered Jesus flogged.** This flogging was a horrible, flesh-ripping experience (Josephus _War_ 2.306, 308; 5.449; 7.200-202) and would hasten Jesus' death once he was crucified.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' trial before Pilate involves two cycles of interrogation (27:11, 12-14), followed by an explanation of the customary Passover prisoner release and the availability of Barabbas (27:15-16). Then there are two cycles of Pilate asking the crowd whom they want to have released (27:17-20, 21), followed by two protests of Jesus' innocence (27:23; 27:24-25), followed by the delivery of Jesus for crucifixion (27:26). Besides Pilate and the crowd there are two other characters: Pilate's wife, who was for Jesus (27:19), and the leading priests and elders, who were against Jesus (27:12). Both the crowd and Pilate were influenced by the religious leaders; Pilate did not heed his wife.
Anti-Semitism? Matthew 27:20-25 takes its place alongside Matthew 23 as a passage frequently cited as being blatantly anti-Semitic (e.g., Sandmel 1978:66). Some conclude that Matthew portrays Pilate positively in order to exonerate or exculpate the Romans and indict or inculpate the Jews (e.g., Hill 1972:351), but Matthew's portrayal of Pilate is not really that positive; it coheres with the other ancient sources in presenting Pilate as insecure and unjust (See the notes on 27:1-2; Davies and Allison 1997:579). Pilate knew that Jesus was innocent, but he did not stop the miscarriage of justice. He knew that Jesus should be released instead of Barabbas, but he acceded to the wishes of the crowd because it was expedient to do so. His symbolic handwashing was pathetically inadequate and hypocritical, especially coming from one charged by the emperor with administering justice in Judea. The handwashing was meant to show that Pilate did not consent to the crowd's wish, but the shot was his to call, not the peoples'. If he did not consent, neither should he permit. Pilate comes across as a cowardly ruler who abdicated his responsibility. His only concern was with how all this impacted him. He lacked sufficient fortitude even to take his wife's advice and leave Jesus alone. "Pilate's title is ironic: the governor leaves the governing to others" (Davies and Allison 1997:583). Thus, Pilate must share in the guilt for Jesus' crucifixion.
But what of Matthew's famous "blood libel" text, 27:25? Is this intended to inculpate the Jews as a nation forever? In response to Pilate's washed hands and denial of responsibility for Jesus' death, the crowd clearly accepts that responsibility for themselves and their children. This passage has been frequently understood during the church's history as teaching that the Jews as a nation are to be viewed as despicable Christ-killers (as in Beare 1981:531). This interpretation is false, since all the founders of the church were Jewish and many Jews have believed in Jesus throughout the church's history. Matthew himself was a Christian Jew writing to Christian Jews in conflict with non-Christian Jews over the identity of Jesus the Jewish Messiah.
One way Christians have disavowed the blood libel view is to regard Matthew 27:25 as fiction (Beare 1981:531). But this merely adds a mistake about the historicity of the passage to the previous mistake about its meaning. On its surface the text is limited to those present before Pilate and their children, not the Jews as a nation at that time or at any other time (Saldarini 1994:32-33). The comment was made in the heat of the moment, not as a carefully reasoned theological position. There is no guarantee that a God of grace would hold the crowd to its rash statement any more than the twelve disciples would be held unforgivable for deserting Jesus and Peter for denying Jesus three times. Likewise, one should not expect that a God of justice would pardon Pilate for his diffidence and empty show of cleansing his hands.
If anything is clear in Matthew's Gospel, it is that Jesus came to save sinners—exemplified by such notorious people as tax collectors and harlots (9:13; 21:31). Sinners like these would likely be prevalent in the crowd that took responsibility for the blood of Jesus and there is no doubt that in Matthew's theology such sinners would be forgiven upon repentance. It is also clear in Matthew's Gospel that Jesus saved his most severe criticisms for the religious leaders whom he viewed as hypocrites. Perhaps this theme is an important part of the response to the "blood libel" view of Matthew 27:25. One notes in 27:20 that it was the leading priests and elders who persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas. If Jesus' Jewish contemporaries were an especially wicked generation (12:45; 23:36), it was largely because their leaders were especially wicked themselves. These corrupt leaders of Israel, then, are the ones to blame for the crowd's unfortunate statement in 27:25, and for Pilate's unprincipled acquiescence to the crowd's inflamed request (Davies and Allison 1997:593). This coheres perfectly with the Matthean theme of Jesus' conflicts with the leaders of Israel. So, in one sense, these leaders were responsible for the blood of Jesus, but in the most profound sense, all humans, Jews and Gentiles alike, are responsible for Jesus' pouring out his blood to forgive sins and inaugurate the new covenant. This was the plan of the heavenly Father, and Jesus drank the cup the Father gave him. Ultimately, then, it is those who do not believe in Jesus, Jews and Gentiles alike, who will be held responsible for the blood of Jesus (Hagner 1995:828).
## TEXT [Commentary]
L. The Crucifixion of Jesus (27:27-44; cf. Mark 15:16-32; Luke 23:26-43; John 19:17-27)
27 Some of the governor's soldiers took Jesus into their headquarters[*] and called out the entire regiment. 28 They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him. 29 They wove thorn branches into a crown and put it on his head, and they placed a reed stick in his right hand as a scepter. Then they knelt before him in mockery and taunted, "Hail! King of the Jews!" 30 And they spit on him and grabbed the stick and struck him on the head with it. 31 When they were finally tired of mocking him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him again. Then they led him away to be crucified.
32 Along the way, they came across a man named Simon, who was from Cyrene,[*] and the soldiers forced him to carry Jesus' cross. 33 And they went out to a place called Golgotha (which means "Place of the Skull"). 34 The soldiers gave Jesus wine mixed with bitter gall, but when he had tasted it, he refused to drink it.
35 After they had nailed him to the cross, the soldiers gambled for his clothes by throwing dice.[*] 36 Then they sat around and kept guard as he hung there. 37 A sign was fastened above Jesus' head, announcing the charge against him. It read: "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews." 38 Two revolutionaries[*] were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left.
39 The people passing by shouted abuse, shaking their heads in mockery. 40 "Look at you now!" they yelled at him. "You said you were going to destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days. Well then, if you are the Son of God, save yourself and come down from the cross!"
41 The leading priests, the teachers of religious law, and the elders also mocked Jesus. 42 "He saved others," they scoffed, "but he can't save himself! So he is the King of Israel, is he? Let him come down from the cross right now, and we will believe in him! 43 He trusted God, so let God rescue him now if he wants him! For he said, 'I am the Son of God.'" 44 Even the revolutionaries who were crucified with him ridiculed him in the same way.
## NOTES
27:27 Events now lead relentlessly to the cross (cf. Mark 15:16-32; Luke 23:26-43; John 19:17-27), with 27:27-37 describing the actions of the soldiers.
**took Jesus into their headquarters and called out the entire regiment.** Before the execution detail took Jesus to Golgotha (27:31-32), they first mocked him before the entire regiment. NLT renders the word "praetorium" (see NLT mg) as the soldiers' headquarters, but more likely it is the governor's residence (BDAG 859). This was either at Herod's palace (just south of the present Jaffa Gate on the west side of the old city) or at the Antonia fortress bordering the northwest corner of the Temple enclosure. A "regiment" of soldiers was a cohort, one tenth of a legion or 600 men ( _speira_ , BDAG 936). The mockery of the Roman soldiers in Pilate's palace fulfills Jesus' prophecy in 20:19 (cf. Ps 22:8; Isa 50:6). This mockery recalls that of the religious leaders (26:67-68) and anticipates worse taunting to come (27:39-44).
27:28-30 **scarlet robe.** This robe, the crown of thorns, and the stick (Ps 2:9; 110:2; Jer 48:17) were all intended as a cruel parody of royal trappings. The Romans' derision is probably fueled by the fact that Jesus was purported to be the king of the despised Jews, a conquered people under Roman dominion.
**they knelt before him in mockery.** Ironically, some day these soldiers will join all humanity, not just the Jews, in rendering obeisance to the conquering Son of Man (Dan 7:13ff; Phil 2:9-11). Those of the regiment who were assigned to the burial detail will soon have reason to rethink their mockery of Jesus (27:54).
27:31 **they led him away to be crucified.** After this horrible charade, Jesus was led away to be crucified. Davies and Allison (1997:597) show that 27:27-31 has a chiastic structure.
27:32 **Simon, who was from Cyrene.** The mention of this man in passing is a striking historical allusion and may imply that Simon was or became a disciple of Jesus. Some speculate that he may be the same person as Simon called Niger in Acts 13:1. Cyrene was a north African city on the Mediterranean (cf. Acts 2:10; 6:9; 11:20; 13:1). It was the capital of the Roman province of _Cyrenaica_ , roughly equivalent to modern Libya. Simon may have been a Jerusalem resident (Acts 6:9) or a religious pilgrim.
**the soldiers forced him to carry Jesus' cross.** The conscription of Simon to carry the cross bar of Jesus' cross probably indicates the degree of physical suffering already undergone by Jesus. Normally, the condemned criminal would be forced to carry his own cross (10:38; 16:24). The forced conscription of Simon reminds the reader of the teaching of Jesus in 5:41, to the effect that if one is forced (evidently by a soldier) to go one mile, one should go two.
27:33 **Golgotha (which means "Place of the Skull").** Ancient tradition identifies the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre with Golgotha, the Aramaic word for "skull." Perhaps a skull-like rock formation there gave rise to this name. The Latin word for skull is _calvaria_ , from which the English word Calvary is derived. Crucifixions were used by conquerors as a public spectacle to humiliate rebels and quell resistance, so it is likely that Golgotha was near a well-traveled street, which would entail many observers (cf. 27:39; 3 Macc 5:21-24).
27:34 **wine mixed with bitter gall.** When they arrived at Golgotha, Jesus refused to drink the wine mixed with gall offered to him by the soldiers (but cf. 27:48 where he does drink the wine; also Ps 69:21; Prov 31:6). This was probably a sedative ( _b. Sanhedrin_ 43a) customarily offered to those about to experience the torture of crucifixion, but it may have been another act of mockery, since gall might have made the wine extremely bitter in taste (Davies and Allison 1997:612-613).
27:35 **After they had nailed him to the cross.** Matthew's narrative supplies few details of the actual crucifixion, stressing instead the actions of the people involved and the fulfillment of prophecy. See the commentary below for further details on crucifixion.
**the soldiers gambled for his clothes.** The soldiers of the execution detail would get the meager belongings of those who were crucified, and they determined who would get Jesus' garment by casting lots for it (Ps 22:18).
27:37 **A sign was fastened.** The sign was a _titulus_ (a placard on which was written the charge against him).
**This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.** The charge or _titulus_ against Jesus involves a profound irony. Jesus' kingship was rejected by the leaders of Israel, who worked to have him crucified. The Romans also mocked Jesus as king (27:29). Yet his very crucifixion was an enactment of his power to save his people from their sins, and his resurrection, ascension, and return progressively vindicate his claim to be the King of the Jews (cf. John 19:19-22; 1 Cor 1:18, 23-25).
27:38 **Two revolutionaries.** The criminals (cf. 26:55) on Jesus' right and left are mentioned here and later in 27:44 (cf. Isa 53:12). One cannot help but be reminded of 20:23.
27:39-40 **You said you were going to destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days.** Jesus' alleged plans to destroy the Temple were brought up again here (cf. 26:61), as the passersby shook their heads (cf. Ps 22:7; 109:25; Jer 18:16; Lam 2:15) and mocked Jesus. The taunts capitalized on the incompatibility between Jesus' supposed high office and his actual low situation (cf. 4:3, 6).
**if you are the Son of God, save yourself.** If he could do something as miraculous as destroy the Temple, surely he could save his life. Certainly he could come down from the cross if he was the Son of God. The taunt to demonstrate his sonship by coming down from the cross (27:40, 42, 44) is particularly perverse since Jesus was willingly enduring the cross precisely because he was the obedient Son of God (cf. 26:39, 42, 44). Jesus knew that if he saved his life he would lose it and the lives of his people whom he came to save (1:21; 10:38-39; 16:24-26; 20:28; 26:28).
27:41-42 **he can't save himself!** The leading priests and elders had followed Jesus from Pilate's residence to the place of crucifixion (cf. 27:12). There the teachers of religious law, who had not appeared since they joined in the trial at Caiaphas' residence, rejoined them (26:57). Their taunts use the third person and they are not addressed directly to Jesus as are those of the passersby in 27:39-40, but if anything they are even more cutting. They scoffed that Jesus supposedly could save others but cannot save himself.
**Let him come down . . . and we will believe.** The leaders said they would believe that Jesus was the King of Israel if he would manifest his status by coming down from the cross. In their view, if Jesus really was God's trusting Son in whom God took pleasure (Ps 22:8-9; Wis 2:18-20; cf. Matt 3:17; 17:5; 26:63), God would rescue him from crucifixion. But it was God's will that Jesus drink the cup of crucifixion, pour out his own blood, and inaugurate the new covenant.
27:44 **the revolutionaries who were crucified with him ridiculed him in the same way.** These two added their voices to this barrage of taunts (but cf. Luke 23:39-43).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The narrative of Jesus' crucifixion is a story of the gruesome process of execution. The story begins with the action of the soldiers in mocking Jesus (27:27-31), conscribing Simon to carry the cross (27:32), arriving at Golgotha (27:33), offering Jesus wine with gall (27:34), crucifying Jesus (27:35a), gambling for his garments (27:35b), observing (27:36), and putting up the sign describing Jesus' identity (27:37). The next section is an _inclusio_ framed by the mention of the revolutionaries who were crucified on both sides of Jesus (27:38-44). The theme here is mockery, whether by the bystanders (27:39-40), the religious leaders (27:41-43), or the revolutionaries themselves (27:44). As Jesus was tempted three times (4:1-11), so he is mocked three times. Both the temptation and the mockery focus on Jesus' sonship. Both the devil and the various mockers confront Jesus with the alternative of reigning without suffering, but both times Jesus would have none of it.
The mockery of the passage is ironic, since Jesus really is the Son of God and the Temple would be destroyed within a generation. Jesus did in fact save others and will continue to do so. He is the King of Israel, who trusted in God, and God was supremely pleased with him. He did not come down from the cross but he did overcome death. Each point of sarcastic ridicule is, in fact, eventually shown to be true. The mockers were unwitting evangelists. The irony is never more pronounced than in the actions of the soldiers who dressed Jesus as a king and pretended to pay homage to him (27:27-31). What the soldiers acted out in cruel jest is prophetic of what really will happen some day. After his resurrection, Jesus was exalted as the glorious Son of Man and given all authority (28:18). His message of the rule of God continues to win willing subjects from all the nations of the earth. At the end of the age, he will return as the King and be seated on his glorious throne (25:31ff). Things are not always as they seem, and sometimes things are exactly the opposite of what they seem.
Old Testament 316. The crucifixion narrative is replete with Old Testament citations and allusions, the most prominent of which follow, listed in the order they appear:
27:34— Wine mixed with bitter gall (Ps 69:21; mercy or mockery?)
27:35— Garments divided by throwing dice (Ps 22:18)
27:36— Soldiers watch Jesus (Ps 22:17)
27:38— Counted among the rebels (Isa 53:12)
27:39— Shaking heads in mockery (Ps 22:7)
27:43— God will deliver if he trusts in him (Ps 22:8)
27:45— Darkness at noon (Amos 8:9)
27:46— "Why have you abandoned me?" (Ps 22:1)
27:57, 60— His grave with a rich man (Isa 53:9)
Anti-Semitism? It is also significant that perhaps the most vicious mockers of Jesus in the crucifixion narrative were Gentiles (27:27-31). This calls into question the tendency among Christians towards identifying Jews with rejection of Jesus and Gentiles with reception of Jesus, which is found in some treatments of Matthew's theology. There are examples in Matthew of Jews who love Jesus and of Gentiles who hate him. France (1985:397) goes too far in commenting on 27:44 when he says that "the totality of Jesus' rejection by his people is complete." Rather, not all of the mockers in the crucifixion narrative are Jews (27:27-31), and not all the Jews are mockers (27:55-57). Therefore, Matthew should not be charged with an unqualified negative view of the Jews nor a similarly unqualified positive view of the Gentiles.
Crucifixion. Crucifixion was cruel and unusual punishment, to say the least (Josephus _War_ 1.97-98; 5.449-551; _Antiquities_ 13.379-383; 18:63-64; Hengel 1977; Brown 1994:945-952). The Romans used it in the case of slaves, notorious criminals, and insurrectionists to make a political statement. Crucifixion asserted the dominion of Rome over conquered peoples by making a gruesome example of anyone who dared to upset the _pax Romana_. According to Josephus, it was frequently utilized during the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70. Although practices varied somewhat, crucifixion often involved driving a long nail (Luke 24:39; John 20:25; Col 2:14) through the victim's ankles into the vertical post of the cross and driving nails through the victim's outstretched hands or wrists into the horizontal beam of the cross. The precise medical cause of death by crucifixion is not clear. It is commonly thought that victims would die of asphyxia. They would eventually have difficulty supporting their own weight with their legs. Then it would become increasingly difficult to breathe when hanging by the arms. The process could take days, and at times the executors would break the legs of the victims to hasten their deaths, though in the case of Jesus this was not necessary (John 19:31-33). Another theory is that dehydration and loss of blood from the pre-crucifixion flogging and the nail wounds would cause death (Brown 1994:1088-1092).
The crucifixion narrative in Matthew is the culmination of the story of Jesus' rejection. It stresses the way in which various parties—the bystanders, the Jewish leaders, and the revolutionaries crucified with Jesus—taunt him. In their way of thinking, his crucifixion unmasked Jesus as an impotent pretender to messianic office. Jesus' ministry as Messiah, however, was never intended to involve the military leadership they expected to remove Rome's oppressive yoke. Jesus and John before him demanded individual Jewish repentance, not war against Rome. Jesus' messianic values are epitomized most clearly in 12:14-21. There the Pharisees were planning to kill Jesus because his healing on the Sabbath amounted to work in their view. In response, Jesus withdrew from conflict and counseled silence on the healing. The Kingdom is built not by the sword (26:52) but by one repentant disciple at a time. Such disciples acknowledge that following Jesus amounts to a transformation of fundamental values involving crucifixion of the old ego-centered life and renewal into a Kingdom-centered life of humble service (10:38-39; 16:24-26; 20:23, 26-28). In this messianic model, justice is achieved not by military prowess but by individual repentance and humble service to others, but the Jewish religious establishment of Jesus' day would have none of it.
In addition to modeling Kingdom values, Jesus' crucifixion accomplished redemption. Jesus saved his people from their sins (1:21) by giving his life as a ransom for them (20:28). This ransom entailed the sacrificial pouring out of his blood so that their sins could be forgiven (26:28). The Torah pronounces a curse on anyone who is hung on a tree (Deut 21:22-23; cf. Isa 53:3-6), and other New Testament authors develop this along the lines of vicarious sacrifice—on the cross Jesus bore the curse and penalty for the sins of his people so that they would not have to bear that curse themselves. There are subtle allusions to Deuteronomy 21:22-23 (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; 1 Pet 2:24) as well as an explicit citation of it in Galatians 3:13, both to the effect that Jesus took on himself the sin and guilt of his people and thereby achieved their forgiveness and redemption (Rom 3:24-26; 1 Cor 1:23-24; 2 Cor 5:21; 1 Tim 2:6). Paul develops the theology of crucifixion even further, teaching that the believer in Jesus has become identified with Jesus in death to the old life of sin and identified with Jesus in resurrection to a new life of holiness (Rom 5:12-6:11; 1 Cor 15:20-22; Gal 2:20; 6:14; Eph 2:1-6; 4:22-24; Col 2:8-15; 3:1-4). Paul's understanding of the redemptive effect of the cross also develops Matthew's stress on mission to Gentiles, since the new life in Christ is lived in community with all who believe in Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile (Rom 15:7-12; Eph 2:11-22; Col 3:9-11).
## TEXT [Commentary]
M. The Death of Jesus (27:45-56; cf. Mark 15:33-41; Luke 23:44-49; John 19:31-37)
45 At noon, darkness fell across the whole land until three o'clock. 46 At about three o'clock, Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Eli, Eli,[*] lema sabachthani?" which means "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?"[*]
47 Some of the bystanders misunderstood and thought he was calling for the prophet Elijah. 48 One of them ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, holding it up to him on a reed stick so he could drink. 49 But the rest said, "Wait! Let's see whether Elijah comes to save him."[*]
50 Then Jesus shouted out again, and he released his spirit. 51 At that moment the curtain in the sanctuary of the Temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, rocks split apart, 52 and tombs opened. The bodies of many godly men and women who had died were raised from the dead. 53 They left the cemetery after Jesus' resurrection, went into the holy city of Jerusalem, and appeared to many people.
54 The Roman officer[*] and the other soldiers at the crucifixion were terrified by the earthquake and all that had happened. They said, "This man truly was the Son of God!"
55 And many women who had come from Galilee with Jesus to care for him were watching from a distance. 56 Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary (the mother of James and Joseph), and the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee.
## NOTES
27:45 **At noon, darkness fell across the whole land until three o'clock.** Jesus had evidently been put on the cross around the middle of the morning. His death occurred at the end of a providential darkness that prevailed during what is normally the brightest part of the day, from noon to 3 p.m. (lit. "from the sixth to the ninth hour;" cf. Mark 15:33-41; Luke 23:44-49; John 19:28-37). This darkness (24:29) was appropriate, given the horrible suffering and divine abandonment (27:46) experienced by Jesus during these epochal hours (cf. Exod 10:22; Deut 28:29; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 8:9).
27:46-47 **Jesus called out.** Jesus had evidently not spoken since his brief response to Pilate in 27:11, and when he broke his silence it was not to respond to his mockers but to cry out mournfully to God.
**Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani.** Jesus loudly cried these words from Ps 22:1 that expressed his deep awareness of and anguish over his loss of intimate communion with the Father: "Why have you abandoned me?"
**thought he was calling for the prophet Elijah.** In Heb. "my God" (transliterated in Gr. as _ēli_ [TG2241, ZG2458]) sounds like the first two syllables of the name "Elijah," and some of the bystanders misunderstood, taking Jesus' quotation of Ps 22:1 as an attempt to summon Elijah. Preoccupation with Elijah was part of first-century Jewish eschatological speculation based on Mal 4:5-6 (cf. Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:3, 10-13).
27:48 **sour wine.** Evidently the offer of sour wine (Ps 69:21; cf. Num 6:3; Ruth 2:14) was an act of kindness not appreciated by those who wished to see whether Elijah would come to rescue Jesus. Why the offer of wine was made after the misinterpreted cry of Jesus is not clear.
27:50 **Jesus shouted out again, and he released his spirit.** It seems surprising that one who had undergone the agonies experienced by Jesus would be able to muster a loud shout, but that is how Matthew reports Jesus died. The expression "released his spirit" is sometimes understood to mean that Jesus decided when he would die (Davies and Allison 1997:628; Hendriksen 1973:973), but this may be only an idiomatic expression for death (cf. Gen 35:18; 1 Esdr 4:21; Josephus _Antiquities_ 1.218; 5.147; 12.430; 14.369).
27:51 **the curtain in the sanctuary of the Temple was torn in two.** The curtain that was torn was probably not the one between the Court of Israel and the Court of the Gentiles (Blomberg 1992:421) but either the inner one that separated the holy of holies from the holy place (Exod 26:31-35; Lev 16:2; 2 Chr 3:14) or the outer one in front of the holy place (Exod 26:37; 38:18; Num 3:26). The tearing of the curtain from top to bottom is taken by some scholars as symbolizing God's judgment on the Temple and its resulting obsolescence (e.g., Blomberg 1992:421; Hagner 1995:849, who seems to read too much of Hebrews into Matthew). But one wonders whether the AD 70 destruction necessarily requires the final obsolescence. Others view the tearing of the curtain as a vindication of Jesus as one who is greater than the Temple and its corrupt leaders (12:6; Gundry 1994:575). Davies and Allison (1997:632) point out that any judgment on the Temple, such as the tearing of the curtain, is first of all a judgment against the priests who were the custodians of the Temple. Since Matthew presents Jesus to his Christian Jewish community not as one who destroys but as one who fulfills the Torah (5:17ff), it is not likely that he thought in terms of the absolute end of the Temple, even though he had predicted its destruction in 24:2.
**The earth shook, rocks split apart.** The extraordinary phenomena accompanying Jesus' death were due to an earthquake (24:7; 28:2; cf. Isa 24:19; 29:6; Jer 10:10; Amos 8:8; Nah 1:5-6; Zech 14:4). The earthquake, like the darkening of the sun, was a providential event signifying God's epochal redemptive action.
27:52-53 **godly men and women who had died were raised from the dead.** Lit., "holy ones who had fallen asleep were raised."
**They left the cemetery after Jesus' resurrection, went into the holy city of Jerusalem, and appeared to many people.** The opening of the tombs (Ezek 37:13) is here associated with Jesus' death, but the appearance of the saints in the holy city evidently did not occur until after Jesus' resurrection (27:53). There are many questions as to the timing and nature of this rather bizarre event (Hagner 1995:849-852), but it is not ultimately helpful to view it as non-historical. As a preview of the ultimate resurrection of humanity (Gundry 1994:577), it is important that one recognize that this resurrection was as real as that of Jesus. Only then can this resurrection be appropriately contextualized as an effect of Jesus' resurrection and an augur of the final resurrection. Matthew said nothing about the ultimate end of those raised. One wonders whether their "resurrection" was a temporary resuscitation to physical life, after which they died. In this case, these saints would be like Lazarus in John 11. If the resurrection involved a transformation of the body like that of Jesus, one wonders whether these saints ascended with Jesus to heaven. Matthew supplies no answers to such questions, and for this reason many scholars view 27:52-53 as more of a symbolic theological tale than an actual historical narrative.
27:54 **Roman officer.** Lit., "centurion," a commander of a hundred soldiers; cf. 8:5, 8, 13.
**This man truly was the Son of God!** The confession of the centurion and the other soldiers is crucial, not only as a foil to all the invectives hurled at Jesus since 27:27, but also as a cardinal example of Matthew's theme of mission to the Gentiles. These soldiers acknowledged what all the others refused to see, and Matthew used their words to echo a main theme in the first Gospel, that Jesus is the Son of God. What the soldiers themselves meant by "Son of God" probably does not approach Matthew's high Christology. They were probably terrified by the mid-day darkness and the earthquake accompanying Jesus' death and came to the conclusion that Jesus was in some sense a supernatural being.
27:55-56 **many women . . . were watching from a distance.** These women figure prominently in the narrative by standing closer to Jesus than the inner circle of his disciples (cf. 26:7; 27:61; 28:1, 5).
**had come from Galilee.** Some of these women had been disciples since the days of the Galilean ministry.
**Mary Magdalene.** Cf. Luke 8:2.
**Mary (the mother of James and Joseph).** This is the mother of Jesus; James and Joseph were his half-brothers.
**the mother of James and John.** Zebedee's wife had previously envisioned her sons sitting on both sides of Jesus' throne (20:20-21), but now she saw Jesus' cross with revolutionaries crucified on both sides of him. The two Marys mentioned here will appear again in 27:61; 28:1ff. Their presence forms the literary hinge between the burial and resurrection of Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The death of Jesus is the event that all of Matthew's narrative has been pointing to. There is a sense in which Matthew 1–25 is the introduction to the passion narrative in Matthew 26–28, and the centerpiece of the passion narrative is the death of Jesus. Matthew's narration of Jesus' death is much like his preceding material on the crucifixion. He spared the details of the event itself and stresses instead the actions of others, which are full of irony and Old Testament allusions. Jesus' death is attended by darkness and results in a rock-splitting earthquake. Nature itself thus testifies to the ominous, epochal significance of this event. The direct taunting of Jesus ceases at 27:46, and Jesus' desolate cry in 27:46 pierces the darkness with some of the most profound words in the entire Bible. How one who was uniquely God's Son in terms of such passages as 1:23; 3:17; 11:27; 16:16; and 17:5 could be forsaken by God "is one of the most impenetrable mysteries of the entire Gospel narrative" (Hagner 1995:845). This is not a loss of faith on Jesus' part but the expression of the deepest imaginable pain at being abandoned by his Father. Yet the abandonment sensed by Jesus was only temporary, and his vindication was coming soon.
Jesus' cry of dereliction was misunderstood by those watching to the very end (27:47-49). Unaware of the true significance of what had transpired, they imagined that Jesus was calling for Elijah. Although they had been mocking Jesus previously, some of them appeared half-seriously to expect Elijah to come miraculously to Jesus' rescue. But Jesus had to drink the dregs of the cup of suffering the Father had placed before him. His death amounts to the sacrificial pouring out of his blood as a ransom which saves his people from their sins (1:21; 20:28; 26:28).
The earthquake at Jesus' death (27:51ff) ripped the Temple veil and even the very rocks, so that tombs were opened and people are raised from the dead. The tearing of the veil vindicated Jesus, demonstrating that he was indeed one greater than the Temple (12:6). The splitting of the rocks and resulting opening of tombs was evidently a preview of the final resurrection, guaranteed by the imminent resurrection of Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 15:20, 23; Rev 1:5). Despite the rejection of Jesus by the leaders of Israel, and his abandonment, albeit temporary, by his own disciples, there were sympathetic witnesses to his death. The Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus were transformed into believers of a sort when they witnessed the manner of Jesus' death and its results. They may not have grasped all that Matthew conveys elsewhere in the title "Son of God," but their words indicate a positive response to the "light" they had and openness to further witness by Jesus' disciples. It is likely that some of them became disciples. Another largely unsung group watched the death of Jesus, no doubt in horror over the pain and taunting but in awe over the subsequent earthquake. These were the women mentioned in 27:55-56, who in days to come were the first to learn of the resurrection of Jesus, meet the resurrected Jesus himself, and, finally, tell the disciples about it. The preeminence of these faithful women in the account of the death of Jesus, taken alongside the shameful absence of the disciples, is a powerful warning against chauvinism in the community of Jesus' disciples (cf. 23:8-12; Gal 3:28). (For further reflection on the death of Jesus the Messiah, see the commentary on 27:27-44.)
## TEXT [Commentary]
N. The Burial of Jesus (27:57-66; cf. Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:38-42)
57 As evening approached, Joseph, a rich man from Arimathea who had become a follower of Jesus, 58 went to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. And Pilate issued an order to release it to him. 59 Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a long sheet of clean linen cloth. 60 He placed it in his own new tomb, which had been carved out of the rock. Then he rolled a great stone across the entrance and left. 61 Both Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were sitting across from the tomb and watching.
62 The next day, on the Sabbath,[*] the leading priests and Pharisees went to see Pilate. 63 They told him, "Sir, we remember what that deceiver once said while he was still alive: 'After three days I will rise from the dead.' 64 So we request that you seal the tomb until the third day. This will prevent his disciples from coming and stealing his body and then telling everyone he was raised from the dead! If that happens, we'll be worse off than we were at first."
65 Pilate replied, "Take guards and secure it the best you can." 66 So they sealed the tomb and posted guards to protect it.
## NOTES
27:57 The burial of Jesus unfolds as Friday afternoon gives way to evening (cf. Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:31-42).
**Joseph, a rich man from Arimathea.** His appearance is unexpected. Very little is known about the obscure place of Arimathea (1 Macc 11:34; Josephus _Antiquities_ 5.342; 13:127). The mention of Joseph's wealth may be an allusion to Isa 53:9.
**had become a follower of Jesus.** As both a rich man and a disciple (cf. Mark 15:43; John 19:38), Joseph is a unique person in Matthew's narrative, an example of God's power to do seemingly impossible things (cf. 19:23-26). Joseph, unlike the rich young ruler, did use his wealth to help the poor.
27:58-59 **went to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body.** Joseph obtained permission from Pilate to bury Jesus. Bodies were to be buried before sunset (Deut 21:22-23), and the burial of corpses was regarded as a righteous work (Acts 5:6, 10; 8:2; Josephus _War_ 4.317; Tob 1:17-20). This would be all the more true on the eve of the Sabbath. But victims of crucifixion were often left on their crosses after their deaths to perpetuate the lesson of the futility of rebellion against Rome. When they were disposed of, this would often involve being unceremoniously thrown on a trash heap. Joseph's bold and reverential treatment of Jesus' body is a remarkable demonstration of his faith in the Messiah.
**long sheet of clean linen cloth.** Lit., "clean linen cloth."
27:60 **He placed it in his own new tomb.** This tomb was carved out of a rock escarpment, which was typical in those days. Visitors to Israel can see examples of such ancient tombs even today.
**rolled a great stone across the entrance.** The tomb was closed with a large stone, probably carved into a shape like a disc or millstone. The stone would roll in a groove carved into the ground across the front of the tomb. According to John 19:39-42, Nicodemus aided Joseph in burying Jesus.
27:61 **Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were sitting across from the tomb and watching.** The two Marys from 27:56 were still keeping watch over the body of Jesus; they would be the first to learn of the resurrection (28:5ff).
27:62 **on the Sabbath.** This correctly interprets an expression that speaks of the day after the day of preparation (for the Sabbath).
**leading priests and Pharisees.** The religious leaders continued to pursue Jesus even after his death. This time the Pharisees, last mentioned in Jesus' denunciations in Matt 23, joined the leading priests in asking Pilate to seal and guard the tomb. Here, two groups normally in tension with one another unite to accomplish a larger common purpose (cf. 21:45).
27:63-64 **that deceiver.** It is unclear how the chief priests and Pharisees became aware of Jesus' predictions concerning his resurrection. Jesus' repeated explicit predictions of his resurrection had been made only to his disciples (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:17-19). Perhaps the veiled predictions of the resurrection in terms of the sign of Jonah were understood by the Pharisees and Sadducees who heard it (12:38-40; 16:4). Calling Jesus a deceiver (Luke 23:14; John 7:12, 47), they feared the highly implausible event that his disciples would perpetrate further deception by stealing the body and then claiming that Jesus rose from the dead.
27:65 **Take guards.** Pilate's response should probably be taken as a command for the Jewish religious leaders to take a guard, evidently of Roman soldiers at Pilate's disposal, and secure the tomb, but possibly Pilate was permitting them to guard the tomb with their own resources—namely, the Temple police. However, the fact that these guards were called soldiers (28:12-13) and that they were accountable to Pilate (28:14) suggests that they were Roman soldiers.
27:66 **they sealed the tomb and posted guards to protect it.** If the former view is correct, these soldiers sealed the tomb and guarded it with the authority of Rome. The seal would likely be clay or wax pressed into the crack between the rolling stone and the tomb itself. The clay or wax would then have the imperial seal stamped on it (Dan 6:17), but this would not hinder the power of God at dawn the next morning.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage contains two sections, the first describes the burial of Jesus (27:57-61) and the second the fear of the Jewish religious leaders that the disciples would steal Jesus' body and make deceptive claims of his resurrection (27:62-66). Both sections involve a request being made to Pilate, and Pilate granting the request. This section sets up Matthew 28 because the burial of Jesus and guarding of his tomb are reversed by the resurrection and flight of the guards to the chief priests.
After all of the abuse Jesus had taken this day, the manner of his burial is surprising, to say the least. He is spared the ignominy of having his body hang on the cross after sundown, a sundown that led to the Sabbath during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Leaving his body exposed would have added insult to injury, to say the least. But Joseph stepped in and brought the story of Jesus' horrible death to an end by giving him a decent burial. Fittingly, this was the kindest treatment Jesus received since the unnamed woman anointed him for his burial in 26:6-13.
The fear of the religious leaders that the disciples would steal Jesus' body and go on to deceive people with false resurrection claims seems to be irrational, even bordering on paranoia. The religious leaders thought too highly of the disciples, who were scattered, afraid, and hardly in a position to steal the body. But a far worse mistake is that the religious leaders thought so little of Jesus that they ruled out any possibility that God would make good on Jesus' promised resurrection. In any event, the post-resurrection appearances refute the stolen body theory of the resurrection (28:9, 17; cf. Acts 1:3-11; 1 Cor 15:5-8). The conspiracy that results after Jesus' resurrection shows the lengths to which unbelief will go in order to sustain its pretended autonomy (cf. 28:11-15; cf. Luke 16:31). The book of Acts portrays the ensuing confirmation of the worst fears of these religious leaders. Jesus whom they crucified had indeed risen from the dead and commissioned his followers to take this message to all the nations (Acts 2:24; 3:15; 10:40; 13:30; 17:31; 23:6-10; 24:15, 21; 25:19; 26:8, 23). And the last "deception" certainly does turn out to be "worse" than the first (27:64; cf. Acts 2:41-47; 6:7; 9:31; 21:20).
Summary and Transition. Matthew 27 carries the drama of Jesus' arrest and trial before the religious leaders to its awful conclusion, as Jesus is condemned by Pilate and crucified. After his death and burial, the Jewish religious leaders attempted to nullify any possibility of his predicted resurrection by guarding the tomb and sealing the stone. Certainly this is the low point of the Gospel for followers of Jesus the Messiah, but the seeming victory of Jesus' enemies was only temporary.
The chapter begins with the note that Jesus was sent to Pilate for condemnation (27:1-2) but interrupts this story line briefly with the pathetic account of Judas' remorse and suicide (27:3-10). Then Matthew returns to the trial of Jesus before Pilate and Pilate's somewhat reluctant deliverance of Jesus for crucifixion (27:11-26). Jesus was then cruelly mocked by the soldiers (27:27-31), led to Golgotha, crucified, and mocked even more (27:32-44). Matthew next features the circumstances of Jesus' death at the ninth hour (3 p.m.; 27:45-56), and the remarkable manner of his burial (27:57-61). The chapter concludes with yet another evidence of the hardness of the religious leaders' hearts as they did all in their power to prevent the disciples from stealing Jesus' body (27:62-66). This final section of the chapter sets the scene for the resurrection as the event that once for all exposes the folly and futility of those who would thwart the plan and purpose of God.
In this chapter, Matthew develops two contrasting themes in parallel fashion. On the one hand, the religious leaders continue their hard-hearted, cruel, mocking treatment of Jesus and admit their absolute responsibility for his execution (27:1, 4, 20, 41-43, 62). To the bitter end their amazing obstinacy in opposing Jesus continues. On the other hand, Jesus is repeatedly vindicated in the midst of this mockery by the officials of Israel and Rome. Judas remorsefully admitted that Jesus was innocent, and the religious leaders did not attempt to persuade him otherwise (27:4). Even Pilate was aware of the ulterior motives of the religious leaders and, along with his wife, regarded Jesus as innocent (27:18-19, 23-24). The Father provided meteorological phenomena, which befit the atrocity committed and provided a sort of vindication as well (27:51-53). A detachment of Roman soldiers was more perceptive than the Jewish religious leaders when they interpreted these phenomena as demonstrating that Jesus is the Son of God (27:54). While it is debatable how much the soldiers understood of Jesus' divine sonship, their sincere confession contrasts starkly with the taunts of the multitudes and the religious leaders (27:40, 43). This confession paves the way for the resurrected Jesus to send his disciples to all the nations, who must likewise confess in baptism the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (28:19).
## TEXT [Commentary]
O. The Resurrection of Jesus (28:1-10; cf. Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18)
1 Early on Sunday morning,[*] as the new day was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went out to visit the tomb.
2 Suddenly there was a great earthquake! For an angel of the Lord came down from heaven, rolled aside the stone, and sat on it. 3 His face shone like lightning, and his clothing was as white as snow. 4 The guards shook with fear when they saw him, and they fell into a dead faint.
5 Then the angel spoke to the women. "Don't be afraid!" he said. "I know you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He isn't here! He is risen from the dead, just as he said would happen. Come, see where his body was lying. 7 And now, go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and he is going ahead of you to Galilee. You will see him there. Remember what I have told you."
8 The women ran quickly from the tomb. They were very frightened but also filled with great joy, and they rushed to give the disciples the angel's message. 9 And as they went, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they ran to him, grasped his feet, and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, "Don't be afraid! Go tell my brothers to leave for Galilee, and they will see me there."
## NOTES
28:1 The comparison of Matthew's resurrection narrative with that of the other Gospels raises a number of questions regarding chronology and harmonization (cf. Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18; see the last paragraph of the commentary below for other resources on the resurrection).
**Early on Sunday morning, as the new day was dawning.** Lit., "after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning."
**visit the tomb.** Lit., "see the tomb." Their purpose in doing so is explained more clearly in Mark 16:1. It is significant that once again the female disciples were the closest to Jesus at a crucial juncture of the story (cf. 26:7; 27:56, 61). Evidently the disciples were still scattered (26:31-35).
28:2 **a great earthquake!** This severe earthquake reminds the reader of the earthquake which had occurred when Jesus died on Friday afternoon (27:51-53). It is possible to regard this as an aftershock of the previous earthquake (Blomberg 1992:427), which was accompanied by the epochal events that lead up to the resurrection of Jesus. Or, it may be better to see the quake as due to the angelic work mentioned in the next note. The sequence of the events in 28:2-3 is not clear. Either the earthquake had already occurred by the time the women arrived or it occurred as they viewed the tomb.
**an angel . . . rolled aside the stone.** The appearance of the angel to roll the stone aside evidently coincided with or caused the earthquake, but it is not clear whether this was visible to the women. Either way, the stone was rolled aside, not to let Jesus out, but to show the women that the tomb was empty because the resurrection had already occurred.
28:3 **His face shone like lightning.** The description of the awesome appearance of the angel is similar to other biblical accounts of angelic visitations (Dan 7:9; 10:6; Acts 1:10; Rev 10:1; 15:6). It is noteworthy that Matthew begins and ends with angelic activity; angels are involved with both the birth and resurrection of Jesus (1:20; 2:19).
28:4 **The guards shook with fear when they saw him, and they fell into a dead faint.** As it turns out, the detachment of guards and the imperial seal on the stone (27:65-66) were powerless to stop the removal of Jesus' body because it was not stolen by the disciples but raised by the Father. The glorious angel who rolled away the stone so astonished the guards that they fainted as if _they_ were the dead ones.
28:5-6 **He is risen from the dead.** Lit., "he was raised from the dead"; this shows that the power of another, the Father, accomplished the miracle.
**Come, see where his body was lying.** After the angel told the women not to fear (cf. Luke 1:13, 30; 2:10), the angel coupled his announcement of the resurrection with an invitation for the women to look into the tomb and see for themselves. His words, "just as he said would happen," remind the women that Jesus had repeatedly predicted his resurrection (cf. 12:40; 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32).
28:7 **he is going ahead of you to Galilee.** Jesus' earlier promise to meet the disciples in Galilee (26:32) is repeated here by the angel and later by Jesus himself (28:10). The promise was originally uttered in the context of Jesus' prediction that the disciples would desert him (26:31). It is the power of the resurrection that transforms the deserters back into disciples.
**go . . . tell his disciples. . . . Remember what I have told you.** Lit., "Behold, I have told you." This detail, which indicates that the women were the first witnesses of the empty tomb, is unusual and adds a ring of truth. Blomberg (1992:426) points out the high probability that if the story had been invented, male witnesses would have been fabricated.
28:8-9 **as they went, Jesus met them.** As the women hastened to report the news to the absentee apostles in obedience to the angel, they were met and greeted by none other than the risen Jesus himself.
**grasped his feet, and worshiped him.** Their worship of Jesus reminds the reader of similar actions by the Magi and others (2:2, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 18:26; 20:20; 28:9, 17). In view of Jesus reminding Satan that only God is to be worshiped (4:9-10), the women's worship is indicative of Matthew's high Christology. This first post-resurrection appearance of Jesus sets the tone for the proper response to him from now on—worship. The reader is evidently to picture them prostrated before Jesus, face to the ground, with arms outstretched and hands grasping Jesus' feet.
28:10 **Go tell my brothers to leave for Galilee.** Jesus himself reaffirmed the angel's promise (28:7), and referred to the disciples as his brothers (12:49-50; 23:8; 25:40; cf. Rom 8:29; Heb 2:11). This use of the family metaphor indicates great love and patience, since the disciples could be said to have "run away from home" in abandoning Jesus. Jesus welcomed the prodigals back home again.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this section, the resurrection of Jesus is announced, not explained. The central focus of 28:1-10 is the empty tomb, revealed by an angel who rolled away the stone, causing an earthquake. He then showed the two women that their crucified master was no longer entombed. The glorious angel and the empty tomb caused the guards to faint. For the faithful women, the significance was that Jesus is indeed the Messiah and that they no longer needed to mourn him. They ran to tell his disciples the good news that he had risen. According to this passage, there were six witnesses to the resurrection:
1. The Father, whose miraculous activity is the presupposition of everything else and who is the implied agent of all the passive verbs that state that Jesus will be raised up (16:22; 28:6)
2. The glorious angel, who actually made the announcement (28:6a)
3. The empty tomb itself, which says nothing but signifies everything (28:6b)
4. The faithful women, who hurried to announce the resurrection to the disciples (28:8)
5. Jesus himself, who met the women on their way and reiterated that he would meet the disciples in Galilee (28:9-10)
6. The guards, who regained consciousness and told the leading priests what had happened (28:11)
In addition to these six witnesses, two other factors in the narrative provide additional testimony that Jesus was raised: the earthquake which accompanies the stone being rolled away marked the occurrence of an epochal event (28:2), and the religious leaders' conspiracy to deny the resurrection amounts to an indirect and ironic testimony that it did happen.
The Theological Significance of Jesus' Resurrection. Although often relegated to Easter Sunday, the resurrection of Jesus is the heart of the Christian gospel. Without the resurrection, the ministry of Jesus ends on a dismal note. But everything changes with the announcement: "He isn't here! He has risen from the dead, just as he said would happen" (28:6). The resurrection is not only the climax of Matthew's passion narrative, it is the heart of redemption itself. It may be helpful to remember that the resurrection of Jesus is the necessary prerequisite, the _sine qua non_ , of several themes in Matthew's theology.
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no Savior, since Jesus would have been a deluded liar instead of an exalted Lord. He had predicted several times that he would rise from the dead (12:40; 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32). If he did not, he would be worthy only of pity, not faith and obedience (1 Cor 15:16-19).
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no salvation, for Jesus' mission to save his people from their sins (1:21) would have come to the ignominious end of a cursed person who hung upon a tree (Deut 21:22-23; Gal 3:13). Jesus would not drink the new wine that represented his redeeming blood in the Father's Kingdom with his disciples. The blood of the new covenant would have been shed in vain (26:27-29).
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would have been no apostolic foundation for the church, for it was the resurrection of Jesus that turned the deserters back into disciples (26:31-32). What could have brought the scattered disciples back into the fold except the message brought to them by the two women (28:7, 10)? What would Jesus have built his church upon (16:18) if Peter and his fellow disciples had remained deserters and deniers?
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no model of sacrificial living instead of selfish living. Jesus taught his disciples the oxymoron of the crucified life, convincing them that the truly abundant life is the life dead to self-interest and that the truly miserable life is the life lived for self-interest. But this model would be incomplete if Jesus' suffering did not end in glory, and if his cross was never replaced with the crown (10:38-39; 16:24-26; 20:26-28; 23:12; Rom 6:1-11).
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no rectification of all the wrongs done on earth since the fall of humanity in Genesis 3. The blood of the martyrs would cry out for all eternity without vindication (23:35; Rev 6:9-11). Those who did evil and violence to their fellow humans would never give account, and there would be no such thing as justice (13:37-42; cf. Dan 12:2). The resurrection guarantees the final judgment of all mankind (13:37-42; 16:27; 25:31; cf. Dan 12:2; Acts 17:31). Without the resurrection, Satan would win.
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be no resurrection and reward of his people (27:51-53). At the heart of Jesus' ethical teaching is the eschatological promise of the coming Kingdom (4:17). That Kingdom becomes the focus of the disciples' hope and values (6:10, 33), but how could it ever come to earth if its ruler remained in the grave? If Jesus remained in the grave he could not be exalted to sit on his throne, and with his throne unoccupied, what would become of the twelve thrones of his apostles, and of the rewards he promised to all who left what this world has to offer for the sake of his name (6:19-21; 13:43; 19:27-29; cf. Dan 12:3; Rev 2:26-27; 3:21)?
Without the resurrection of Jesus, there would be nothing. Therefore, those who want to communicate the good news of Jesus the Messiah must make sure that they stress the resurrection of Jesus as the essential explanation of the significance of his death. Attempts to communicate the gospel in ways that gain the attention and understanding of the lost are laudable, but not if such encapsulation amounts to truncation. Any so-called gospel which does not include focus on the resurrection of Jesus is not the authentic message of Jesus and the apostles (Acts 2:32; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30ff; 17:18, 31; 23:6; 24:21; 25:19; 26:8, 23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-5; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Cor 15; 2 Cor 4:10, 14; 13:4; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:20; 2:5; 4:10; Phil 2:8-9; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thess 4:14; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:3; 10:12; 12:3; 1 Pet 1:22; 3:18-22; Rev 5).
Studies of the resurrection are numerous. For a conservative attempt to answer the questions that arise when the four Gospel accounts are compared, see J. Wenham (1984). For the unique emphases of each Gospel, see Osborne (1984). Blomberg (1987:100-110) discusses historical matters. For an apologetic approach, see Craig in Wilkins and Moreland (1995:142-176).
## TEXT [Commentary]
P. Report of the Guard (28:11-15)
11 As the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and told the leading priests what had happened. 12 A meeting with the elders was called, and they decided to give the soldiers a large bribe. 13 They told the soldiers, "You must say, 'Jesus' disciples came during the night while we were sleeping, and they stole his body.' 14 If the governor hears about it, we'll stand up for you so you won't get in trouble." 15 So the guards accepted the bribe and said what they were told to say. Their story spread widely among the Jews, and they still tell it today.
## NOTES
28:11-12 **the guards.** These were probably Roman soldiers responsible to Pilate (see note on 27:65).
**guards went into the city and told the leading priests what had happened.** Just how much of the happenings at Jesus' tomb they saw is unclear, but the Gr. says that they told the priests "everything that happened." They had fainted when they saw the angel (28:4), but eventually regained consciousness and saw that the tomb was empty.
**a large bribe.** After the priests met with the elders, they bribed the guards and fabricated a story to explain the resurrection. Ironically, the very guards who were supposed to prevent a potential problem became an actual problem themselves. The story of the bribery of Judas to betray Jesus is near the beginning of the passion narrative, and this story of the bribery of the guards to lie about the resurrection is near the end of the passion narrative.
28:13-15 **they stole his body.** The story the guards were bribed and instructed to tell was also the premise that the leaders had used to get the guards to begin with—that is, they feared the theft of Jesus' body by the disciples (cf. John 20:1-2).
**If the governor hears about it, we'll stand up for you.** The religious leaders promised to protect them from Pilate, who would no doubt be enraged at their dereliction of duty. First Judas was bribed, then the guards, and perhaps the leaders would need to bribe Pilate too. But their story is a patently false concoction—if the guards were asleep, how did they know that the disciples stole the body?
**the guards accepted the bribe.** The guards took the money and did as they were told.
**Their story spread widely among the Jews, and they still tell it today.** They spawned a hoax that continued to the time when the Gospel of Matthew was written. According to Justin Martyr, such stories were still in circulation during his lifetime (AD 100–165; cf. _Dialogue_ 108.2).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this passage the soldiers who were guarding Jesus' tomb became evangelists of Jesus' resurrection! Previously the leaders purported to need guards for fear that a resurrection hoax might occur, but those very guards later reported that a genuine resurrection had occurred. The leaders had outsmarted themselves: the very guards they secured to prevent a potential problem could now testify to an actual problem. So a "cover-up" had to be concocted, and money must change hands to ensure that everyone had the story straight.
The minds of the religious leaders were already made up about Jesus, and they did not want to be confused by the fact of his resurrection. This intensified their guilt. Perhaps they really believed that the disciples had used the occasion of an earthquake to steal the body, but most likely they made up the story with full knowledge that it was a lie. They had accused Jesus of being a deceiver (27:63-64), but now they were the ones willfully deceiving people about Jesus. They had refused to believe Jesus was the ultimate interpreter of Moses and the prophets, and they would not be persuaded even when someone was raised from the dead (Luke 16:31). However, one must never be pessimistic about the life-changing power of the gospel of Christ. The book of Acts speaks of thousands of converts in Jerusalem (Acts 2:41; 4:4), many of whom were priests (Acts 6:7).
None of the alternative explanations of the resurrection of Jesus satisfactorily explain what is recorded here. The explanation that the disciples stole the body is patently false, and other theories fare no better. Some have theorized that the women visited the wrong tomb, or that Jesus on the cross had merely swooned and later revived, or that there was so much wishful thinking on the part of the disciples that they had a collective hallucination and all thought that they saw Jesus. Only by _a priori_ , worldview-driven assumptions that rule out supernatural events up front, can one dismiss this account outright.
## TEXT [Commentary]
Q. The Commission of the Risen Lord (28:16-20; cf. Mark 16:15-18)
16 Then the eleven disciples left for Galilee, going to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him—but some of them doubted!
18 Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. 19 Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations,[*] baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. 20 Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
## NOTES
28:16-17 **the eleven disciples left for Galilee.** The meeting in Galilee is fitting since the disciples were native Galileans and would normally return home to Galilee after the pilgrimage to Jerusalem for Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Given the previous association of Galilee with Gentiles (4:14-16; cf. Isa 9:1-2), it is fitting that a mandate for mission to all the nations was given here. The disciples (only eleven in number now) obeyed their Lord's instructions and traveled to a previously unmentioned, nameless mountain that Jesus had evidently designated at some point (28:10).
**going to the mountain.** The name of the mountain is unimportant, but the fact that Jesus met them on a mountain reminds the reader of the giving of the Torah from Mount Sinai as well as previous mountain experiences in Matthew (4:8; 5:1; 14:23; 15:29; 17:1; 24:3; Donaldson 1985).
28:17 **When they saw him, they worshiped him.** When the disciples first saw Jesus, like the two faithful women, they worshiped him.
**but some of them doubted!** Lit., "some doubted." Most scholars agree with the NLT that some of the disciples were less confident than the others, but others argue that all the disciples doubted Jesus, or at least that they hesitated to worship him (e.g., Hagner 1995:884-85). The word translated "doubted" here occurs previously in 14:31 to describe the little faith of Peter in doubting as he walked on the water and saw the wind. It can be translated "hesitated" or "wavered" ( _distazō_ , BDAG 252), and Blomberg 1992:430 argues that it does not refer to unbelief so much as to lack of spontaneous worship on the part of some of the disciples. But this is far from clear, since the only other time the word is used in Matthew (14:31) it is closely related to the familiar theme of "little faith" (cf. 6:30; 8:26; 16:8; 17:20). Whether one thinks of the disciples' response as hesitant or doubting, it is surprising.
28:18 **I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth.** God's bestowal of authority or power upon Jesus echoes Dan 7:13-14, 18, 22, 27 (cf. Eph 1:20-23; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-20; 1 Pet 3:18-22). Davies and Allison (1997:683) concisely explain the similarities. In Daniel 7, the authority of the Son of Man passes from him to his community, and so it is in Matthew. Matthew has stressed repeatedly that Jesus is the king who has authority to forgive sins and to save his people (Matt 1:1, 17, 21; 2:2; 7:29; 8:8-9; 9:6-8; 10:1; 11:27; 21:23; 24:14). Jesus demonstrated his authority by word and deed. Hagner (1995:886) helpfully points out that the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus result in a sort of permanent transfiguration (17:1-8). The glory that a few disciples saw briefly at the transfiguration is now the permanent mode of Jesus' life as the exalted Son of Man.
28:19 **Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations.** It is crucial to note that this verse begins with "therefore." The point is that Jesus, having been exalted, was now in a position to send his disciples forth in mission. Their mission is possible because Jesus is potent. Jesus had already commissioned his disciples to take the message of the Kingdom to Israel alone (10:5-6; cf. 15:24ff), but now he commands them to take it to all the nations (cf. Gen 12:3). Some take this as "all the Gentiles," and exclude the Jews from the commission, but this is a mistake. No doubt the priority is on the Gentiles, but mission to the Gentiles is supplemental to mission to Israel, not a substitute for it. Ongoing mission to Israel is assumed by 10:23 (Levine 1988). It is clear from Acts that the practice of the apostolic church was to continue mission to the Jews. "Universal Lordship means universal mission" (Davies and Allison 1997:684). For a thorough discussion of this passage in the broader context of early Christian mission, see Schnabel 2004:1.348-367.
The central responsibility of the disciples is to reproduce themselves, to make more disciples. The other activities (go, baptize, teach) essentially describe how a disciple is made. "Disciple" originally designated one who followed an itinerant master, as Jesus' disciples had done. But since Jesus was about to depart this world, the term "disciple" took on a more metaphorical meaning. One now follows Jesus by understanding and obeying his teaching. If the message of Jesus is to reach all the nations, the disciples will obviously have to go to them.
**baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.** Baptism will be the key, early step of new disciples that initiates them into the church. Their baptism is distinct from Jewish ritual washings because it is a single act. It differs from John's baptism because it is done with the triadic formula which invokes the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (cf. _Didache_ 7:1).
28:20 **Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you.** The mission mandate also involves teaching new disciples to obey all that Jesus commanded. One would expect that the major discourses of Jesus in Matthew would form the core of this teaching. Walvoord (1974:242) certainly errs by excluding Jesus' interpretation of the law of Moses from what is to be taught and by restricting the word "commands" to the new commandment of John 13:31-35. Since Jesus was a teacher, indeed the ultimate and definitive teacher of the Torah (4:23; 5:2, 17-48; 7:29; 9:35; 11:1; 13:34; 21:23; 26:55), it is not surprising that his disciples are to continue in this vein. This teaching is not merely to convey information but to change lives from disobedient to obedient behavior (5:17-20; 7:21-27).
**I am with you always, even to the end of the age.** The commission began with Jesus' announcement that he had received all authority; it is now concluded with Jesus' promise to be with his disciples constantly until the end of the age. The disciples' responsibilities are daunting, but they have amazing resources. They will need to drink deeply of both the power and the presence of Jesus if they are to fulfill his mandate. Jesus has already been called Immanuel, God's presence on earth (1:23; cf. Isa 7:14). His ministry demonstrated God's presence as the Spirit enabled him to be God's servant in compassionately serving the scattered sheep of Israel (9:36) and those oppressed by Satan (12:17-29). Now the disciples will experience Jesus' presence in a new way, evidently through the same Spirit that empowered him while he was ministering on earth. Even during the difficult times of dispute and discipline, they may be assured that Jesus' presence and authority will guide and confirm their decisions (18:18-20). This presence is permanent, lasting until "the end of the age." This expression has been used previously (13:39-40, 49; 24:3) and clearly refers to the time of eschatological judgment at the conclusion of the present order. Because the end of the age is in view, it seems clear that this commission is not merely for the original disciples but also for the disciples of the disciples of the disciples, in perpetuity until Jesus returns. All during this time there will never be a day when Jesus will not be present with his disciples as they are busy about the business of the Kingdom.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
According to Luke and John, Jesus appeared to the disciples in Jerusalem after his resurrection (Luke 24:13-53; John 20:19–21:23; Acts 1:1-11). Then he met them in their native Galilee to charge them with a mission that would endure throughout the age. They worshiped him when they met him there, although some still doubted (cf. 14:31). The remedy for this doubt would be found in the disciples' growing realization of Jesus' power and presence, truths which bracket the responsibilities of the mission mandate.
One is immediately struck by the repetition of the word "all" in this passage:
1. Jesus has been given all authority (28:18).
2. Disciples are to be made of all nations (28:19).
3. Disciples are to obey all that Jesus commanded (28:20).
4. Jesus will be with the disciples always (lit. "all the days"; 28:20).
The universality of Jesus' power and perpetuity of his presence provide the dynamic for the universal discipleship mandate. The disciples will be able to disciple all the nations only as they recognize that Jesus has been given all authority and that he will be with them all the days until the end. The universal task is daunting, but it can be done because of the continuing power and presence of Jesus.
Matthew's story of Jesus concludes with a short chapter that describes the resurrection of Jesus (28:1-10), the cover-up perpetuated by the religious leaders (28:11-15), and the mandate of Jesus for discipling all the nations (28:16-20). The chapter covers the resurrection and postresurrection appearances rather concisely, stressing the religious leaders' opposition to the resurrection, and stressing the mission mandate of the exalted Messiah. Both of these themes, the former negative and the latter positive, are by now familiar to the attentive reader of Matthew.
There may be no better way to summarize the theology of Matthew than by following up on the themes found in the Great Commission. The setting of the commission finds the restored disciples worshiping Jesus, but not wholeheartedly. Throughout his Gospel, Matthew has presented the weaknesses of the disciples, but all the same, Jesus still promised to build his church on their foundational ministries. God's power can overcome their infirmities.
The commission itself is based in Christology, as Jesus describes his kingly authority in terms taken from Daniel 7:13ff. Here is Matthew's theology of the Kingdom in a nutshell. This Kingdom has both realized and unrealized elements, and the disciples are to long for and pray for its full manifestation on earth. The commission is concerned with making true disciples who obey Jesus—their Lord—not just casual hangers-on who may listen to his message without doing it. And these disciples are to be made not only from Israel, but from all the nations, where eager converts, reminiscent of the Roman officer and the Canaanite woman, will be found.
This universal mission also has cosmic implications. When people from all nations are discipled, a new humanity begins to be formed. Thus, obedience to the mission mandate turns out to fulfill (as a byproduct) the original creation mandate that God gave to humanity's first parents in the Garden of Eden.
As the disciples take Jesus' message to all nations and make disciples of them, they will experience the faithful Immanuel-presence of Jesus. Through the Spirit, Jesus will tell them what to say when they are under duress from outsiders, and he will be in their midst when they ask for wisdom in dealing with internal problems.
This presence of Jesus will end only when the age ends at his return. At that time the disciples' enemies will be judged and their sacrificial service rewarded. This will lead to nothing less than a regeneration of the world, and obedience to Jesus the exalted Messiah will no longer be merely partial. God's "will" will finally be done on earth as it is in heaven. _Soli Deo Gloria!_
# BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aland, B. and J. Delobel
1994 _New Testament Exegesis, Textual Criticism, and Early Church History_. Kampen: Kok Pharos.
Allison, D. C.
1993 _The New Moses: A Matthean Typology._ Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Albright, W. and C. Mann.
1971 _Matthew_. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday.
Allen, W.
1912 _A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew_. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Bacon, B.
1930 _Studies in Matthew_. New York: Holt.
Balch, D., editor
1991 _The Social History of the Matthean Community_. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Barbieri, L. A. Jr.
1983 "Matthew," _Bible Knowledge Commentary_. ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. Wheaton: Victor.
Barclay, W.
1975 _The Gospel of Matthew_. 2 vols. The Daily Study Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster.
Barnes, Albert
1868 _Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Gospels_. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Bauer, D.
1989 _The Structure of Matthew's Gospel_. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 31. Sheffield: Almond Press.
Baum, G.
1965 _Is the New Testament Anti-Semitic?_ Glen Rock: Paulist.
Beare, F.
1981 _The Gospel According to Matthew_. New York: Harper.
Beasley-Murray, G.
1986 _Jesus and the Kingdom of God_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
1993 _Jesus and the Last Days: The Interpretation of the Olivet Discourse_. Peabody, MA: Hendrikson.
Beck, Norman.
1985 _Mature Christianity: The Recognition and Repudiation of the Anti-Jewish Polemic in the New Testament_. Selinsgrove: Susquehanna University Press.
Berger, K. et al.
1995 _Hellenistic Commentary on the New Testament_. Nashville: Abingdon.
Blomberg, C.
1987 _The Historical Reliability of the Gospels_. Leicester: InterVarsity.
1990 _Introducing the Parables_. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
1991 "The Liberation of Illegitimacy: Women and Rulers in Matthew 1–2," _Biblical Theology Bulletin_ 21:145-150.
1992 _Matthew_ The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman.
Boring, M. Eugene
1995 _The Gospel of Matthew_. Pp. 87-506 in _The New Interpreters Bible_ , vol. 8. Editor, L. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon.
Bornkamm, G., G. Barth, and H. J. Held.
1963 _Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew_. Philadelphia: Westminster.
Brandon, S.
1951 _The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church_. London: SPCK.
Broadus, J.
1886 _Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew_. American Commentary. Valley Forge: American Baptist Press.
Brooks, S.
1987 _Matthew's Community: The Evidence of his Special Sayings Material_. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
Brown, R.
1993 _The Birth of the Messiah_. New York: Doubleday.
1994 _The Death of the Messiah_. New York: Doubleday.
Brown, R., K. Donfried, and J. Reumann, editors
1973 _Peter in the New Testament_. Minneapolis: Augsburg/Paulist.
Bruce, F. F.
1988 _The Canon of Scripture_. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Bruner, F.
1987 _The Christbook_ (Matthew 1–12). Waco: Word.
1990 _The Churchbook_ (Matthew 13–28). Waco: Word.
Buchanan, G.
1996 _The Gospel of Matthew_. 2 vols. Lewiston, NY: Mellen.
Burgess, J.
1966 _A History of the Exegesis of Matthew 16:17-19 from 1781 to 1965_. Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers.
Burnett, F.
1981 _The Testament of Jesus-Sophia: A Redaction-Critical Study of the Eschatological Discourse in Matthew_. Lanham: University Press of America.
1992 "Exposing the Anti-Jewish Ideology of Matthew's Implied Author: The Characterization of God as Father," _Semeia_ 59:155-192.
Butler, B.
1951 _The Originality of St. Matthew: A Critique of the Two-Document Hypothesis_. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Calvin, John
1960 _Institutes of the Christian Religion_. Editor, J. McNeil. Translator, F. Battles. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Westminster. (Orig. Pub. c1559)
1972 _A Harmony of the Gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke_. Editors, D. and T. Torrance. Translator, A. Morrison. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. (Orig. Pub. c1555)
Campbell, K.
1978 "The New Jerusalem in Matthew 5:14," _Scottish Journal of Theology_ 31:335-363.
Cargal, T.
1991 "'His blood be upon us and upon our children': A Matthean Double Entendre?" _New Testament Studies_ 37:101-112.
Carson, D.A.
1978 _The Sermon on the Mount_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
1984 _Matthew_., in _The Expositor's Bible Commentary_. Editors, F. Gaebelein and J. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 8:1-599.
1987 _When Jesus Confronts the World_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Carter, W.
1996 _Matthew: Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist_. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
Chilton, B.
1984 _A Galilean Rabbi and His Bible_. Wilmington: Glazier.
Comfort, P. W.
2007 _New Testament Text and Translation Commentary_. Carol Stream: Tyndale.
Comfort, P. W. and D. Barrett
2001 _The Text of the Earliest Greek New Testament Manuscripts_. Carol Stream: Tyndale.
Cook, M.
1983 "Anti-Judaism in the New Testament," _Union Seminary Quarterly Review_ 38:125-137.
Cope, O.
1976 _Matthew: A Scribe Trained for the Kingdom of Heaven_. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association.
Cullmann, O.
1962 _Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr_. 2nd ed. Translator, F. Filson. London: SCM.
Davies, A., editor
1979 _Anti-Semitism and the Foundation of Christianity_. New York: Paulist.
Davies, W. and D. Allison, Jr.
1988, 1991, 1997 _A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew_. 3 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Davis, C.
1973 "The Fulfillment of Creation. A Study of Matthew's Genealogy," _Journal of the American Academy of Religion_ 41:520-535.
Davison, J.
1985 "Anomia and the Question of an Antinomian Polemic in Matthew," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 104:617-635.
Derrett, J.
1968 "'You build the Tombs of the Prophets,'" In _Studia Evangelica 4_ , editor, F. Cross, 187-193. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Donaldson, T.
1985 _Jesus on the Mountain: A Study in Matthean Theology_. Journal of the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 8. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Dunn, J., editor
1992 _Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways AD 70–135_. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 66. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck).
Edwards, R.
1985 _Matthew's Story of Jesus_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Elliott, M.
2000 _The Survivors of Israel_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Ellis, P.
1974 _Matthew: His Mind and His Message_. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical.
Evans, C.
1989 "Jesus' Action in the Temple: Cleansing or Portent of Destruction?" _Catholic Biblical Quarterly_ 51:237-270.
1995 _Jesus and His Contemporaries: Comparative Studies_. Leiden: Brill.
Evans, C. and S. Porter, editors
2000 _Dictionary of New Testament Background_. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Farmer, W.
1999 _Anti-Judaism and the Gospels_. Valley Forge: Trinity Press International.
Feldman, L.
1987 "Is the New Testament Anti-Semitic?" _Humanities_ 21:1-14.
Fenton, J.
1963 _The Gospel of St. Matthew_. Pelican New Testament Commentaries. New York: Penguin.
Filson, F.
1960 _A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew_. Harper's New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harper.
Fitzmeyer, J.
1997 _The Semitic Background of the New Testament_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. This edition combines the previous works, _Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament_ (Missoula: Scholars, 1974) and _A Wandering Aramean_ (Missoula: Scholars, 1979).
Flusser, D.
1975 "Two Anti-Jewish Montages in Matthew," _Immanuel_ 5:37-45.
Fowler, H.
1968 _The Gospel of Matthew_. 4 vols. Joplin: College.
France, R.
1982 _Jesus and the Old Testament_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
1985 _Matthew_. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Leicester: InterVarsity.
1989 _Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Freedman, D. N., editor
1992 _The Anchor Bible Dictionary_. 5 vols. New York: Doubleday.
Furnish, V.
1972 _The Love Command in the New Testament_. Nashville: Abingdon.
Gardner, R. B.
1991 _Matthew_. Believer's Church Bible Commentary. Scottdale: Herald Press.
Garland, D.
1979 _The Intention of Matthew 23_. Studien zum Neuen Testament 52. Leiden: Brill.
1993 _Reading Matthew_. New York: Crossroad.
Gaston, L.
1970 _No Stone on Another: Studies in the Significance of the Fall of Jerusalem_. Novum Testamentum Supplement Series 23. Leiden: Brill.
Gerhardsson, B.
1979 _The Mighty Acts of God according to Matthew_. Lund: Gleerup.
Goulder, M.
1974 _Midrash and Lection in Matthew_. London: SPCK.
Gray, S. W.
1989 _The Least of my Brothers; Matthew 25:31-46: A History of Interpretation_. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Green, J. and S. McKnight, editors
1992 _Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels_. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Green, M.
1988 _Matthew for Today_. Dallas: Word.
Guelich, R.
1976 "The Matthean Beatitudes: 'Entrance Requirements' or Eschatological Blessings?" _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 95:415-434.
1982 _The Sermon on the Mount_. Waco: Word.
1991 "The Gospel Genre," in _The Gospel and the Gospels_ , editor, P. Stuhlmacher, 173-208. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Gundry, R.
1967 _The Use of the OT in St. Matthew's Gospel_. Studien zum Neuen Testament 18. Leiden: Brill.
1975 _Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew's Gospel with Reference to Messianic Hope_. Leiden: Brill.
1982, 1994 _Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Hagner, D.
1984 _The Jewish Reclamation of Jesus: An Analysis and Critique of Modern Jewish Study of Jesus_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
1993, 1995 _Matthew_ , 2 vols. _Word Biblical Commentary_. Dallas: Word.
Hare, Douglas
1967 _The Theme of Jewish Persecution of Christians in the Gospel according to Matthew_. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 6. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1993 _Matthew_. Interpretation. Louisville: Knox.
Hare, D. and D. Harrington
1975 "Make Disciples of All the Gentiles (Matthew 28:19)," _Catholic Biblical Quarterly_ 37:359-369.
Harrington, D.
1991 _The Gospel of Matthew_. Sacra Pagina. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical.
Hartman, L.
1966 _Prophecy Interpreted: The Formation of Some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the Eschatological Discourse of Mark 13_. Lund: Gleerup.
1972 "Scriptural Exegesis in the Gospel of Matthew and the Problem of Communication," in _L'Evangile selon Matthieu: R _é_ daktion et Th _é_ ologie_, editor, M. Didier, 31-52. Paris: Gembloux.
Hawthorne, G.
1991 _The Presence and the Power_. Dallas: Word.
Hay, D.
1973 _Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christian Literature_. Nashville: Abingdon.
Hendriksen, W.
1973 _The Gospel of Matthew_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Hengel, M.
1977 _Crucifixion in the Ancient World_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Heth, W. and G. Wenham
1984 _Jesus and Divorce_. London: Hodder.
Hiers, R.
1985 "'Binding' and 'Loosing': The Matthean Authorizations," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 104:233-250.
Hill, D.
1972 _The Gospel of Matthew_. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Hoch, C.
1995 _All Things New: The Significance of Newness for Biblical Theology_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Hoehner, H.
1972 _Herod Antipas: A Contemporary of Jesus Christ_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
1976 _Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Horsley, R. A.
1989 _The Liberation of Christmas: The Infancy Narratives in Social Context_. New York: Continuum.
Howard, G.
1987 _The Gospel of Matthew according to a Primitive Hebrew Text_. Macon: Mercer.
Howell, D.
1990 _Matthew's Inclusive Story_. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Hultgren, A.
1979 _Jesus and His Adversaries: The Form and Function of the Conflict Stories in the Synoptic Tradition_. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
2000 _The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Jeremias, J.
1955 _The Eucharistic Words of Jesus_. New York: Macmillan.
1967 _The Prayers of Jesus_. London: SCM.
Johnson, L.
1989 "The New Testament's Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Rhetoric," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 108:419-441.
Kaiser, W.
1982 "The Arrival of Elijah in Malachi and the Gospels," _Grace Theological Journal_ 3:221-233.
Keener, C. S.
1999 _A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
2000 _The NIV Application Commentary: Revelation_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Kennard, J.
1950 _Render to God: A Study of the Tribute Passage_. New York: Oxford.
Kik, J.
1948 _Matthew Twenty-Four_. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed.
Kilpatrick, G.
1946 _The Origins of the Gospel according to Matthew_. Oxford: Clarendon.
Kingsbury, J.
1975 _Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom_. Minneapolis: Fortress.
1979 "The Figure of Peter in Matthew's Gospel as a Theological Problem," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 98:67-69.
1986 _Matthew_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
1987 "The Developing Conflict between Jesus and the Jewish Leaders in Matthew's Gospel: A Literary-Critical Study," _Catholic Biblical Quarterly_ 49:57-73.
1988 _Matthew as Story_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
1993 _Matthew_. Interpretation. Louisville: Knox.
Kissinger, W.
1975 _The Sermon on the Mount: A History of Interpretation and Bibliography_. Metuchen: Scarecrow.
Laansma, J.
1997 _I will give you rest: The 'Rest' Motif in the New Testament with Special Reference to Matthew 11 and Hebrews 3–4_. Tubingen: Mohr/Siebeck.
Lachs, S.
1987 _A Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke_. Hoboken: KTAV.
Ladd, G.
1974 _The Presence of the Future_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Lampe, G. and K. Woollcombe
1957 _Essays on Typology_. Studies in Biblical Theology 22. Naperville: Allenson.
Lenski, R.
1961 _The Interpretation of St. Matthew's Gospel_. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
Levine, A.
1988 _The Social and Ethnic Dimensions of Matthean Salvation History: Go nowhere among the Gentiles_. Lewiston, NY: Mellen.
Lightfoot, J.
1997 _A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica_. 4 vols. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson (Orig. pub. c1675).
Linnemann, E.
1992 _Is There a Synoptic Problem?_ Trans. R. Yarbrough. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Lloyd-Jones, D. M.
1981 _Studies in the Sermon on the Mount_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Loewe, H.
1940 _Render unto Caesar: Religious and Political Loyalty in Palestine_. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Luz, U.
1989 _Matthew 1-7: A Commentary_. Trans., W. Linss. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
1994 _Matthew in History: Interpretation, Influence, and Effects_. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
1995 _The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew_. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2001 _Matthew 8-20_. Trans., J. Crouch. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Malina, B.
1990 "Jewish Christianity or Christian Judaism: Toward a Hypothetical Definition," _Journal for the Study of Judaism_ 7:46-57.
Malina, B. and J. Neyrey
1988 _Calling Jesus Names: The Social Value of Labels in Matthew_. Sonoma: Polebridge.
Mann, J.
1924 "Rabbinic Studies in the Synoptic Gospels," _Hebrew Union College Annual_ 1:323-355.
Marshall, I.
1978 _The Gospel of Luke_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
1980 _Last Supper and Lord's Supper_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Massaux, Edouard
1990 _The First Ecclesiastical Writers_. Vol. 1 of _The Influence of the Gospel of Saint Matthew on Christian Literature before Saint Irenaeus_. Translators, N. Belval and S. Hecht. Macon: Mercer.
McCasland, S.
1961 "Matthew Twists the Scripture," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 80:143-148.
McConnell, R.
1969 _Law and Prophecy in Matthew's Gospel_. Basel: Reinhardt.
McGuckin, J.
1986 _The Transfiguration of Christ in Scripture and Tradition_. Lewiston: Mellen.
McKnight, S.
1991 _A Light among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period_. Minneapolis: Fortress.
1993 "A Loyal Critic: Matthew's Polemic with Judaism in Theological Perspective," in _Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity: Issues of Polemic and Faith_ , ed. C. Evans and D. Hagner, 55-79. Minneapolis: Fortress.
McNeile, A.
1949 _The Gospel according to St. Matthew_. London: Macmillan.
Meeks, W. and R. Wilken
1978 _Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era_. Society of Biblical Literature Sources for Biblical Study 13. Missoula: Scholars Press.
Meier, J.
1976 _Law and History in St. Matthew's Gospel: A Redactional Study of Matt 5:17-48_. Rome: Biblical Institute.
1978 _The Vision of Matthew: Christ, Church, and Morality in the First Gospel_. New York: Paulist.
1980 _Matthew_. Wilmington: Glazier.
Menninger, R.
1994 _Israel and the Church in the Gospel of Matthew_. New York: Peter Lang.
Metzger, B.
1951 "The Formulas Introducing Quotations of Scripture in the New Testament and in the Mishnah," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 70:297-307.
1971 _A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament_. London: United Bible Societies.
1994 _A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament_ (2nd edition). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
Miller, R.
1988 "The Rejection of the Prophets in Q," _Journal of Biblical Literature_ 107:225-240.
Montefiore, C. and H. Loewe
1974 _A Rabbinic Anthology_. New York: Schocken.
Morris, L.
1992 _The Gospel according to Matthew_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Moule, C.
1968 "Fulfillment-Words in the New Testament: Use and Abuse," _New Testament Studies_ 14:293-320.
Mounce, R.
1985 _Matthew_. Good News Commentary. San Francisco: Harper.
Neusner, J.
1973 _From Politics to Piety_. Englewood Cliffs: Doubleday.
Neusner, J. and E. Frerichs
1985 _To See Ourselves as Others See Us: Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity_. Chico: Scholars Press.
Newport, K.
1995 _The Sources and Sitz im Leben of Matthew 23_. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 117. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Niedner, F.
1989 "Rereading Matthew on Jerusalem and Judaism," _Biblical Theology Bulletin_ 19:43-47.
Nolland, J.
2005 _The Gospel According to Matthew_. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Orton, D.
1989 _The Understanding Scribe: Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal_. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Osborne, G.
1984 _The Resurrection Narratives: A Redactional Study_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Osborne, R.
1973 "The Provenance of Matthew's Gospel," _Studies in Religion_ 3:220-235.
Overman, J.
1990a "Heroes and Villains in Palestinian Lore: Matthew's Use of Traditional Jewish Polemic in the Passion Narrative," _The Society of Biblical Literature 1990 Seminar Papers_ , ed. D. J. Lull, 592-602. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
1990b _Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism_. Minneapolis: Fortress.
1996 _Church and Community in Crisis: The Gospel according to Matthew_. Valley Forge: Trinity.
Patte, D.
1987 _The Gospel according to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's Faith_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
1988 "Anti-Semitism in the New Testament: Confronting the Dark Side of Paul's and Matthew's Teaching," _Chicago Theological Seminary Register_ 78:31-52.
1996 _Discipleship according to the Sermon on the Mount_. Valley Forge: Trinity.
Perlewitz, M.
1988 _The Gospel of Matthew_. Wilmington: Glazier.
Plummer, A.
1915 _An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew_. London: R. Scott.
Plumptre, E.
1957 _The Gospel according to Matthew_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. (Orig. Pub. c1902)
Powell, M.
1990 _What is Narrative Criticism?_ Minneapolis: Fortress.
Pritz, R.
1988 _Nazarene Jewish Christianity: From the End of the New Testament until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century_. Studia Postbiblica 37. Leiden: Brill.
Przybylski, B.
1980 _Righteousness in Matthew and in His World of Thought_. New York: Cambridge University Press.
1988 "The Setting of Matthean Anti-Judaism," in _Anti-Judaism in Early Christianity_ , ed. P. Richardson and O. Granskou, 181-200. Waterloo: Laurier.
Ridderbos, H. N.
1987 _Matthew_. Trans., R. Togtman. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Reinhartz, A.
1988 "The New Testament and Anti-Judaism: A Literary-Critical Approach," _Journal of Ecumenical Studies_ 25:524-537.
Rist, J.
1978 _On the Independence of Matthew and Mark_. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Robinson, J.
1970 _Redating the New Testament_. London: SCM.
Robinson, T.
1928 _The Gospel of Matthew_. Moffatt New Testament Commentary. London: Hodder.
Ruckstuhl, E.
1965 _Chronology of the Last Days of Jesus_. New York: Desclee.
Russell, E.
1982 "The Image of the Jew in Matthew's Gospel," _Studia Evangelica_ 7:427-442.
1986 "'Anti-Semitism' in the Gospel of Matthew," _Irish Biblical Studies_ 8:183-196.
Ryken, L.
1984 _How to Read the Bible as Literature_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Saldarini, A.
1992a "Delegitimation of Leaders in Matthew 23," _Catholic Biblical Quarterly_ 54:659-680.
1992b "The Gospel of Matthew and Jewish-Christian Conflict in the Galilee," in _The Galilee in Late Antiquity_ , ed. L. Levine, 23-38. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
1994 _Matthew's Christian-Jewish Community_. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Sanders, E. P.
1981 _Jewish and Christian Self-Definition_. Vol. 2 of _Aspects of Judaism in the Graeco-Roman Period_. London: SCM.
Sanders, J.
1992a "Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire: A Conversation with Rodney Stark," _Sociological Analysis_ 53:433-445.
1992b "Jewish Christianity in Antioch before the Time of Hadrian: Where Does the Identity Lie?" in _Society of Biblical Literature 1992 Seminar Papers_ , ed. H. Lovering, Jr., 346-361. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
1993 _Schismatics, Sectarians, Dissidents, Deviants: The First Hundred Years of Jewish-Christian Relations_. Valley Forge: Trinity.
Sandmel, S.
1978 _Anti-Semitism in the New Testament?_ Philadelphia: Fortress.
Schaberg, J.
1987 _The Illegitimacy of Jesus_. San Francisco: Harper.
Schiffman, L.
1981 "Jewish Sectarianism in Second Temple Times," in _Great Schisms in Jewish History_ , ed. R. Jospe and R. Wagner, 1-46. New York: KTAV.
Schnabel, E. J.
2004 _Early Christian Mission_. 2 vols. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Schweizer, E.
1975 _The Good News According to Matthew_. Atlanta: John Knox.
Senior, D.
1975 _The Passion Narrative according to St. Matthew_. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 39. Leuren: Leuren University.
1983 _What Are They Saying about Matthew?_ New York: Paulist.
1985 _The Passion of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew_. Wilmington: Glazier.
Shuler, P.
1982 _A Genre for the Gospels: The Biographical Character of Matthew_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Sigal, P.
1986 _The Halakah of Jesus of Nazareth according to the Gospel of Matthew_. Lanham: University Press of America.
Sim, D.
1995 "The Gospel of Matthew and the Gentiles," _Journal for the Study of the New Testament_ 57:19-48.
1996a _Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew_. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 88. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1996b "Christianity and Ethnicity in the Gospel of Matthew," in _Ethnicity and the Bible_ , ed. Mark G. Brett, 171-195. Leiden: Brill.
1998 _The Gospel of Matthew and Christian Judaism_. Edinburgh: Clark.
Simonetti, M., editor
2001 _Matthew 1-13_. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
2002 _Matthew 14-28_. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Slingerland, H.
1979 "The Transjordanian Origin of Matthew's Gospel," _Journal for the Study of the New Testament_ 3:18-28.
Smith, M.
1968 _Tannaitic Parallels to the Gospels_. Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature.
Smith, R.
1989 _Matthew_. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
Snodgrass, K.
1983 _The Parable of the Wicked Tenants_. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck).
Soarés-Prabhu, G.
1976 _The Formula Quotations in the Infancy Narratives of Saint Matthew's Gospel_. Anacleta Biblica 63. Rome: Biblical Institute.
Sproul, R. C.
1998 _The Last Days According to Jesus_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Stanton, G.
1983 _The Interpretation of Matthew_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
1985 "The Origin and Purpose of Matthew's Gospel: Matthean Scholarship from 1945-80," in _Aufstieg und Niedergang der r _ö_ mischen Welt_ 2.25.3, ed. H. Temporini and W. Haase, 1891-1951. Berlin: De Gruyter.
1992 _A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew_. Edinburgh: Clark.
1994 "Revisiting Matthew's Communities," in _Society of Biblical Literature 1994 Seminar Papers_ , ed. E. Lovering, 9-23. Atlanta: Scholars.
Stendahl, K.
1968 _The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Stoldt, H.
1980 _History and Criticism of the Marcan Hypothesis_. Trans. D. Niewyk. Macon: Mercer.
Stonehouse, N.
1979 _The Witness of the Synoptic Gospels to Christ_. Grand Rapids: Baker. (Orig. pub. as _The Witness of Matthew and Mark to Christ_ , 1944; and _The Witness of Luke to Christ_ , 1951.)
Stott, J. R. W.
1978 _Christian Counter-Culture_. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Suggs, M.
1970 _Wisdom, Christology, and Law in Matthew's Gospel_. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
Talbert, C.
1977 _What is a Gospel? The Genre of the Canonical Gospels_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Tasker, R.
1961 _The Gospel According to St. Matthew_. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Taylor, J. E.
1997 _The Immerser: John the Baptist within Second Temple Judaism_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Telford, William
1980 _The Barren Temple and the Withered Fig Tree_. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 1. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Thomas, R. L.
2002 _Three Views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels_. Grand Rapids: Kregel.
Toussaint, S.
1980 _Behold the King: A Study of Matthew_. Portland: Multnomah.
Trautman, D.
1966 _The Eunuch Logion of Matthew 19:12: Historical and Exegetical Dimensions as Related to Celibacy_. Rome: Catholic Book Agency.
Trevett, C.
1984 "Approaching Matthew from the Second Century: The Under-Used Ignatian Correspondence," _Journal for the Study of the New Testament_ 20:59-67.
Tuckett, C., editor
1983 _The Messianic Secret_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Turner, D.
1989 "The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1—Interaction with Evangelical Treatments," _Grace Theological Journal_ 10:3-27.
1991 " _Primus inter Pares?_ Peter in the Gospel of Matthew," In _New Testament Essays in Honor of Homer A. Kent Jr._ , ed. Gary T. Meadors, 179-201. Winona Lake: BMH.
1992a "The New Jerusalem in Revelation 21:1–22:5: Consummation of a Biblical Continuum," in _Dispensationalism, Israel, and the Church: The Search for Definition_ , ed. C. Blaising and D. Bock, 264-292. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
1992b "Whom Does God Approve? The Context, Structure, Purpose, and Exegesis of Matthew's Beatitudes," _Criswell Theological Review_ 6:29-42.
2002 "Matthew 21:43 and the Future of Israel," _Bibliotheca Sacra_ 159:46-61.
Van Tilborg, S.
1972 _The Jewish Leaders in Matthew_. Leiden: Brill.
Verseput, D.
1986 _The Rejection of the Humble Messianic King: A Study of the Composition of Matthew 11–12_. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Viviano, B.
1979 "Where Was the Gospel according to St. Matthew Written?" _Catholic Biblical Quarterly_ 41:533-546.
Walker, L.
2005 _Isaiah_ in _Cornerstone Biblical Commentary_ , vol. 11. Carol Stream: Tyndale House.
Walton, J. H.
1987 "Isa 7:14: What's in a Name?" _Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society_ 30:289-306.
Walvoord, J. F.
1974 _Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come_. Chicago: Moody Press.
Weinfield, M.
1990 "The Charge of Hypocrisy in Matthew 23 and in Jewish Sources," _Immanuel_ 24/25:52-58.
1997 "The Jewish Roots of Matthew's Vitriol," _Bible Review_ 13:5.
Wenham, D.
1979 "The Structure of Matthew 13," _New Testament Studies_ 25:516-522.
1984a _Easter Enigm_. Exeter: Paternoster.
1984b _The Rediscovery of Jesus' Eschatological Discourse_. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Wilkins, M.
1988 _The Concept of Disciple in Matthew's Gospel_. Leiden: Brill.
Wilkins, M. and J. Moreland, editors
1995 _Jesus under Fire_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Willis, J. T.
1978 "The Meaning of of Isaiah 7:14 and Its Application in Matthew 1:23," _Restoration Quarterly_ 21:1-18.
Wilson, M.
1989 _Our Father Abraham_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Winkle, R.
1986 "The Jeremiah Model for Jesus in the Temple," _Andrews University Seminary Studies_ 2
# Mark
## DARRELL L. BOCK
# INTRODUCTION TO
# Mark
TODAY, THE GOSPEL OF MARK is generally regarded as the first Gospel to have been written (Stein 1987; Brown 1997:99-125; Guthrie 1990:136-208). Most of the church fathers of the first five centuries held that Matthew was the earliest Gospel, possibly because of its direct apostolic roots (see Irenaeus _Against Heresies_ 3.1.1-2; Tertullian _Against Marcion_ 4.2.1-5; Papias, as cited in Eusebius _Ecclesiastical History_ 7.39.16; for evaluation, see Bock 2002a:163-165). However, the connection between Mark and the apostle Peter is also consistently affirmed by early church tradition, which helps to explain how a Gospel written by a non-apostolic figure became a part of the New Testament canon.
The belief that Mark is our earliest Gospel emerges from several factors: (1) Mark's outline seems to be fundamental to the basic structure of the three synoptic Gospels. In other words, when Matthew is not going his own way, he seems to be following Mark, and the same is true of Luke. This means that Mark is probably either our first written Gospel or the last of the Synoptics. (2) Mark says critical things about the disciples that are softened in the other Gospels. Textually, it seems more likely that later authors would remove or downplay such transparent failures (as Matthew and Luke do) than that a later author would add these accounts (thus, their presence in Mark argues against it being the third Gospel written). (3) Mark is the shortest Gospel, but in the accounts that are parallel to the other Gospels, it generally gives more detail. This makes it unlikely that Mark is a "summary" Gospel following Matthew and Mark. (4) Mark is an "action" Gospel, lacking much of the key discourse material found in the other Gospels. Again, if Mark were writing last and summarizing the other Gospels, it is hard to explain these omissions; there is no infancy account or evidence of a Sermon on the Mount or Plain. Since Mark was probably our first written Gospel, his outline has often been important in recent efforts to present the life of Christ, even though sections of it are probably not arranged chronologically but topically (e.g., the conflicts of Mark 2–3).
As with the other Gospels, discussions about authorship, date, and audience revolve around external testimony from witnesses in the later church and inferences based on internal features of the Gospel (for all the options discussed regarding these areas, see Guelich 1989: xxv-xxxii).
## AUTHOR
As with the other Gospels, the author does not name himself in his work. We need to look to other sources to discover the author of this Gospel. Its association with Mark comes to us through early church testimony (Gundry 1993:1026-1045; Taylor 1966:1-8). According to Eusebius, Papias described Mark as Peter's interpreter ( _Ecclesiastical History_ 3.39.15). These remarks of Papias are often dated around AD 140, although some argue that they could actually be from as much as thirty years earlier, since Papias is associated with Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement of Rome, and Eusebius's discussion precedes his mention of Emperor Trajan's persecution of around AD 110 (Gundry 1993:1027-1028). Papias claims that what he says goes back to John the elder (probably the apostle John), which moves the source of the information back one generation from his report. (Gundry, 1993:1032-1033, also discusses and rejects Eusebius's distinction between John the apostle and John the elder.) This remark places us at the end of the first century. Papias, as reported by Eusebius, claimed that
Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord's discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.
We have other sources beyond Papias. The Anti-Marcionite Prologue (about AD 180), Irenaeus ( _Against Heresies_ 3.1.1-2), and Clement of Alexandria ( _Ecclesiastical History_ 6.14.6) confirm this identification. Clement is reported to have said the following concerning Mark:
The Gospel according to Mark had this occasion. As Peter had preached the word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out. And having composed the Gospel he gave it to those who had requested it.
Irenaeus wrote that "after their [Peter and Paul's] departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter." The Prologue calls Mark "stump-fingered," giving us one of the most vivid and famous descriptions of any evangelist. Justin Martyr suggests that Mark was connected to Peter. In an allusion to Mark in Martyr's _Dialogue with Trypho_ 106, he calls material from Mark 3:17 "the memoirs of him," referring to Peter. The superscriptions also confirm this connection (Hengel 1985:74-81). There is no external evidence for any other author. Taylor concludes, "There can be no doubt that the author of the Gospel was Mark, the attendant of Peter." The conclusion that the author was Mark "may be accepted as sound" (Taylor 1966:26).
Many people identify Mark as John Mark, a known assistant to Peter, Paul, and Barnabas (Acts 12:12, 25; 13:13; 15:37-39; Col 4:10; 2 Tim 4:11; Phlm 24; 1 Pet 5:13). Mark was a common name, so this conclusion is dependent to some degree on early church testimony and on the association of John Mark with both Peter and Paul. There are, however, no good alternatives to this conclusion (Blomberg 1997:124).
## DATE
Determining Mark's date is somewhat difficult because the external testimony is not in agreement. Irenaeus, in _Against Heresies_ 3.1.1-2, places the composition after the deaths of Peter and Paul around the late 60s, while Clement of Alexandria, as cited by Eusebius in _Ecclesiastical History_ 2.15.2, dates it during Peter's and Paul's time in Rome, which could push the date back into the 50s. Most commentators opt for a date in the AD 65–70 range, while others place Mark just after AD 70. Those opting for the post-70 date argue unpersuasively that Mark 13, with its "prediction" of Jerusalem's destruction, must have a post-AD 70 perspective, since they view the account as "prophecy historicized." There is nothing in Mark 13 that points to such an "after the fact" prophecy. Rather, the chapter reflects the language of a covenantal judgment of God for covenantal unfaithfulness, something the exilic and post-exilic prophets taught (Gundry 1993:1042). However, if one accepts the testimony of Clement of Alexandria that Peter ratified Mark's work, then a date in the late 50s to mid-60s is possible. A mid- to late 60s date argues that although Mark got his material from Peter, he took some time to compile and compose his Gospel. A date in the late 50s or early 60s is a good possibility, but one in the mid- to late 60s is also possible, although the impact of that date is to push Matthew and Luke beyond AD 70, which may be too late for those gospels. (On how AD 70 relates to the date of the gospels, see my introduction to Luke in Bock 1994.) As with each Gospel, the discussion turns on what part of the external testimony one accepts, as well as on one's view of the order and date of composition among the Gospels.
## AUDIENCE
The same text from Clement locates the Gospel's original audience in Rome. Later tradition claims a setting as far away as Egypt (John Chrysostom _Homilies on Matthew_ 1.3). However, the Latinisms in the book suggest Rome as the most likely locale, and this also finds support in Mark's emphasis on suffering. The community in Rome experienced pressure both from Jews and from the empire (there was Roman pressure on the Jews in AD 49 and Nero persecuted Christians in AD 64). The Gospel of Mark indicates the tension that existed between the disciples and the Jews, especially those in charge of Judaism, realities that may well explain the Gospel's emphasis on suffering. The early Roman Christian community was being made aware that they could not follow Jesus without suffering just as the rejected Jesus himself suffered (10:35-45). They also were being shown that discipleship failures in their past could be overcome by the same power that enabled Jesus to endure the cross.
## OCCASION AND PURPOSE OF WRITING
Given the emphasis on suffering in Mark, this Gospel was probably associated with a period of persecution, especially against the church in Rome (Lane 1974:24-25). The Gospel should, then, encourage Christians who suffer for their faith. The fact that Nero burned Christians, blaming them for the great fire in Rome, underscores the severity of the situation (Suetonius _Nero_ 38). Christians were also disliked because they refused to share in the adulation and worship of the emperor that were part of Roman nationalism. They were seen as disloyal citizens.
For Mark, the Roman conflict was less important than the larger spiritual battle with Satan and the forces of evil, referred to as early as chapter 1 in the temptation scene and the exorcisms. The Gospel calls its followers to be loyal to the gospel and its message about Jesus. This requires a devoted and sacrificial discipleship (1:17, 20; 2:14; 10:28), one that is supported by the realization that Jesus is indeed all he showed himself to be in his earthly ministry. Jesus' vindication in resurrection is a precursor to his return.
Jesus' nature is revealed as his story is told, not as a secret, but as a gradual disclosure based on what Jesus did more than on what he said (Evans 2001:lxxi-lxxii). Titles for Jesus abound at the end of the Gospel when the disclosure is complete. When Jesus speaks of himself, most of his sayings refer to him as the suffering Son of Man and point to his rejection (Bock 2002b:602). Jesus knew he would suffer, faced this reality, and became the ransom for the world, knowing that God would vindicate him in the end. Those who embrace his Gospel will follow in the same victorious and triumphant way.
## CANONICITY AND TEXTUAL HISTORY
The close connection of the Gospel of Mark to Peter explains its acceptance and circulation in the early church. Sometimes people argue that Matthew would never have used this Gospel as a basis for his own Gospel because Matthew was an eyewitness and Mark was not. However, Mark's strong association with Peter gives his Gospel credibility. It must have had apostolic links for the church to welcome it into the basic fourfold Gospel collection—a collection well established by the mid-second century—even though the church readily acknowledged that a non-apostle wrote it.
For solid summaries of the state of the ancient manuscripts of Mark, see Evans (2001:lix-lx). By way of summary, Mark is in only a few papyri: 45, 84, and 88. 45 (third century) contains Mark 4:36–9:31 and 11:27–12:28 (with lacunae); 84 (sixth century) preserves Mark 2:2-9 and 6:30-41 (with lacunae); 88 (fourth century) preserves Mark 2:1-26. Complete manuscripts appear in a (to 16:8), A (to 16:20), B (to 16:8), D (to 16:20), and W (to 16:20). The Alexandrian manuscripts are 88, A, and B. A few witnesses have been identified as "Caesarean" in the Gospel of Mark. These manuscripts probably came from the text that Origen took with him from Alexandria to Caesarea and bear a mixture of the so-called "Western" and Alexandrian readings. These witnesses are 45 W (in 5:31–16:20) Θ 28 565 700 f1 f13 arm geo.
## LITERARY STYLE
There is a large debate about the genre of "Gospel." Was it a new, unprecedented genre, or was it an extension of biography (Burridge 1992:107-274; Bauckham 1998)? The comparative study by Burridge argues that the closest ancient genre to the Gospels is ancient biography, because of how focused Mark is on describing the activity and teaching of a single figure. It has often been argued that biography is not appropriately compared with the Gospels, but the literary and semantic evidence Burridge brings forth indicates that Mark's form is closest to this category. This means that Mark was concerned to tell us about Jesus and the significance of his person and actions. This is not to say that this Gospel is neutral in its presentation; ancient biography had the goal of lifting up the importance of the figure being discussed, and Mark fits this description well. Unlike modern biography, ancient biography is more focused on a person's actions and teaching than on his psychology. Certain emphases make Mark's work unique and reflect a distinct sub-genre within ancient biography. One important detail about the term "gospel," as it came to be used in the church, is that the superscriptions to the Gospels are worded "the Gospel _according to_ Mark," not the "Gospel _of_ Mark" (Guelich 1989:xxvi; Hengel 1985:65-67). This implies that there is one gospel in many versions. The one gospel is "of God," and Mark gives but one representation of it, as the mediator of a much larger message. Although Mark's work was probably the first of its kind, it was seen as but one example of the story that emerged from the early church that eventually became known as the "fourfold" gospel—one gospel in four versions.
## MAJOR THEMES
Mark begins with a note that what he is telling is "the Good News." As such, Mark's goal was clearly to tell his readers what Jesus was about as he brought the Good News to people and thereby revealed himself as the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus is the story and the point of the story.
To a lesser degree than Matthew or Luke, Mark also traces the Kingdom of God as a theme. For Mark, the Kingdom has elements that indicate its initial presence as immediate, while the bulk of the emphasis is that it will come in fullness one day in the future. Kingdom entry, available now, requires one to be like a child. The "mystery" of the Kingdom is that it starts out small, but will grow into a full harvest, accomplishing all that God has appointed it to. Part of Mark's goal is to explain what Jesus meant by the coming of God's rule and to specify how his coming both does and will fulfill God's plan. Jesus' rejection caused confusion, so Mark explains how a promised Messiah could meet with rejection as a part of God's plan (Guelich 1989:xlii). Mark corrects the danger that some would present the gospel in strictly triumphalist terms, since suffering rejection is also a part of the walk. For a community itself under duress, the cross marks the way ahead.
Mark is more a Gospel of action than of teaching. Things happen "immediately," which is one of Mark's favorite expressions. Mark has only two discourses, one on the parables of the Kingdom (4:1-33) and the eschatological discourse (13:1-37), but miracles abound—Mark includes twenty accounts. Combined with healing summaries, these units comprise a third of the Gospel and are nearly one-half of the first ten chapters (Twelftree 1999:57). These pictures of Jesus are important to Mark as he presents Jesus as one who displays authority both in his actions and his teachings. This authority underscores Jesus' identity as the Messiah (or Christ), the Son of God (1:1; 8:29). Mark's Christology presents Jesus as this promised figure. Jesus' claims of authority over sin, relationships, practices tied to purity, the Sabbath, and the Temple get him into trouble with the Jewish leaders, who soon determine that they must stop him. This conflict emerging from Jesus' claims is also a central feature of Mark's Gospel.
Jesus' authority was not based only on miraculous power. Mark highlights Jesus as the suffering Son of Man and Servant proportionately more than any other Gospel. In fact, nine of thirteen uses of the "Son of Man" title look to Jesus' suffering. Although Isaiah 53 is not cited, the descriptions of Jesus clearly parallel the portrait of the suffering servant, especially in the claim that his mission was to give his life as "a ransom for many" (10:45). The importance of understanding the suffering role probably explains Mark's record of the commands to silence given to those, including demons, who confessed Jesus as Messiah (1:44; 5:43; 9:9). Without an appreciation of his suffering, Jesus' messianic calling is misunderstood. Some have called this the messianic secret, but it was not that Jesus' identity as the Messiah was to be kept a secret but that it was not to be shared until it was more fully understood. Only as the cross drew near did the full scope of his divine promise and calling emerge. The disciples were not in a position to preach Jesus until they appreciated this aspect of his mission. The subsequent mission of the church makes this clear.
The servant Jesus is an example of how to walk with God in a world that rejects those sent by God. Here the pastoral demands of discipleship also appear (10:35-45). Mark is like Matthew in this respect. After suffering come glory and vindication. The same Son of Man will return one day to render judgment, as the eschatological discourse reveals. The need for discipleship and real listening to Jesus emerges clearly within Mark, since the evangelist unhesitatingly narrates the repeated failures of the disciples. Their instincts did not take them in the right direction; trust in God and his ways was required. Mark also notes the emotions of Jesus and the disciples more than any of the other Gospels.
Finally, Mark 6–14 shows that the experience of rejection and suffering challenged even the apostles' committment to discipleship. There is a great deal of discipleship failure in these chapters. The disciples have much to learn and one suspects that Mark wants his readers to identify with the difficulty as a way of gaining strength from the fact that these apostles did overcome their past failures. If Mark is the John Mark of Acts 13:13, who abandoned Paul under pressure, then the theme may well be a reflection of his own experience and growth—in spite of the account of his failure in Acts, he persevered in discipleship as Colossians 4:10-11 bears witness.
In summary, Mark addresses a church under duress and suffering rejection as their Teacher had before them. The antidote to their stressful situation is to persevere and to look to Jesus as their example. The Gospel of Mark gives us one of the earliest glimpses as to how the church presented Jesus and his life to others who needed to be established in their walk with God.
## OUTLINE
Many scholars today regard Mark as the first of the four canonical Gospels to be written. Its outline of Jesus' ministry has become the basic structure through which his life has been traced, even though sections of it are probably given in topical, not chronological, order (e.g., the conflicts of Mark 2–3).
The first major section of this Gospel is on Jesus' public ministry; Mark's account cycles through a consistent structure in each of its three sub-parts. There is a story about the disciples at the beginning (1:16-20; 3:13-19; 6:7-13) and a note about rejection or a summary at the end (3:7-12; 6:1-6; 8:22-26; Guelich 1992:516) of each of these sub-sections.
The turning point of Mark's Gospel is the confession that Jesus is the Christ (8:27-31). Before this confession, there is a miracle in which Jesus gives sight. After the confession comes the repeated information that he will suffer, a point the disciples struggle to grasp. Half of the Gospel treats the movement toward the final week of Jesus' ministry, while a full quarter of it is on the suffering of the last week. For Mark, these events are central to his story and to the theme of Jesus' sufferings.
I. Prologue on the Beginning of the Gospel (1:1-15)
A. John the Baptist Prepares the Way (1:1-8; cf. Matt 3:1-12; Luke 3:1-14)
B. The Baptism and Temptation of Jesus (1:9-15; cf. Matt 3:13-17; 4:1-11; Luke 3:21-23; 4:1-13)
II. Jesus' Public Ministry (1:16–8:26)
A. Calling of Disciples and Beginning of Miracles (1:16–1:45)
1. The first disciples (1:16-20; cf. Matt 4:18-22)
2. Jesus casts out an evil spirit (1:21-28)
3. Jesus' work continues in Capernaum and Galilee (1:29-45)
B. Controversy Leading to Rejection (2:1–3:12)
1. The first controversy: Jesus as Son of Man heals a paralytic and forgives sin (2:1-12; cf. Matt 9:1-8; Luke 5:17-26)
2. The second controversy: Jesus calls Levi and eats with sinners (2:13-17; cf. Matt 9:9-13; Luke 5:27-32)
3. The third controversy: Jesus' disciples did not practice fasting (2:18-22; cf. Matt 9:14-17; Luke 5:33-39)
4. The fourth controversy: Jesus' disciples violate the Sabbath (2:23-28; cf. Matt 12:1-8; Luke 6:1-5)
5. The fifth controversy: Jesus heals on the Sabbath (3:1-6; cf. Matt 12:9-14; Luke 6:6-11)
6. Summary of Jesus' early ministry (3:7-12; cf. Matt 12:15-21; Luke 6:17-19)
C. Teaching on the Mystery-filled Kingdom and Miracles of Power Yield Rejection (3:13–6:6a)
1. The choosing of the Twelve (3:13-19; cf. Luke 6:12-16)
2. The debate over Jesus' power: Is it from Satan or from God? (3:20-30; cf. Matt 12:22-24)
3. Jesus' true family is those who do God's will (3:31-35; cf. Matt 12:46-50)
4. Parable of the sower (4:1-20; cf. Matt 13:1-9)
5. Parable of the lamp (4:21-25)
6. Parable of the growing seed (4:26-29)
7. The mustard seed and a summary on parables (4:30-34; cf. Matt 13:31-35)
8. Jesus calms a storm (4:35-41; Luke 8:22-25)
9. The healing of the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20; cf. Luke 8:26-39)
10. The woman with the hemorrhage and Jairus's daughter (5:21-43; cf. Luke 8:40-56)
11. Jesus faces rejection at Nazareth (6:1-6a; cf. Matt 13:53-58)
D. Challenge, Misunderstanding, and Confession (6:6b–8:26)
1. The Twelve are sent out (6:6b-13; cf. Luke 9:1-6)
2. The death of John the Baptist (6:14-29; cf. Matt 14:3-12; Luke 9:7-10)
3. Jesus feeds five thousand (6:30-44; cf. Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-13)
4. Jesus walks on water (6:45-52; cf. Matt 14:22-33; John 6:14-21)
5. Healing of the sick in Gennesaret (6:53-56; cf. Matt 14:34-36)
6. Jesus' views on cleanliness and purity (7:1-23; cf. Matt 15:1-20)
7. The Syrophoenician woman's faith leads to healing (7:24-30; cf. Matt 15:21-28)
8. Jesus heals a deaf and mute man (7:31-37; cf. Matt 15:29-31)
9. Jesus feeds four thousand (8:1-10; cf. Matt 15:32-39)
10. The Pharisees demand a sign (8:11-13; cf. Matt 16:1-4)
11. Dialogue about yeast among the Pharisees and Herod (8:14-21; cf. Matt 16:5-12)
12. A blind man's healing at Bethsaida (8:22-26)
III. To Jerusalem, Passion and Vindication (8:27–16:8)
A. Passion Predictions and Discipleship Teaching (8:27–10:52)
1. Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi (8:27-30; cf. Matt 16:13-20; Luke 9:18-21)
2. Jesus begins to speak about his death and resurrection (8:31-33)
3. Following Jesus (8:34–9:1; cf. Matt 16:21-28; Luke 9:22-27)
4. Jesus' transfiguration (9:2-13; cf. Matt 17:1-13; Luke 9:28-36)
5. Jesus performs an exorcism after the disciples' failure (9:14-29; cf. Matt 17:14-21; Luke 9:37-43)
6. Jesus predicts his death again (9:30-32; cf. Matt 17:22-27; Luke 9:43-45)
7. The greatest in the Kingdom (9:33-37; cf. Matt 18:1-14; Luke 9:46-48)
8. Miscellaneous remarks about relationships and accountability (9:38-50)
9. Jesus' remarks on divorce (10:1-12; cf. Matt 19:1-12)
10. Jesus blesses the children (10:13-16; cf. Luke 18:15-17)
11. Jesus encounters a rich man (10:17-31; cf. Matt 19:16-30; Luke 18:18-30)
12. Jesus predicts his death again (10:32-34; cf. Matt 20:17-28; Luke 18:31-33)
13. Jesus teaches about service (10:35-45)
14. Jesus heals the blind man Bartimaeus (10:46-52; cf. Matt 20:29-33; Luke 18:35-43)
B. Conflict in Jerusalem and Prediction of Judgment (11:1–13:37)
1. Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem (11:1-11; cf. Matt 21:1-11; Luke 19:29-44; John 12:12-19)
2. Jesus curses the fig tree and clears the Temple (11:12-25; cf. Matt 21:12-22; Luke 19:45-48)
3. Question about the source of Jesus' authority (11:27-33; cf. Matt 21:23-32; Luke 20:1-8)
4. Parable of the evil tenants (12:1-12; cf. Matt 21:33-46; Luke 20:9-19)
5. Question concerning paying taxes to Caesar (12:13-17; cf. Matt 22:15-22; Luke 20:20-26)
6. Question about resurrection (12:18-27; cf. Matt 22:23-33; Luke 20:27-40)
7. The most important commandment (12:28-34; cf. Matt 22:34-40)
8. Question about the Messiah (12:35-37; cf. Matt 22:41-46; Luke 20:41-44)
9. Contrasting the scribes and a widow (12:38-44; cf. Matt 23:1-12; Luke 20:45-47)
10. The destruction of the Temple and return of the Son of Man (13:1-37; cf. Matt 24:1-36; Luke 21:5-36)
C. King of the Jews Executed for Blasphemy, Confessed as God's Son, and Vindicated by God (14:1–16:8)
1. The plot to arrest Jesus (14:1-2; cf. Matt 26:1-5; Luke 21:37–22:1-2)
2. The anointing at Bethany (14:3-9; cf. Matt 26:6-13; John 12:2-11)
3. Judas betrays Jesus (14:10-11; cf. Matt 26:14-16; Luke 22:3-6)
4. The Last Supper (14:12-26; cf. Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:7-20; John 13:21-30)
5. Peter's denials predicted (14:27-31; cf. Matt 26:31-35; Luke 22:31-38; John 13:31-38)
6. Jesus at Gethsemane (14:32-42; cf. Matt 26:36-46; Luke 22:39-46)
7. Jesus is betrayed and arrested (14:43-52; cf. Matt 26:47-56; Luke 22:47-53; John 18:2-12)
8. The Jewish leaders examine Jesus (14:53-65; cf. Matt 26:57-68; Luke 22:54)
9. Peter's denials (14:66-72; cf. Matt 26:69-75; Luke 22:55-65; John 18:25-27)
10. Jesus' trial before Pilate (15:1-15; cf. Matt 27:11-26; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16)
11. The soldiers mock Jesus (15:16-20; cf. Matt 27:27-31)
12. Jesus' crucifixion and death (15:21-39; cf. Matt 27:32-56; Luke 23:26-49; John 19:17-37)
13. Jesus' burial (15:40-47; cf. Matt 27:57-66; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:31-42)
14. The resurrection of Jesus (16:1-8; cf. Matt 28:1-10; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18)
IV. The Added Endings to Mark (post-16:8)
A. The Shorter Ending (post-16:8)
B. The Longer Ending (16:9-20)
# COMMENTARY ON
# Mark
## TEXT [Commentary]
I. Prologue on the Beginning of the Gospel (1:1-15)
A. John the Baptist Prepares the Way (1:1-8; cf. Matt 3:1-12; Luke 3:1-14)
1 This is the Good News about Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God.[*] It began 2 just as the prophet Isaiah had written:
"Look, I am sending my messenger ahead of you,
and he will prepare your way.[*]
3 He is a voice shouting in the wilderness,
'Prepare the way for the LORD's coming!
Clear the road for him!'[*]"
4 This messenger was John the Baptist. He was in the wilderness and preached that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven. 5 All of Judea, including all the people of Jerusalem, went out to see and hear John. And when they confessed their sins, he baptized them in the Jordan River. 6 His clothes were woven from coarse camel hair, and he wore a leather belt around his waist. For food he ate locusts and wild honey.
7 John announced: "Someone is coming soon who is greater than I am—so much greater that I'm not even worthy to stoop down like a slave and untie the straps of his sandals. 8 I baptize you with[*] water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit!"
## NOTES
1:1 **Good News.** We get our word "gospel" (BDAG 402-403) from this noun, _euangelion_ [TG2098, ZG2295]. Mark narrates this special story of good news centered in the ministry of Jesus the Messiah (the Christ).
**about Jesus the Messiah.** The NLT correctly renders the objective genitive of the Gr. as "about." In the second century, this expression became a shorthand way of referring to narrative accounts that described Jesus' life and ministry, but it is probably not used in that technical way here. Mark is simply stating that this story is God's good news about how the power of God's coming kingdom and salvation manifested itself in and through Jesus the Christ, who is also the Son of God.
**Son of God.** There is debate as to whether or not this phrase is in the original text of Mark's gospel. The phrase is missing in some important early witnesses such as . It is likely that in these cases the phrase was accidentally omitted due to similar endings in the abbreviated forms of the sacred names: ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΥ . The last four words look similar because each is written as a _nomen sacrum_ (divine title). The first corrector of Codex Sinaiticus (a) added before it left the scriptorium. However, not all ancient MSS wrote the word "Son" as the _nomen sacrum_ , so this is not a conclusive argument (see Comfort 2007:[Mark 1:1]). It is more likely that "Son of God" was accidentally dropped than that a copyist expanded the introductory title, especially since the major MSS of B, D, and W support the reading (Metzger 1971:73). The title appears at a few key points in Mark (1:11; 15:39), pointing to the unique, intimate relationship the messianic Jesus had with the Father. Witherington (2001:69) compares this beginning of Mark to the Priene inscription about Caesar Octavian from 9 BC, which also uses the term "good news" and speaks of his birth as "the birthday of the god [that] was for the world the beginning of his good news." This is "the epiphany or advent of a deity" (Witherington 2001:70). Mark's gospel is about a person who makes a similar yet distinct claim to deity, a divine figure different from those Mark's Gentile audience may have been accustomed to hearing about.
1:2 **the prophet Isaiah.** The passage names Isaiah in the introductory formula and cites wording from Exod 23:20, Mal 3:1, and Isa 40:3. Malachi 3 speaks of a prophet to come like Elijah (also 4:5-6), while Exod 23 points to a messenger (lit., "angel") who leads the way. After the citation, Mark comments only on the portion from Isaiah that describes activity "in the wilderness," which explains his introductory formula. This is the only OT citation made by the narrator in this Gospel (Garland 1996:43; the other OT citations in this Gospel are made by Jesus). The point is that the preparation for God starts in the wilderness, as Mark 1:4 makes clear, not that John is a voice crying in the wilderness, as the text is often read (Witherington 2001:72).
1:5 **Jordan River.** The ministry of John the Baptist is traditionally associated with a location south of Jericho near the Wadi-el-Kelt (Guelich 1989:20). The lower Jordan valley was a wilderness and Elijah is also associated with this area (2 Kgs 2:6-14; also Elisha in 2 Kgs 5:8-14). Although Guelich is hesitant to make connections between John and Elijah, it appears that an overlap is likely at a few points in the text, as John's clothing also recalls Elijah's (2 Kgs 1:8, LXX).
1:7 **untie the straps of his sandals.** An important cultural detail; in later Judaism, untying the thong of someone's sandal was considered too menial a task for a Jewish slave to perform ( _Mekilta Exodus_ 21.2; _b. Ketubbot_ 96a). If such an understanding goes back to John's time, then John was saying that the One to come is so great that John is not worthy even to perform the most menial of tasks for him. Thus, by comparison he is less than a slave. This kind of humility appears in John's Gospel (John 3:27-30). The NLT's addition of his not being worthy "even to stoop down like a slave" brings out this nuance.
1:8 **he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.** This allusion to baptism is associated with the arrival of the eschaton in the OT (Isa 35:1-10; 44:3; Ezek 11:19; 36:26-27; 37:14; Joel 2:28-29 [3:1-2]). God's decisive act on behalf of humanity was announced as approaching in the baptizing ministry of the Messiah. This is why cleansing (water baptism) and repentance (what that cleansing represents) were part of John's ministry of preparation (1:4). Participation in John's baptism showed a readiness to receive the greater baptism that the coming One would bring. Preparation for forgiveness of sins leads to forgiveness when the greater One to whom John pointed is embraced. In OT thinking, when someone is cleansed and forgiven, God can indwell that person with the presence of his Spirit (Ezek 36:25-27). This summarizes Mark's gospel: cleansing, forgiveness, and the intimate divine presence all come through the Messiah to those who, in faith, embrace repentance and reorientation in their lives. Mark will mention the Spirit only a few more times in his gospel—in connection with Jesus' authority over demons (3:22, 29-30), the Spirit's work through a writer of Scripture (12:36), and the Spirit's speaking through persecuted believers (13:11).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The opening of Mark's Gospel contains a title, an appeal to Scripture, and the description of a prophetic figure, John the Baptist, whose calling was to announce the arrival of Jesus the Christ, the key figure in God's plan. Jesus is described as Messiah and Son of God, two major titles that highlight Jesus' uniqueness. "Messiah" signifies his role as the powerful deliverer who rules over the Kingdom and administers the hope, promise, and judgment of God (Cranfield 1959:35). "Son of God" underscores the unique relationship of this regal figure with God. Mark's Gospel will explain his identity as Son as it unfolds.
It is important to read a Gospel as a developing story. Some of what Mark means becomes clear as this theological narrative unfolds, from its beginning to its turning point in the passion and resurrection. Much as a mystery novel develops its various dimensions, the Gospel gains momentum as it portrays Jesus as the Messiah, Son of God. It is important to distinguish between what readers know with the help of Mark's prologue and what the characters within Mark's story knew (Witherington 2001:79). They must learn who Jesus is. Mark's narrative shows how this took place and the different reactions that revelation produced. This key point of the narrative is often lost on readers who have come to understand the whole story ahead of time. As Witherington (2001:79) says, "Seeing the narrative with the benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing." Even so, keeping an eye on how the narrative develops through the experience of its characters is part of a careful reading. The Gospel narrative works upon its readers on more than one level at once.
Taking into account the verses immediately following this section, we see that in 1:1-13 Mark begins his narrative with a series of events orchestrated by God, foreshadowing for his readers where the whole story is headed (Garland 1996:42). God speaks about his plan from Scripture in 1:2-3. God speaks directly to Jesus from heaven to underscore Jesus' uniqueness in 1:11. The passage in 1:12-13 shows that Jesus was so important that an opponent from the spirit world would try to stop him, as Satan tested Jesus in the wilderness. This "behind the scenes" introduction to the cosmic dimensions of the story underscores Jesus' importance for Mark's readers. Only after this introduction does the story of Jesus' actual ministry begin, showing how people were confronted with who Jesus was. This heavenly vantage point dominates Mark's prologue in a way that is distinct from how most of the rest of the Gospel gradually unveils its story (Hooker 1991:31). Mark thus sets the stage with his prologue much as John's prologue does for his Gospel (John 1:1-18).
The story begins with God's plan as introduced in Scripture, especially in the prophets' predictions of a great day of deliverance, a new day that was being announced as present through a ministry taking place in the desert. Mark highlights Isaiah, but the citation he presents is actually a composite of Exodus 23:20; Malachi 3:1, with its messenger language; and the call for preparation from Isaiah 40:3. John's ministry prepared "the way" for the Lord's coming, like laying a red carpet as all creation was leveled for his entry and hearts were opened to watch for his arrival. The importance of John's ministry in the wilderness is affirmed in the citation and in Mark's exposition of the fulfillment of the passage in 1:4. Israel entered into the promise in the wilderness (Josh 1:11), and it was a destination for a person fleeing from sin (2 Macc 5:27; _Martyrdom of Isaiah_ 2:7-11; 1QS 8:12-16; Garland 1996:52-53). Some anticipated that God would launch his great assault on evil from the wilderness (Isa 40:1-11, a "new exodus" deliverance; 1QM 1:2-3). The importance of the way of God is highlighted in the interplay between the "prepare your way" in 1:2 and "prepare the way for the Lord's coming" in 1:3. Preparing the way for the Lord's coming meant being ready to walk in the way he would announce, a way that had already been announced in Scripture.
John the Baptist appeared, just as God had said through Isaiah and others, in the wilderness. Israel came through the wilderness to enter the new land, and now, from the wilderness God announced a plan for another exodus to deliver his people. John was called to deliver a preparatory message; it involved active participation in a rite that signified acceptance and identification with this call. That rite was a cleansing baptism of repentance (the NLT says that the act showed that they had turned to God to "receive forgiveness of sins"). The cleansing rite was preparatory to their reception of forgiveness.
This sequence is made clear when Jesus is baptized and then the Spirit descends on him, so the point was not a "baptism of repentance on the basis of forgiveness of sins." This recognition of need constitutes the "turning" that is so basic to repentance and entrance into a faith relationship with God. (In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word meaning "to turn" was often used to signify repentance; Jer 4:28; 18:8; Jonah 3:9-10; TDNT 4:989-992). The real cleansing and forgiveness would be supplied by Jesus' future work. Forgiveness refers to release from sin, which is often understood as a debt incurred by an act, and here a debt that includes guilt and punishment (3:29; Acts 2:38; Eph 1:7; Heb 9:22). This release from debt was part of what God announced through John as preparatory "good news." Those who were ready for it participated in John's baptism, confessing their sins and thereby recognizing their need of the cleansing the baptism represented. This rite was so central to John's work that Mark literally calls him "John the baptizer" in 1:4, using a participle to make the point. He was the one "who is baptizing."
John attracted a great crowd from Judea and Jerusalem that journeyed out to the southern Jordan River area to hear him. John lived as an ascetic to show his total dependence on God. John was like Elijah at certain points of his ministry (2 Kgs 1:8), a connection that Jesus makes explicit in Mark 9:11-13. It was believed that Elijah would return before the Day of the Lord as a signal that God was about to deliver Israel (Mal 3:1-2; 4:5-6; Sir 48:10).
John's ministry was not just about the arrival of God's promised period of fresh activity, but also about the one who would be central to it. There was "someone . . . coming soon who is greater [mightier] than I." Despite all the prophetic airs surrounding John the Baptist, he was nothing in comparison to the one coming after him. The difference was so great that this prophet saw himself as more lowly than the most menial slave, not even worthy to untie the sandal thong of "the one to come." In _b. Ketubbot_ 96a, R. Joshua b. Levi states that "all service that a slave must render to his master a student must render to his teacher, except untying his shoe" (Strack-Billerbeck 1922.1:121). John said that he was not worthy to perform this most humble of tasks for the One to come.
If John was a prophet, then how much greater was the One to come than a prophet? John explained that the coming One would not baptize with a mere symbol as he did. Rather, this greater One would bring the promised Spirit of God (Ezek 36:25-27; Isa 4:4, with an image of fire, which appears in the parallels of Matt 3:11 and Luke 3:16), the sign of God's presence and of the new day God would bring (1QS 4:20-21). What John could only represent in a rite, Jesus performed.
The Gospel is about the new life God gives through Jesus, who brought the divinely promised baptism of the Spirit. Jesus was clearly mightier than John and made the prophet pale by comparison. The cleansing of people's lives cleared the way for God's powerful presence in the Spirit. The good news of the One to come was about the forgiveness of sins that follows repentance and makes it possible to enter into fellowship and life with God by the presence of the promised Spirit within those who are cleansed.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. The Baptism and Temptation of Jesus (1:9-15; cf. Matt 3:13-17; 4:1-11; Luke 3:21-23; 4:1-13)
9 One day Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee, and John baptized him in the Jordan River. 10 As Jesus came up out of the water, he saw the heavens splitting apart and the Holy Spirit descending on him[*] like a dove. 11 And a voice from heaven said, "You are my dearly loved Son, and you bring me great joy."
12 The Spirit then compelled Jesus to go into the wilderness, 13 where he was tempted by Satan for forty days. He was out among the wild animals, and angels took care of him.
14 Later on, after John was arrested, Jesus went into Galilee, where he preached God's Good News.[*] 15 "The time promised by God has come at last!" he announced. "The Kingdom of God is near! Repent of your sins and believe the Good News!"
## NOTES
1:10 **he saw.** According to Mark, the descent of the Holy Spirit was seen only by Jesus. It was not a public event but God's private affirmation of Jesus.
**the heavens splitting apart.** Mark uses a very graphic term to describe how the Spirit came upon Jesus. First, he speaks of the heavens splitting apart ( _schizomenous_ [TG4977, ZG5387]), or being torn open as if God were coming in from outside the earth's sphere and invading its space (BDAG 981). The same verb is used to describe how the veil of the Temple was ripped during the crucifixion (15:38). Many find the background for this in Isa 64:1[63:19b] (TDNT 7:962). Isaiah appealed to God to tear the sky apart and come down to deliver his people. For Mark, the Spirit's descent upon Jesus began to answer that call. One of Mark's key terms, "immediately" ( _euthus_ [TG2117, ZG2317]), is not translated here in the NLT but should be noted as present in this verse. This is the first of 41 times that Mark uses this word (out of 51 NT uses). Mark notes that the splitting open of the sky happened as soon as Jesus emerged from the water during the baptism.
**the Holy Spirit descending on him like a dove.** The Spirit descended like the gentle flight of a dove. Mark's point is not that the Spirit looked like a dove but that the Spirit approached him as a dove would.
1:11 **a voice from heaven.** This is God's voice; Mark's prologue continues to emphasize actions from beyond this world. This is not the Jewish _bat qol_ , or "daughter of the voice," which is understood as a heavenly substitute for God's voice (Strack-Billerbeck 1922:125-132). This is God directly speaking in the first person about his Son.
**dearly loved Son.** The citation fuses two OT texts: Ps 2:7 and Isa 42:1. The psalm portrays a king who has a unique relationship to God as his Son. Isaiah describes the Lord's servant as the chosen focus of God's special love. The Gr. word _agapētos_ [TG27, ZG28] can have the force of "only" or "unique" (BDAG 7; Gen 22:2, 12, 16) and could mean "the one dear Son."
**bring me great joy.** God is especially pleased with this person. The remark is an endorsement and a call to be what Jesus is, a Servant-King.
1:12 **compelled.** This is strong language. The Spirit "compelled Jesus to go" to the wilderness, where he met Satan, another cosmic figure. The encounter was not accidental, but would show Jesus' superiority to Adam as a representative of humanity.
1:13 **Satan.** He is the great "adversary," as his name indicates. Satan does not play a major role in Mark, although demonic conflict does. After this scene, he is mentioned only in the dispute over the source of Jesus' healing power (3:23, 26), in the parable of the seed (4:15), and in the rebuke to Peter about Jesus suffering (8:33).
**forty days.** It is hard to establish whether this number is symbolic: The Israelite nation wandered for forty years (Num 14:34), and Elijah's fast (1 Kgs 19:8) and Moses's time on Mount Sinai (Exod 34:28) both lasted forty days.
**among the wild animals.** Once again, it is unclear if this detail is symbolic. In Judaism, wild animals were associated with threat or evil; their subjection could represent the defeat of evil and the arrival of the new era (Isa 13:21-22; Ezek 34:5, 8; _Testament of Issachar_ 7:7; _Testament of Benjamin_ 5:2; _Testament of Naphtali_ 8:4; for animals as hostile to people, see _Apocalypse of Moses_ 10:1–12:2). Alternatively, wild animals at peace picture an idyllic state (see discussion in France 2002:86) and could be part of a paradise motif (Isa 11:6; _2 Baruch_ _[Syriac Apocalypse]_ 73:6; Guelich 1989:38-39). Interestingly, animals are juxtaposed with angels in Ps 91:11-13 (Hooker 1991:50-51).
**angels.** The angels show God's support of Jesus during this time. Angels also provided sustenance for Elijah (1 Kgs 19:1-8) and, traditionally, for Adam and Eve ( _b. Sanhedrin_ 59b; cf. _Apocalypse of Moses_ 29:1-6; _Life of Adam and Eve_ 4:2). This divine care also hints that the new era of restored creation was present in Jesus.
1:14 **Good News.** The Gr. word _euangelion_ [TG2098, ZG2295], repeated in 1:15, forms an inclusio with 1:1 and concludes the introduction.
1:15 **The time promised by God.** This phrase renders the idea of an appointed time being fulfilled. In 1:2, Scripture as written by Isaiah is fulfilled; here the appointed and predicted time described by that Scripture is realized. What was written had now come to pass. The conceptual connection forms another inclusio between the beginning and the end of the introduction.
**has come at last.** This rendering reflects a context in which the "time is fulfilled" and appears to indicate an event that had already been accomplished. The ambiguity of the Gr. image of "is near" suggests that although the Kingdom had come, its power had not yet been fully manifested (Cranfield 1959:63-68).
**Kingdom of God.** This is the subject of Jesus' preaching and of the Gospel. It designates the rule of God in which he enacts his redeeming power and presence as he had promised ( _basileia_ , BAGD 134-135; Bock 2001:28-60). In Jesus, this reality has drawn so near as to be in the process of coming to pass ( _engizō_ , BAGD 213).
**Repent of your sins and believe the Good News.** Those who heard Jesus were called to turn from sin and embrace forgiveness as John prepared them to do. They must then believe that the Kingdom had approached and embrace it in faith. Sin could be dealt with because the Promised One of God had appeared in the person of Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Three short, significant scenes conclude the introduction to Mark's Gospel. John the Baptist's preparatory role in Mark concludes with his baptizing Jesus in the Jordan River. John makes only a cameo appearance here; the stars in the baptism are the voice of God and the astonishing appearance of his Spirit descending through the heavenly canopy to invade human space. The transcendent God gave the Spirit to his Son so he could fulfill his call. In a private experience between Father and Son that underscored Jesus' uniqueness, God called Jesus his beloved Son, one on whom his divine pleasure rested. The Spirit's coming marked Jesus as the one equipped for the task.
Mark's report gives his readers a glimpse of the previously hidden inner circle of divine interaction between Father, Son, and Spirit at the commencement of Jesus' ministry. As Son and Servant, Jesus would proclaim God's deliverance and bring it into reality. However, that deliverance would come in ways his audience did not anticipate and with much suffering. Mark will later highlight this unique aspect of Jesus' mission, but he is not to that point yet. Mark's point here is that the Father showed who the "greater" one to come was. The one who would baptize with the Spirit had been equipped by the Spirit. Jesus' submission to this baptism showed how he desired to identify with humanity and its desperate need for forgiveness and new life. Jesus' baptism thus reinforced John's preparatory message even as it set the stage for a decisive new act. The one who possessed God's Spirit would bring John's role to an end.
From this high moment of divine intimacy, Jesus was "compelled" to go into the wilderness to face the hostile forces of a fallen creation. Here he met another cosmic player—Satan, the great adversary. In a tantalizingly brief summary, we are told only that Satan tempted him for forty days, that he was among the wild animals, and that angels cared for him. It is left implicit that the temptations mentioned failed to bring down this new representative of humanity. It is often commented that Mark does not note Jesus' victory, but such a reading fails to penetrate the subtlety of Mark's text. If Satan had to pursue Jesus during forty days of temptation, the only reason the effort continued was because Satan failed. Nothing in the hostile environment overcame Jesus. Neither was he entirely alone, as the angels were continually caring for him (the Gr. is in the imperfect tense), indicating God's support. This is the only place in Mark where angels are said to help Jesus (Witherington 2001:81). Jesus emerged from the scene a victorious second Adam, succeeding where the first Adam had failed (a motif which Paul uses in Rom 5:12-19, and which John Milton chose as the theme of his second epic poem, _Paradise Regained_ ).
Mark then notes that John was arrested. Matthew and Luke tell us that the arrest came because John rebuked Herod Antipas for his divorce and remarriage to the divorced Herodias. After John's arrest, Jesus began to preach. The perfect tense used here ( _peplērōtai_ [TG4137A, ZG4444], "it has been fulfilled") points to a past act that continues to have effect at the time of writing (Guelich 1989:43). The appointed time was fulfilled! Jesus' message was also good news ( _euangelion_ [TG2098, ZG2295]) about what God was doing. The genitive "of God" in the Greek is probably plenary here: the message is _from_ God, but it is also _about_ his kingdom-rule that had come at its appointed time. Jesus' use of the idea of the appointed time makes it clear that he was referring to the rule God had promised he would bring to earth one day. As that kingdom-rule approached, two things were required as a response: repentance (a change of direction) and belief that the Kingdom had arrived. In a real sense, these two responses are really one. The new era of the Kingdom cannot be embraced without the need to share in it. Attachment to a previous way of life must be released to allow for participation in the new Kingdom and its benefits. Jesus would secure the means necessary for entrance into the forgiveness, life, and power of God's presence and rule. However, once again, this takes us ahead of Mark's story.
## TEXT [Commentary]
II. Jesus' Public Ministry (1:16–8:26)
A. Calling of Disciples and Beginning of Miracles (1:16–1:45)
1. The first disciples (1:16-20; cf. Matt 4:18-22)
16 One day as Jesus was walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon[*] and his brother Andrew throwing a net into the water, for they fished for a living. 17 Jesus called out to them, "Come, follow me, and I will show you how to fish for people!" 18 And they left their nets at once and followed him.
19 A little farther up the shore Jesus saw Zebedee's sons, James and John, in a boat repairing their nets. 20 He called them at once, and they also followed him, leaving their father, Zebedee, in the boat with the hired men.
## NOTES
1:17-18 **followed him.** Gr. _akoloutheō_ [TG190, ZG199]. This key verb referring to discipleship is an important term in Mark (BDAG 36-37; TDNT 2.210-216; Mark 1:18; 2:14-15; 8:34; 10:21, 28; 15:41). With one exception (Rev 14:4), the use of this term to refer to discipleship is limited to the Gospels. "Following" involves a commitment that makes all other ties secondary, which is why Jesus' followers often left other things behind (1:18, 20; 2:14; 10:21, 28; cf. Matt 8:22; Luke 9:61-62). Although Jesus' disciples are often compared to rabbinical students, this term is never used of a rabbi's student (Hengel 1981:50-57), so the expression with this nuance appears to be of Christian origin. Here is radical discipleship. Jesus is put first, so family and vocation become secondary.
**fish for people!** This expression is also without solid precedent in the OT, inasmuch as similar examples are negative and point to being caught in _judgment_ (Jer 16:16; Ezek 29:4-5; Amos 4:2; Hab 1:14-17; Cranfield 1959:70). The sense here is positive since, contextually, people are being caught for the Kingdom. Perhaps the need to catch involves a need to rescue, with its underlying assumption that those who are not caught will be judged (Witherington 2001:85-86) or that once the fish is caught his old life will be changed orever (Garland 1996:69).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The call of these four disciples seems abrupt. The first thing Jesus did after announcing the approach of the Kingdom was to gather disciples who would make following Jesus a priority over everything else, even their livelihood. They went from casting their nets at schools of fish to Jesus' school on catching people for the Kingdom. It is significant that Jesus called such people from everyday life, for God involves himself with everyday people, and that involvement then changes them. Rather than being students of the Law as rabbinical students were, the disciples were engaged with people (Guelich 1989:52-53). These men were willing to turn, believe the gospel, and redirect their lives accordingly.
Not everyone who responded to Jesus was called to follow him in such an absolute manner (5:18-20; Meier 2001:40-50). These would be special disciples, numbered among the Twelve. Their intimate proximity to Jesus would prepare them well to share Jesus' teaching with others. Their calling was in the tradition of previous callings, such as those of the prophets. Elisha followed Elijah, for example (1 Kgs 19:19-21). It should also be noted that Jesus initiated the call of these disciples, whereas in rabbinical circles it was more common for students to choose their teachers.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Jesus casts out an evil spirit (1:21-28)
21 Jesus and his companions went to the town of Capernaum. When the Sabbath day came, he went into the synagogue and began to teach. 22 The people were amazed at his teaching, for he taught with real authority—quite unlike the teachers of religious law.
23 Suddenly, a man in the synagogue who was possessed by an evil[*] spirit cried out, 24 "Why are you interfering with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God!"
25 But Jesus reprimanded him. "Be quiet! Come out of the man," he ordered. 26 At that, the evil spirit screamed, threw the man into a convulsion, and then came out of him.
27 Amazement gripped the audience, and they began to discuss what had happened. "What sort of new teaching is this?" they asked excitedly. "It has such authority! Even evil spirits obey his orders!" 28 The news about Jesus spread quickly throughout the entire region of Galilee.
## NOTES
1:21 **synagogue.** This was the Jewish meeting place where the law was read and studied; it was also a place for prayer, the education of children, and other community events (TDNT 7:821-828). Most significant communities had a Jewish synagogue, and larger cities may have had more than one. Jesus often ministered in synagogues because any competent male (as regulated by synagogue elders; Hooker 1991:62-63; Mark 1:22, 39; 6:2) could comment on the Scriptures. The synagogue mentioned here was in Capernaum, now often identified with _Tell Hum_ on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee, about two miles west of where the Jordan River enters the lake (Cranfield 1959:71). Capernaum was a fishing village. The synagogue that has been excavated there is from after the time of Jesus, but it may be the site of this earlier synagogue. Witherington (2001:88-89) defends the idea that such buildings did exist in the first century.
1:22 **amazed.** Mark uses seven different verbs to describe amazement (Cranfield 1959:73); this verb ( _ekplēssomai_ [TG1605, ZG1742]) also appears in 6:2; 7:37; 11:18. The concept of amazement is ambiguous in that it could either be a first step toward faith or be motivated by offense at what Jesus was doing. In this scene, the amazement simply led to discussion about what was going on. The ambiguity is left there for Mark's readers to contemplate against the backdrop of his introduction to the Gospel about who Jesus is. No doubt Mark used the concept to portray Jesus as different from all other teachers; those who heard him sensed this even though they could not explain it.
**authority.** See also 1:27. This term summarizes a dominating characteristic of Jesus' teaching that will become an issue later in his ministry. Authority can mean (1) the power or ability to act or (2) the right to take certain action. Here the former is intended, for the words Jesus taught were accompanied by authoritative acts, as the exorcism in 1:23-28 shows.
**quite unlike the teachers of religious law.** Jesus taught with a power distinct from that of the scribes ("teachers of religious law" in the NLT), who made judgments for various Jewish sects about the meaning and application of the law, and made their living copying Torah texts (EDNT 1:259-260). Meier (2001:549-260) emphasizes that "scribe" refers to the function of copying sacred texts, not to a particular party of Jews or to their role in adjudicating the law (i.e., scribes could belong to any sect within Judaism, as indicated by the phrase "the teachers of religious law who were Pharisees" in 2:16). Later in Mark, the issue will be Jesus' right to speak and act as he did. In Mark, when Jesus speaks with authority, the scribes are always noted in contrast (1:21-27; 2:5-12; 11:27-33). Only one text in Mark commends a scribe (12:28-34), and the scribes are often seen in opposition to Jesus (3:22; 7:1, 5; 8:31; 10:33; 14:1, 43, 53; 15:1, 31; Guelich 1989:56). Jesus' independence from such authority disturbed the Jewish leaders. Mark also makes the important point that people noticed Jesus' distinctive character. Jesus' authority was not derivative; it was more direct than that of the other religious leaders.
1:23 **evil spirit.** The Gr. refers to an unclean spirit that would have been regarded by Jews as malevolent or evil ( _Jubilees_ 10:1; _Testament of Benjamin_ 5:2; 1QM 13:5). Mark refers to such spirits eleven times, with six of the references occurring in two scenes (1:23, 26-27; 3:11, 30; 5:2, 8, 13; 6:7; 7:25; 9:25). They are clearly described as destructive beings (5:2-13; 9:17-27). It is no accident that Jesus encountered demons early in his ministry, for there was a cosmic dimension to his work. The spirits' remarks also make it clear that they were aware of Jesus' authority, which extended far beyond what he said to what he was able to do (1:27).
1:24 **Why are you interfering with us?** It was unusual for a man possessed by an evil spirit to be in the synagogue, but perhaps his condition was not entirely evident until Jesus' presence forced the spirit in the man to react and ask, lit., "What do you want with us?" This phrase, also found in Judg 11:12 and 1 Kgs 17:18, is an idiom for, "Why are you interfering with us?" or "What have we to do with each other?" The phrase is used by an inferior to a superior (Guelich 1989:56-57)—the spirit sensed that Jesus' holy presence was a threat. So Jesus and the spirit are engaged in a type of spiritual combat.
**Holy One of God!** The remark contrasts the unclean spirit that was speaking with Jesus, the Holy One (Hooker 1991:64), as purity met the impure. A destructive force encountered a power of deliverance. The title suggests a close association with the Holy God (cf. Aaron, Ps 106:16; Elisha, 2 Kgs 4:9; the saints of God, Dan 7:18-27; see also Isa 40:25; 57:15). The title clearly points to Jesus' superior cosmic authority since the demons wondered if he might destroy them. The remark is a clue to how Jesus' heavenly opponents viewed him and gives insight into his true identity. It was often the case in exorcisms that naming the opponent was a key to control (Bock 2002b:101-102); this instance of naming was likely such an attempt on the part of the demons.
1:25 **Be quiet!** This call to silence occurs only twice in Mark, once here and once in Jesus' rebuke to the wind and sea in 4:39 (a similar idea appears in 3:12). The expression shows Jesus' authority and precedes his exorcism of the demon from the man. It was a common way to exert control in an exorcism (PGM IX.4, 9; PGM IV.1243, 1245, 3013; Witherington 2001:91). There is no magic here, no incantation or other type of help. Jesus' word alone was good enough.
1:26 **threw the man into a convulsion.** Violence accompanied the demon's departure. The man was violently shaken by the exorcism. The verb behind this expression ( _sparassō_ [TG4682, ZG5057]) is used only three times in the NT, and always of a demon trying to harm a person (9:26; Luke 9:39). The term in classical Gr. refers to animals such as dogs shaking or ripping up a victim (LSJ, 1624). That the foundation of the heavens "shook" reflects usage in the Gr. OT (2 Sam 22:8). In Josephus, the term describes Ezra as reacting to the marrying of wives outside the faith by rending his garments and casting himself down on the ground in grief ( _Antiquities_ 11.141).
1:27 **Amazement.** This is a different term for amazement ( _ethambēthēsan_ [TG2284, ZG2501]) than in the reference to astonishment in 1:22 (see note). Only Mark uses this verb in the NT. In 10:24 the verb describes the disciples' amazement at Jesus' comment about the rich. The NT uses of the term all suggest perplexity with the sense of being caught off guard in "sudden bewilderment and total shock" (BDAG 442; EDNT 2.128). They were trying to sort out the things they had seen and heard (see also 10:32).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' story begins in Mark with his miraculous activity against the cosmic forces that oppose humanity. Mark, like Luke, presents an exorcism as Jesus' first miracle (Matthew shows Jesus cleansing a leper, and John tells about Jesus' changing water into wine). Of thirteen miracles in Mark, four are exorcisms, more than any other type of miracle narrated by Mark. In contrast, John's Gospel has no exorcisms. Most of Mark's miracles occur in the first half of his Gospel and comprise almost half of that material (Witherington 2001:92). The miracles were not automatically persuasive, for the Pharisees still opposed him (3:6), the scribes considered him demon possessed (3:22), those in his hometown did not respond (6:2-3), and Herod thought of him as John the Baptist returned from the dead (6:14-16). Even the disciples repeatedly misunderstood him (6:52; 8:17-21; Witherington 2001:94).
The function of Jesus' exorcisms was to underscore Jesus' authority and the cosmic scope of his work. Jesus had come to set all creation right. This miracle took place in the synagogue, a holy place, and Jesus' word of rebuke was authoritative enough to accomplish the exorcism. In this event, Jesus is portrayed as the regal Son-Servant who is God's Holy One. The exact meaning of the demons' confessions would not automatically be clear to Jesus' audience. Their remarks indicated that Jesus' authority threatened them because of his close connection with divine power. Mark makes the case from the very beginning that Jesus was not an average prophet or servant of God. There was something unique in his teaching that initiated a special time of fulfillment (Guelich 1989:58).
Mark finishes his presentation of this event with the perplexity all of this was producing in the crowd. Jesus had a new and special type of authority. He was not merely discussing law, ethics, or even theology as the scribes might have done. Rather, demons were being confronted face-to-face and defeated. Needless to say, such news spread around the region because people were not accustomed to such events.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Jesus' work continues in Capernaum and Galilee (1:29-45)
29 After Jesus left the synagogue with James and John, they went to Simon and Andrew's home. 30 Now Simon's mother-in-law was sick in bed with a high fever. They told Jesus about her right away. 31 So he went to her bedside, took her by the hand, and helped her sit up. Then the fever left her, and she prepared a meal for them.
32 That evening after sunset, many sick and demon-possessed people were brought to Jesus. 33 The whole town gathered at the door to watch. 34 So Jesus healed many people who were sick with various diseases, and he cast out many demons. But because the demons knew who he was, he did not allow them to speak.
35 Before daybreak the next morning, Jesus got up and went out to an isolated place to pray. 36 Later Simon and the others went out to find him. 37 When they found him, they said, "Everyone is looking for you."
38 But Jesus replied, "We must go on to other towns as well, and I will preach to them, too. That is why I came." 39 So he traveled throughout the region of Galilee, preaching in the synagogues and casting out demons.
40 A man with leprosy came and knelt in front of Jesus, begging to be healed. "If you are willing, you can heal me and make me clean," he said.
41 Moved with compassion,[*] Jesus reached out and touched him. "I am willing," he said. "Be healed!" 42 Instantly the leprosy disappeared, and the man was healed. 43 Then Jesus sent him on his way with a stern warning: 44 "Don't tell anyone about this. Instead, go to the priest and let him examine you. Take along the offering required in the law of Moses for those who have been healed of leprosy.[*] This will be a public testimony that you have been cleansed."
45 But the man went and spread the word, proclaiming to everyone what had happened. As a result, large crowds soon surrounded Jesus, and he couldn't publicly enter a town anywhere. He had to stay out in the secluded places, but people from everywhere kept coming to him.
## NOTES
1:31 **the fever left her, and she prepared a meal for them.** This is Jesus' first healing in Mark. It is unusual in that it involved a man healing a woman who was not a family member, and it was done on the Sabbath if the later Jewish text of _b. Berakhot_ 5a is a guide to earlier Jewish practice (Witherington 2001:98; the late date of the text may reflect later Jewish practice). That it was the Sabbath was potentially controversial, but this seems to have been the private healing of a relative of a key disciple, Peter, who apparently was married (1 Cor 9:5). The healing led immediately to her serving them. Mark uses the verb _diakoneō_ [TG1247, ZG1354] to describe her preparation of a meal for them. This is the normal use of this verb from which we get our word "deacon" (EDNT 1:302; Luke 17:8). Her immediate service indicated that her healing was quick and complete, and illustrates the service that receiving God's grace should produce (note the theological use of the "deacon" idea in 9:33-37 and 10:43-45).
1:34 **he did not allow them to speak.** After the healing, Jesus continued to perform exorcisms but prevented the demons from giving their testimony. This remark continues the theme of Jesus' authority from the first exorcism.
1:35 **went out to an isolated place to pray.** In Mark, Jesus goes alone to pray three times: here, in 6:46 (before the miracle of walking on the water), and in 14:35-39 (at Gethsemane). In the midst of a demanding period of ministry, Jesus sought communion with God. Jesus' private prayer contrasts with what he said about the scribes and their public prayers (12:38-40).
1:36 **went out to find him.** The verb used in this description ( _katediōxen_ [TG2614, ZG2870]) is quite vivid. It means "to hunt someone down" and is often used in a hostile sense (cf. Marcus 2000:202; Ps 17:38 [LXX]; _Psalms of Solomon_ 15:8; and BDAG 516). Marcus suggests that whereas Jesus had called the disciples to be fishers of people, here they were hunting him down or pursuing him. Jesus will instruct them on the requirements of his ministry.
1:38 **We must go on to other towns.** The Gr. is softer in tone, reading "Let us go in another direction to neighboring towns." This is a mission statement, indicating that Jesus came to preach to a larger region, and not just to Capernaum (1:24; 2:17; 10:45; Witherington 2001:102).
**came.** Lit., "came out," an expression we do not use much in English. It has the nuance of being sent by God in a calling (Amos 7:14-15; Josephus _Antiquities_ 3.400; Marcus 2000:204). In 1:24 and here, two reasons are given for Jesus' coming: to confront evil forces and to preach. These two ideas are repeated in 1:39. The term for "preach" ( _kērussō_ [TG2784, ZG3062]) both here and in 1:39 is not the term for instruction but for missionary proclamation (Guelich 1989:43). It probably refers to preaching the gospel as previously mentioned (1:14-15).
1:39 **preaching in the synagogues and casting out demons.** Jesus' cosmic battle continued to be a part of his ministry so that his actions matched his words. What he did in Capernaum (1:21-28), he also did elsewhere.
1:40 **leprosy.** This word refers to an array of skin diseases that rendered a Jewish person unclean and required a life of isolation from society (Lev 13–14; _m. Nega'im_ ). Lepers were to announce their presence and the danger of contamination by crying out, "Unclean, unclean!" (Lev 13:45-46; Cranfield 1959:90). The leper's approach to Jesus violated this legal tradition, but it expressed the confidence that Jesus was capable of reversing his condition. Sometimes such diseases were regarded as divine judgments (2 Kgs 5:7). Other texts discussing the disease are Num 12:9-12, Job 18:13, and 11QTemplea 45:17-18.
**If you are willing.** In Gr., this is a third class condition, so the request is made without any presumption—i.e., "If you are willing, and I am not saying whether you are or not." The leper knew that Jesus could make him clean, but he was not certain whether he would or not, although his willingness to risk approaching Jesus meant that he came in the hope that his request would be graciously granted.
1:41 **Moved with compassion.** A few MSS, of which D and some Old Latin renderings are the most important, read "moved with anger" (cf. NLT mg). Some argue that this is the harder reading, because it is more difficult to explain a copyist's move from compassion to anger. If it were original, then Jesus' anger would be set against the man's condition, not his request (Luke 13:16; Marcus 2000:206; Hooker 1991:79). But compassion is slightly more likely to be the original sense, given the overwhelming external spread of the MSS (Metzger 1971:76-77 also notes that Mark's use of anger is clearly attested in other verses: 3:5; 10:14). Mark loved to note Jesus' emotions; here, Jesus acted graciously out of compassion for the man's plight (on compassion, see 6:34; 8:2; 9:22). The healing would be extended with a symbolic touch, since Jesus' power to cleanse was greater than leprosy's power to stain (contrast 2 Kgs 5:1-14; Num 12:9-15). The significance of this is more clear in other Gospel texts (Matt 11:5; Luke 7:22).
1:43 **a stern warning.** The Gr. verb _embrimaomai_ [TG1690, ZG1839] lit. means "to snort" or "be indignant" (BDAG 322; Mark 14:5; John 11:33, 38). Jesus sternly restricted the public announcement of what had taken place while urging the leper to follow the law by showing himself to the priest so he could be declared clean (1:44; Lev 14:1-20). Mark notes such calls to silence with respect to demons (1:34; 3:12), those healed (1:43-44; 5:43; 7:36), and the disciples (8:30; 9:9). It appears that a major concern was to avoid the excessive publicity that this aspect of Jesus' work could generate (Guelich 1989:76).
1:44 **testimony that you have been cleansed.** This public testimony was a liturgical recognition before God alone of God's gracious work of healing through Jesus. The Gr. also allows for the interpretation, "a testimony against them." In other spots where this expression appears, it is negative, meaning "against them" (6:11; 13:9; TDNT 4:502-503). The meaning appears to be that the evidence of God's acting through Jesus (when the healed man offered a sacrifice) would stand as a testimony against the priests when they came to reject the reality that God was working through Jesus.
1:45 **But the man went and spread the word.** The cleansed leper did not obey Jesus and Jesus got the publicity he had hoped to avoid.
**proclaiming.** Interestingly, the man "preached" ( _kērussō_ [TG2784, ZG3062]) his testimony.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Mark portrays these early scenes of Jesus' ministry almost like a battle between Jesus and the cosmic forces of evil, with humans as both the victims and the prize in the battle. Jesus fought demons and overcame disease as he preached the good news of God's deliverance. What he claimed about God's promise of deliverance, he backed up with action. So Peter's mother-in-law was healed of fever and her healing led her into serving them. Meanwhile, the entire village began to seek him out for healing and exorcism. Jesus healed graciously, but he commanded the demons not to say who he was.
This command of silence suggests that Jesus was not interested in drawing too much attention to this testimony. Possible reasons for his hesitation are that (1) it might be misread, as the view of the scribes in 3:22 suggests; (2) Jesus preferred that the awareness of who he was should emerge intrinsically from the nature of his ministry and teaching; (3) Jesus wanted to prevent the wrong kind of attention from being drawn to the miracles themselves and what could accompany them; and (4) the crowd could not yet appreciate exactly what such a confession really meant for God's plan. This last reason explains why Jesus gradually taught the disciples who he was and also explains how Mark gradually unfurls his story. The concern that miracles would overshadow what they represented is evident from the development of the scene. One exorcism in a synagogue led to Jesus' being overwhelmed with requests to heal and to exorcise. He performed them graciously, but it is clear, as Mark's story proceeds, that Jesus was concerned that the miracles not detract from his message.
Jesus withdrew from the public clamor to pray, to be alone with God. When the disciples sought him out to return, Jesus responded with a different plan. He would move on throughout Galilee doing what he had done in Capernaum, teaching and exorcising demons. The message must be taken elsewhere.
Nothing pictures Jesus' ability to offer cleansing so clearly as his healing of a leper. This disease isolated those afflicted from the rest of society out of fear that they would render others unclean. Even the law required such isolation, but Jesus' presence was stronger than the contagion. The leper wanted the cleansing Jesus offered. Jesus extended his compassion and healed the man, and then explained that the only testimony the man should give was what was required by the law. Jesus was still concerned that the proper features of his ministry be emphasized. Unfortunately, the man did not heed the restriction. This was not the only time that Jesus' command would be ignored. As a result, Jesus was overwhelmed by the crowds and could not find relief even by withdrawing to the desert.
One other point is important. Mark develops the idea of Jesus' increasing popularity, from "spread throughout" in verse 28 to "whole town gathered" in verse 34 to "everyone is looking" in verse 37 to "he couldn't publicly enter a town" in verse 45. This radical popularity with the crowds stands in contrast with the radical rejection by the leaders in 2:1–3:6 that comes next. This juxtaposition of crowd reception versus leadership rejection is a theme Mark develops throughout his gospel.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. Controversy Leading to Rejection (2:1–3:12)
1. The first controversy: Jesus as Son of Man heals a paralytic and forgives sin (2:1-12; cf. Matt 9:1-8; Luke 5:17-26)
1 When Jesus returned to Capernaum several days later, the news spread quickly that he was back home. 2 Soon the house where he was staying was so packed with visitors that there was no more room, even outside the door. While he was preaching God's word to them, 3 four men arrived carrying a paralyzed man on a mat. 4 They couldn't bring him to Jesus because of the crowd, so they dug a hole through the roof above his head. Then they lowered the man on his mat, right down in front of Jesus. 5 Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralyzed man, "My child, your sins are forgiven."
6 But some of the teachers of religious law who were sitting there thought to themselves, 7 "What is he saying? This is blasphemy! Only God can forgive sins!"
8 Jesus knew immediately what they were thinking, so he asked them, "Why do you question this in your hearts? 9 Is it easier to say to the paralyzed man 'Your sins are forgiven,' or 'Stand up, pick up your mat, and walk'? 10 So I will prove to you that the Son of Man[*] has the authority on earth to forgive sins." Then Jesus turned to the paralyzed man and said, 11 "Stand up, pick up your mat, and go home!"
12 And the man jumped up, grabbed his mat, and walked out through the stunned onlookers. They were all amazed and praised God, exclaiming, "We've never seen anything like this before!"
## NOTES
2:1 **Jesus returned to Capernaum.** The return suggests two things: (1) that Jesus' initial tour through Galilee was completed, and (2) that Capernaum was the headquarters for his ministry.
2:2 **visitors.** According to Mark, there was a large audience for this event; the NLT translates "many" as "visitors." In 2:4, they are called a crowd. In 2:6, it is also noted that scribes (NLT, "teachers of religious law") are present. Matthew notes scribes (Matt 9:3) and crowds (Matt 9:8), and Luke specifies that the crowds included scribes and Pharisees (Luke 5:17, 21). The point is that Jesus' activities were now beginning to draw a variety of people to see what Jesus was doing and saying.
**preaching God's word.** Lit., "speaking the word," an idiom for preaching God's message. In Mark "the word" often refers to something Jesus teaches (2:2; 4:14-20, 33; 8:32; Guelich 1989:84). The expression also creates a link back to 1:45 with its use of "word."
2:3 **paralyzed man.** This is the only event involving a paralytic in Mark and Luke. Matthew reports the healing of paralysis two other times as well (Matt 4:24; 8:6). Acts also has two such events (Acts 8:7; 9:33).
2:4 **dug a hole through the roof.** The literal phrase here is "unroofed the roof." They created an opening so they could lower the mat on which the man lay. The mat could have been like many wood and cloth pallets one sees today in the Middle East. The house would have been a flat-roofed home with a staircase up the back.
2:5 **their faith.** Mark likes to use both the noun and the verb for faith (1:15; 4:40; 5:34-36; 9:19, 23-24, 42; 10:52; 11:22-24). The inner conviction and trust of the paralytic and his friends in Jesus' power is evident in the effort they made to get to Jesus. Mark commends their faith as it was manifest in their action. In Mark, faith is expressed concretely as it overcomes obstacles placed in its way (Guelich 1989:85).
**your sins are forgiven.** This remark got Jesus into trouble with the theologians. In spite of the fact that it is expressed as a divine passive that attributes forgiveness to God (see Lev 4:26, 31; 2 Sam 12:13; or Qumran's _Prayer of Nabonidus_ [4Q242]).
2:6 **teachers of religious law.** The Gr. refers to "the scribes," whose fundamental task was to copy the sacred text, not just to render judgment about it. The great amount of time they spent with the sacred texts helped to qualify them for making judgments about the law.
2:7 **blasphemy! Only God can forgive sins!** Something about the way Jesus expressed this forgiveness made it clear to them that he was claiming to be more than a healer or prophet. In their view, Jesus was not honoring God, but slandering him by making such claims. Blasphemy is dishonoring or slandering someone, usually through arrogant or disrespectful speech against them (BDAG 178). In Jewish culture it could also spill over into disrespectful acts (Bock 1998:30-112). Jesus traded charges of blasphemy with the teachers of religious law later (3:22); he was convicted of blasphemy at his examination (14:63-64), and the people blasphemed Jesus while he was on the cross (15:29-30).
2:8 **Jesus knew immediately what they were thinking.** Jesus had insight into the minds of those who were criticizing him. Such a perception might reflect his unique role as Son of Man, but could also reflect revelatory insight that God can give to others. The Gr. has, "and Jesus perceiving in his spirit." The NLT renders the sense of the remark well.
2:9 Jesus' question presents a dilemma. It appears to be easier to offer forgiveness, for this cannot immediately be seen and evaluated, whereas telling the man to walk requires that he do so. So in one sense it is easier to speak of forgiveness than to give healing. However, to really be able to forgive sin is hard because one must have the authority to actually do it. The question sets up a connection that Jesus makes in 2:10. Jesus did not back off from the dispute; he wished to engage them on this controversial point and affirm his authority to do these things.
2:10 **I will prove to you that the Son of Man has the authority on earth to forgive sins.** Although some argue that these verses are Mark's narrative commentary, it is better to see this verse as part of the scene in which Jesus affirms his authority. Healing can be seen, but forgiveness cannot be seen. Jesus said that his healing of the paralytic would make evident the truth of his claims about forgiveness. If God worked through him in healing, then these claims would be vindicated. The Gr. reads, "that you might know that the Son of Man has authority." The NLT rendering, "I will prove" emphasizes the vindication that the healing represents.
2:12 **We've never seen anything like this.** The crowd's reaction indicates that something unusual had taken place. In effect, their reaction was, "What's going on here?" This scene has an open ending that invites the reader to contemplate what is being described.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This first of five controversy scenes indicates that one of the issues over which Jesus and the religious authorities battled was his claim to forgive sin. The scribes wondered how Jesus could know that God was willing to forgive the sins of the paralytic. Many ancient Jews connected sin and sickness, as indicated in Jewish texts such as _b. Nedarim_ 41a, which says "No one gets up from his sick bed until all his sins are forgiven" (Hooker 1991:85). But no one could forgive these sins except God, as the _Midrash Psalms_ 17:3 reads, "No one can forgive transgressions but you [God]" (Marcus 2000:217). So Jesus assumed a divine prerogative here, or at least knowledge of divine preferences (Exod 34:6-7; Isa 43:25; 44:22).
Furthermore, Jesus affirmed his authority as the Son of Man, and the scribes viewed this as blasphemy. At this point in Mark, the source of this title for Jesus is not clear. Later in the Gospel, the title will be associated with Daniel 7:13-14, where a person is described who rides the clouds, approaches the Ancient of Days (God) in heaven, and receives authority to judge. Its use in Judaism in _1 Enoch_ 39–71 and _4 Ezra_ 13 also points to a figure with such authority (Garland 1996:95-96). "Son of Man" is Jesus' favorite way of referring to himself; in Mark, the title appears fourteen times. It will be important to trace what the Son of Man does in Mark. Forgiving sins is one of his abilities. In 2:10, Jesus emphasizes his authority by referring to himself in this way. In other contexts, Jesus used the term to foretell his suffering or the authority he would have on his return.
The conflict presented in Mark 2 and the judgment that circulated around this first controversy would remain the same when Jesus was examined by the Sanhedrin (Mark 14). He claimed authority as the Son of Man, and they claimed that this was blasphemy (Bock 1998:188). However, the problem for the leaders was that Jesus gave signs that backed up his claims; his healings validated those claims that were otherwise unobservable. This is a passage in which word and deed work together to make a theological point. The form of the account is a mixture of a pronouncement (2:10) and a miracle story, another illustration of word and deed explaining each other.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. The second controversy: Jesus calls Levi and eats with sinners (2:13-17; cf. Matt 9:9-13; Luke 5:27-32)
13 Then Jesus went out to the lakeshore again and taught the crowds that were coming to him. 14 As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at his tax collector's booth. "Follow me and be my disciple," Jesus said to him. So Levi got up and followed him.
15 Later, Levi invited Jesus and his disciples to his home as dinner guests, along with many tax collectors and other disreputable sinners. (There were many people of this kind among Jesus' followers.) 16 But when the teachers of religious law who were Pharisees[*] saw him eating with tax collectors and other sinners, they asked his disciples, "Why does he eat with such scum?[*]"
17 When Jesus heard this, he told them, "Healthy people don't need a doctor—sick people do. I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners."
## NOTES
2:14 **Levi.** This may be the same person as Matthew, with Levi as his second name, as was common in Jewish contexts (Lane 1974:100-101). Others reject this identification (Guelich 1989:99-100).
**tax collector's booth.** This booth would have been in the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas and was probably located in Capernaum (Sherwin-White 1963:125-126). Tax collectors were disliked by Jews because they reminded people of Roman authority by collecting taxes for them, spent much of their time in contact with Gentiles, and were often dishonest (Donahue 1971:39-61). Later mishnaic and talmudic texts compare them to murderers and robbers ( _m. Nedarim_ 3:4; _b. Bava Qamma_ 113a). It is perhaps better to speak of them as "toll collectors" because Levi was collecting usage taxes, or indirect taxes based on use and consumption. Levi would have had to bid for the right to collect taxes and to add a surcharge for his efforts (Luke 3:13; 19:8; Marcus 2000:225). Great opportunity for abuse existed in setting the amount of the surcharge.
**Levi got up and followed him.** As with Peter and the three others in 1:16-20, the call to follow Jesus was a call to discipleship.
2:15 **sinners.** Toll collectors were not the only disreputable people Jesus drew. Mark uses the general category of "sinners" for other social outcasts that were drawn to Jesus.
2:16 **teachers of religious law who were Pharisees.** These scribes were also Pharisees; they regarded table fellowship with such people as implying acceptance of them and their sins.
**such scum.** This rendering attempts to convey the emotive force of the lit. expression, "toll collectors and sinners." These were two groups of disreputable people that the Pharisees thought Jesus should not be so friendly with. Their objection could be that their food was not properly tithed (Deut 14:22; Matt 23:23) or prepared with proper attention to purity (7:1-8), or there may have been other issues related to cleanliness ( _m. Hagigah_ 2:7; Hooker 1991:96; Marcus 2000:227). They also feared that such association would lead to sharing in sinful practices (so the later text, _b. Berakhot_ 43b).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Hooker (1991:94) perceptively suggests that this story about Jesus' eating with sinners and tax collectors illustrates the theme of forgiveness introduced in 2:1-12. This account also presents a controversy in the form of a pronouncement, where everything in the passage drives towards Jesus' concluding utterance; whatever offense the religious officials took at Jesus' associations, he was justified in seeking out sinners—this was his calling. Thus, one finds Jesus wherever there is disease that needs to be healed. Jesus did not wait for sinners to approach him, as the calling of Levi shows. Rather, he made it clear that he and the God he represented sought out such people for entry into fresh relationship with God. This account shows God's absolute commitment to reach people as Jesus associates with sinners in order to bring them to God.
Jesus said, "Healthy people don't need a doctor—sick people do. I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners." This is Jesus' mission statement. The only other such statement in Mark is in 10:45. His divine task was not to treat the righteous but to heal the spiritually ill. Jesus had come to help sinners (Cranfield 1959:106) and his ability to heal, cleanse, and forgive revealed his divine power (cf. Exod 15:26).
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. The third controversy: Jesus' disciples did not practice fasting (2:18-22; cf. Matt 9:14-17; Luke 5:33-39)
18 Once when John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting, some people came to Jesus and asked, "Why don't your disciples fast like John's disciples and the Pharisees do?"
19 Jesus replied, "Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can't fast while the groom is with them. 20 But someday the groom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.
21 "Besides, who would patch old clothing with new cloth? For the new patch would shrink and rip away from the old cloth, leaving an even bigger tear than before.
22 "And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. For the wine would burst the wineskins, and the wine and the skins would both be lost. New wine calls for new wineskins."
## NOTES
2:18 **Why don't your disciples fast?** The question concerns an important religious practice that John's disciples and the Pharisees thought the pious should observe. As an ascetic, John probably made a point of fasting. Mark does not specify who asked the question here. It was a cultural expectation that Jesus, as a pious religious figure, should be fasting like other pious figures. Luke 18:12 reports that the Pharisees fasted twice a week. This was on the second and fifth days of the week as noted in _Didache_ 8:1 (our Monday and Thursday). Some speculate that this scene was really only about John and Jesus and reflected a concern of the early church, but this is highly unlikely since the dispute does not really fit the later setting (Guelich 1989:103).
2:19 **celebrating with the groom.** The NLT rendering again captures the force of the Gr., which reads, "while the groom is with them." The celebration of the banquet table was an image of the special relationship between God and Israel (TDNT 4:1103). It recalled a special time when God was especially active on behalf of his people and their salvation (Isa 54:4-8; 62:5; Ezek 16:7-14; Hos 2). Jesus' presence was a special indication of divine presence and activity; this called for celebration and feasting, and fasting was not appropriate. Later Jewish practice indicates that some religious obligations were not required of wedding celebrants (Marcus 2000:233; _b. Sukkah_ 25b; living in booths was not required for celebrants of a wedding that took place during this feast). Such an idea seems to be operative in Jesus' example.
2:20 **the groom will be taken away.** Jesus is not specific here, other than to indicate that things would change in the future when the groom was no longer present. Lane (1974:111) speaks of the language here as "cryptic," with no definite allusion to a violent death. The narrative as a whole makes clear that this imagery alludes to Jesus' death, at which point fasting will again be appropriate.
2:21 **new patch would shrink.** New cloth was not preshrunk, and the process of washing and drying the garment would cause it to shrink.
2:22 **burst the wineskins.** New wine had yet to ferment, and wine fermenting in a closed container puts pressure on that container. New wineskins would stretch during fermentation, but the brittle leather of old wineskins would crack and rupture.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus took a question about fasting and broadened it to show how his practice was distinct. One explanation was in the nature of the current time. His presence was a time of celebration, so fasting was not appropriate. There would come a time when he would no longer be present, and fasting would then be appropriate again. The second explanation is more comprehensive. Something really fresh and new had come in Jesus.
Jesus' two illustrations (concerning the new patch and the new wine) show that one could not simply fuse the message and person of Jesus to everything that Judaism had been. To do so would cause damage, as when a new patch of cloth was washed, since it would shrink and pull on the old cloth, which was worn thin and had no more give to it. Jesus asserted that something new and fresh had come, which would also require new ways.
The two illustrations basically make the same point. If there is a difference, it is that the first is written from the standpoint of the old material, while the second takes up the perspective of the new. An old garment does not take a new patch, for it would tear the garment. New wine does not go into old wineskins. The old skins have stretched as far as they can. When the new wine ferments, it will burst the old worn skins and both the wine and the skins will be lost. The wine of the new era needs fresh containers and new ways. Jesus noted that both the old and the new are damaged when they are wrongly combined.
The new wine needs new wineskins and new cloth can only be attached to new cloth. Jesus' ways would be different. His coming did not merely change the cover on Judaism. It was a new era that called for new ways of relating to God.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. The fourth controversy: Jesus' disciples violate the Sabbath (2:23-28; cf. Matt 12:1-8; Luke 6:1-5)
23 One Sabbath day as Jesus was walking through some grainfields, his disciples began breaking off heads of grain to eat. 24 But the Pharisees said to Jesus, "Look, why are they breaking the law by harvesting grain on the Sabbath?"
25 Jesus said to them, "Haven't you ever read in the Scriptures what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 26 He went into the house of God (during the days when Abiathar was high priest) and broke the law by eating the sacred loaves of bread that only the priests are allowed to eat. He also gave some to his companions."
27 Then Jesus said to them, "The Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, and not people to meet the requirements of the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord, even over the Sabbath!"
## NOTES
2:23 **Sabbath.** In Judaism, the last day of the week (our Friday night to Saturday night) is set aside as a day of rest (Exod 20:8-11; Lev 23:1-3). Jews mark the day from sunset to sunset.
**began breaking off heads of grain to eat.** Certain areas of a field were reserved for travelers or foreigners (Deut 23:25), so taking the grain was not a problem. Those who were very careful about the law believed that on the Sabbath, grain should not be plucked or threshed ( _m. Shabbat_ 7:2; Lane 1974:114-115). This act would have been viewed by some as a violation of Sabbath rest, which was one of the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:10; 34:21; Deut 5:12-15; for other examples of strict Sabbath laws, see CD 10:14–11:18. _Jubilees_ , esp. in 2:17-33 and 50:1-13, discusses the importance of Sabbath practice; cf. Guelich 1989:121). Since Jesus was responsible for the behavior of his followers in religious matters, the issue was raised for his explanation. Marcus (2000:240) cites Seneca _Troades_ 290 here: "He who forbids not sin when in control commands it." Since the grain was ready for harvesting, it was probably April or May (Hooker 1991:102).
2:24 **breaking the law by harvesting grain on the Sabbath.** The Pharisees' charge was that the Sabbath had been violated. This scene may be compressed since the Pharisees were probably not following them around looking for violations. Rather, the Pharisees happened to hear of it and so the charge was raised (Witherington 2001:129).
2:25-26 **David . . . and his companions . . . [ate] the sacred loaves of bread.** Jesus referred to the incident in which David and his men ate the sacred loaves of bread that were reserved for priests (1 Sam 21:1-6; see Lev 24:5-9; Exod 25:30). God did not judge David for this act, so by implication, this exceptional situation did not violate the law. This did not happen on the Sabbath, but it is a parallel example in which the letter of the law was violated but the act was still permitted. Later Jews believed that this event took place on the Sabbath ( _b. Menahot_ 95b; _Yalqut Shim'oni_ 2.130; Witherington 2001:130; Hooker 1991:103-104 takes this as the time when the bread was removed to be consumed if _Midrash Rabbah Lev_ 32.3 is a correct guide).
**during the days when Abiathar was high priest.** This remark is in tension with 1 Sam 21:1, 2, 8, where Ahimelech, Abiathar's father, was named as high priest. Matthew and Luke omit this reference. Some argue that it is a vague literary reference indicating the general section of 1 Samuel containing the account. (The issue is discussed in Lane 1974:116.) Witherington (2001:130) suggests the reference may have been to a general time and meant "in the day of Abiathar," but that a translation issue obscured it.
2:27 **to meet the needs of people.** Jesus stated the priority and purpose of the Sabbath. The day of rest was to serve and benefit people, not become an obstacle to them. For Jewish views of the Sabbath, see _Jubilees_ 2:17, where the Sabbath is called a "great sign." The Jews took a Sabbath (i.e., rested) from all work on the seventh day. It was seen as a gift to be enjoyed. Interestingly, the later Jewish text _Mekilta Exodus_ [109b] on 31:13-14 reads, "The Sabbath was delivered to you, not you to the Sabbath," though the point is that Israel received the day to be observed as a matter of privilege (Guelich 1989:124). The day was designed to be refreshing (Exod 23:12; Deut 5:14); Jesus' point was that taking basic nourishment on this day did not violate it.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus and his disciples' practices were unusual. One of the more disputed areas was Jesus' observance of the Sabbath. In an incident that involved taking grain on the Sabbath, Jesus defended his disciples with two arguments. First, the Sabbath was never intended to create a situation in which basic human needs went unmet. Jesus made this point with the example of David, who also "broke" the law to obtain food. The second, more fundamental point was that Jesus, as Son of Man, had authority over the Sabbath.
Whatever the exact nature of the analogy with David, Jesus' final argument was his primary one. The Son of Man has authority, even over something as important as the Sabbath, for he is Lord. Some try to apply this reference to the Son of Man to humans and their authority, but that is probably not intended here. Nowhere in Judaism was it thought that humans had authority over the Sabbath. The appeal here is to a special and limited authority that resided uniquely in Jesus (Witherington 2001:132). He had the right to make the call about what could and could not be done. Jesus' authority thus applied not only to forgiveness, relationships, and religious practice, but also to the most sacred day of the Jewish week. Mark is delineating the extent of Jesus' claims and authority. The Sabbath was made for people, but only one man has authority over it.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. The fifth controversy: Jesus heals on the Sabbath (3:1-6; cf. Matt 12:9-14; Luke 6:6-11)
1 Jesus went into the synagogue again and noticed a man with a deformed hand. 2 Since it was the Sabbath, Jesus' enemies watched him closely. If he healed the man's hand, they planned to accuse him of working on the Sabbath.
3 Jesus said to the man with the deformed hand, "Come and stand in front of everyone." 4 Then he turned to his critics and asked, "Does the law permit good deeds on the Sabbath, or is it a day for doing evil? Is this a day to save life or to destroy it?" But they wouldn't answer him.
5 He looked around at them angrily and was deeply saddened by their hard hearts. Then he said to the man, "Hold out your hand." So the man held out his hand, and it was restored! 6 At once the Pharisees went away and met with the supporters of Herod to plot how to kill Jesus.
## NOTES
3:1 **deformed.** The man's hand was withered ( _exērammenēn_ [TG3583A, ZG3830]), like a plant desiccated by drought (BDAG 684). The result was paralysis.
3:2 **If he healed.** This remark suggests that Jesus' "enemies" (in Gr., a vague "they") fully expected him to heal the man with the deformed hand. They had the sense that Jesus would respond compassionately to the man in this way.
3:4 **to save life or to destroy it?** Jesus posed the ironic dilemma of the scene. Those who accused Jesus of violating the Sabbath were faulting him for doing something good and were trying to destroy him. Mark 3:2 makes it clear that they were searching for such an opening. Their hope was that he would discredit himself as a divine agent. Meanwhile, by healing, Jesus was doing good and improving the quality of someone's life. Jesus raised the question of who was really honoring God and blessing his creation—the point of the Sabbath rest—by what they were doing.
3:5 **angrily and was deeply saddened by their hard hearts.** Mark often notes Jesus' emotions. He does so here by showing the mixture of anger and sadness Jesus experienced at their refusal to understand what he had been saying to them. A hard heart meant that their perception had become rigid and stubborn (Hooker 1991:107). The term for "hard" ( _pōrōsei_ [TG4457, ZG4801]) refers to something hardened or dulled (BDAG 900). One might refer to a callous understanding that both angered and saddened Jesus. His only Sabbath work was a command for the man to stretch out his hand. The man's obedience made the healing evident.
3:6 **plot how to kill Jesus.** Pharisees and Herodians joined in a commitment to stop Jesus. The Herodians were Jewish supporters of Herod, so religious (Pharisees) and political (Herodians) Jews were united in wanting to kill Jesus. Jesus' challenge to a variety of practices and sacred days motivated their decision. The rest of the Gospel explains how the plot was carried out. Note the contrast between this and the positive response to Jesus' ministry in 1:45.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This unit rounds out and concludes the controversy section of Mark. Cases of paralysis bookend the unit. Jesus' ministry caused controversy because of his unique authority to offer forgiveness, his association with sinners, his disciples' not fasting, and his Sabbath activities. In each case, a pronouncement by Jesus makes the case for his action. In each case, he claims to have the authority to determine the most appropriate action and to perform it. Each step accelerated the opposition's reaction against Jesus. By the time he acted to "save life" and "do good" on the Sabbath, his opponents, while trying to defend the sacred day, ironically ended up doing evil and being destructive on the Sabbath. Jesus' actions turned everything upside down. In their defense of the law, they violated it by plotting murder against one who understood that the law existed to serve people, not to unduly confine them.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Summary of Jesus' early ministry (3:7-12; cf. Matt 12:15-21; Luke 6:17-19)
7 Jesus went out to the lake with his disciples, and a large crowd followed him. They came from all over Galilee, Judea, 8 Jerusalem, Idumea, from east of the Jordan River, and even from as far north as Tyre and Sidon. The news about his miracles had spread far and wide, and vast numbers of people came to see him.
9 Jesus instructed his disciples to have a boat ready so the crowd would not crush him. 10 He had healed many people that day, so all the sick people eagerly pushed forward to touch him. 11 And whenever those possessed by evil[*] spirits caught sight of him, the spirits would throw them to the ground in front of him shrieking, "You are the Son of God!" 12 But Jesus sternly commanded the spirits not to reveal who he was.
## NOTES
3:7 **Jesus went.** Some suggest that Jesus' withdrawal in 3:7 is really a "fleeing" from the plot, because the term for "withdraw" ( _anechōrēsen_ [TG402, ZG432]) used here can have that meaning (Matt 2:12-14, 22; John 6:15; Marcus 2000:257). However, Jesus' move did not put him in less contact with people or restrict his access to them.
3:8 **as far north as Tyre and Sidon.** These towns were not part of Israel. They indicate that Jesus' popularity had extended beyond the nation, although many Jews lived in these regions. The locales in Idumea and east of the Jordan make a similar point. The only areas not mentioned are Samaria and the Decapolis, which were predominantly Gentile. The point of popular attention was Jesus' miraculous activity, a focus Jesus had tried to prevent (1:44).
3:9 **crowd would not crush him.** So many were present that the disciples had to work to prevent Jesus from being crushed ( _thlibō_ [TG2346, ZG2567]; BDAG 457) by the crowd. Jesus worked from a boat at the edge of the shore so that people could approach without crushing him.
3:10 **eagerly pushed forward.** The NLT has translated the force of the verb _epipiptō_ [TG1968, ZG2158] ("to press upon"; BDAG 377) very well here. People were eagerly approaching Jesus to be healed of their various tormenting conditions ( _mastigas_ [TG3148, ZG3465]; BDAG 620). This term for "disease" referred to a whip or a lash, but metaphorically had come to also refer to tormenting illnesses. Their desire to touch Jesus reflects cultural ideas shared with the OT (1 Kgs 17:21; 2 Kgs 4:34; 13:21; Guelich 1989:148). They believed that bodily contact would put them in touch with Jesus' healing power.
3:11-12 **the Son of God! . . . commanded the spirits not to reveal who he was.** Jesus commanded them to be silent. The Gr. _epitimaō_ [TG2008, ZG2203] often translates a Heb. term denoting rebuke (Job 26:11; Ps 80:16; 104:7; 106:9; Zech 3:2; Lane 1974:130). Jesus refused such disclosure from the world of spirits. He preferred for his identity to emerge from his words and deeds. This silence is part of the "messianic secret" theme in Mark (see the "Major Themes" section in the Introduction).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Despite the rise of opposition, Jesus' popularity and ministry continued as before, except that now the crowds were growing, as they came in from virtually everywhere in the region. Healings and exorcisms continued as the crowds pressed upon Jesus to gain access to the physical deliverance he provided.
Jesus also continued to exercise authority over demons and to silence their confessions of him as the "Son of God." This title is rare in Mark, appearing only here, in 1:1 (in the introductory heading of the Gospel), and in 15:39 (in the climactic moment of the centurion's confession). A variation of the expression appears at 1:11 (the voice of God at Jesus' baptism calling Jesus the beloved son), 5:7 (also at an exorcism), and 14:61 (in the question at Jesus' examination). Jesus did not use this title of himself in Mark. Jesus had silenced a demon making a similar confession in 1:24-25 ("the Holy One sent from God"). As discussed there and in 1:34, the silencing had to do with the source of the confession as well as with a concern for timing and for potential confusion about what such a confession might mean. The consistency of the demons' confessions stand in contrast to the various opinions expressed by humans in Mark (1:27; 2:6-7; 4:41; 6:2-3, 14-16; 8:27-28).
From a literary perspective, this unit is a bridge to the next phase of Mark's Gospel. The section ends with Jesus' ministry gaining wide attention, even as it surfaced opposition. The next unit will detail the nature of his teaching and further trace his impact.
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. Teaching on the Mystery-filled Kingdom and Miracles of Power Yield Rejection (3:13–6:6a)
1. The choosing of the Twelve (3:13-19; cf. Luke 6:12-16)
13 Afterward Jesus went up on a mountain and called out the ones he wanted to go with him. And they came to him. 14 Then he appointed twelve of them and called them his apostles.[*] They were to accompany him, and he would send them out to preach, 15 giving them authority to cast out demons. 16 These are the twelve he chose:
Simon (whom he named Peter),
17 James and John (the sons of Zebedee, but Jesus nicknamed them "Sons of Thunder"[*]),
18 Andrew,
Philip,
Bartholomew,
Matthew,
Thomas,
James (son of Alphaeus),
Thaddaeus,
Simon (the zealot[*]),
19 Judas Iscariot (who later betrayed him).
## NOTES
3:13 **Jesus went up on a mountain.** Though the area was likely what we would consider a "hillside," Mark's use of "mountain" may allude to the mountain as the site where God acts and reveals, as he did with Moses at Sinai. The phrase Mark uses is _anabainei eis to oros_ [TG3735, ZG4001] (mountain), which recalls a frequent expression in the Pentateuch that describes Moses' activity (Exod 19:3; 24:1-4; Num 27:12ff; Deut 9:7–10:11; Marcus 2000:266). If this allusion is intended, then Jesus' selection of the Twelve was a moment not unlike Israel's formation as a structured theocracy (Guelich 1989:156-157 argues against the allusion).
3:14 **twelve.** This number adds to the sense of an intentional typology between the disciples and Israel. Like the twelve tribes, the twelve apostles were chosen to preach the new message of the approaching Kingdom (TDNT 2:325-328). The setting of the selection is important. As the nation's leaders moved to reject Jesus, the emissary of God selected his own twelve leaders to make a claim for the nation (Hooker 1991:111). Their names are listed in 3:16-19. We know very little about most of the Twelve and in fact, the only four mentioned in Mark after this list is given are Peter, James, John, and Judas Iscariot.
**called them his apostles.** The presence of this phrase in the Gr. original of Mark is disputed, but the earliest MSS have it, including and B. Those who argue against its inclusion think the phrase is more likely to have been added to conform with Luke 6:13 and treat its omission as the harder reading (Marcus 2000:263). However, the use of similar terms for "send" in 3:14 might have led to an error of sight and a skipping of the initial phrase. By calling the twelve the "apostles," Jesus designated them as his commissioned representatives with authority to proclaim his message.
3:15 **authority to cast out demons.** Jesus extended their authority to include the conflict with demons that had been part of his own ministry to this point (1:39). Their parallel activity underscored their connection with Jesus.
3:16 **Simon (whom he named Peter).** For Peter to have two names was not unusual; this was a common practice at that time. His second name, Peter, means "rock." We first meet him in Mark at 1:16-20, where he left his nets and, with Andrew and the sons of Zebedee (James and John), joined Jesus.
3:17 **Sons of Thunder.** These brothers also received a second name, "Sons of Thunder." We are not told why they were given this name (see Guelich 1989:162).
3:18 **Matthew . . . Simon.** See the commentary below.
**Thaddaeus.** In Luke's list (Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:13), this position is occupied by Judas, son of James, but the possibility of two names for the same person may be at work here.
3:19 **Judas Iscariot (who later betrayed him).** Whenever Judas is named, his betrayal is always noted. He is also last in the list.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus was planning his moves even as opposition was rising. By naming twelve to serve in a special role, he made it clear that he was making a claim on Israel. That the Twelve were rooted in the historical ministry of Jesus becomes clear in Acts 1:21-26, when Judas has to be replaced to complete the group of twelve again. As to the historical character of the group, the early church would never have created a story in which Jesus selected his betrayer. This is not a story that one makes up about a leader's ability to select people or about his key followers.
The selection of the Twelve shows that Jesus planned to work with others alongside him. They would represent him and help to declare the message of the Kingdom. As Mark also made abundantly clear, they had much to learn about how that program would work.
The first listed among the Twelve is Peter. He was clearly the leader of the entire group, and he made a key confession at Caesarea Philippi (8:27-30). James and John are named second and third because they, with Peter, formed an inner group of three disciples that saw Jesus raise a little girl from the dead (Luke 8:51), witnessed Jesus on the mount of Transfiguration (9:2-8), and were asked to pray with Jesus during his time of trial (14:33).
Two other notable disciples are Simon the zealot and Matthew. The title "zealot" suggests that Simon was a nationalist, willing to fight to free Israel from Roman rule, before he became a disciple. Although the zealots did not appear as a formal party until the sixties in the first century, some were committed to this political position before then. Then there is Matthew, who collected taxes for Rome (2:13-14; Matt 9:9), a position in direct opposition to Simon's. Thus there is evidence within the Twelve of the very reconciliation Jesus sought to give to people, not only with God but also with one another.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. The debate over Jesus' power: Is it from Satan or from God? (3:20-30; cf. Matt 12:22-24)
20 One time Jesus entered a house, and the crowds began to gather again. Soon he and his disciples couldn't even find time to eat. 21 When his family heard what was happening, they tried to take him away. "He's out of his mind," they said.
22 But the teachers of religious law who had arrived from Jerusalem said, "He's possessed by Satan,[*] the prince of demons. That's where he gets the power to cast out demons."
23 Jesus called them over and responded with an illustration. "How can Satan cast out Satan?" he asked. 24 "A kingdom divided by civil war will collapse. 25 Similarly, a family splintered by feuding will fall apart. 26 And if Satan is divided and fights against himself, how can he stand? He would never survive. 27 Let me illustrate this further. Who is powerful enough to enter the house of a strong man and plunder his goods? Only someone even stronger—someone who could tie him up and then plunder his house.
28 "I tell you the truth, all sin and blasphemy can be forgiven, 29 but anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. This is a sin with eternal consequences." 30 He told them this because they were saying, "He's possessed by an evil spirit."
## NOTES
3:20 **couldn't even find time to eat.** The crowds continued to grow. In 3:9, Jesus had to get in a boat to handle the crowds; now the presence of the crowds had become constant. Mark is carefully tracing the growth of Jesus' ministry.
3:21 **to take him away.** This often refers to arresting someone, so the idea was for his family to place him in their own custody (6:17; 12:12).
**"He's out of his mind," they said.** The syntax of this verse is not entirely clear. Who was making the judgment that Jesus had gone too far in his claims and had lost his senses? The most natural reading is that some of his own family members shared this concern, since until now the crowds had been drawn to Jesus and the only opponents were members of religious parties such as the Pharisees. That would leave the nearest antecedent as _hoi par autou_ , which is a reference to family members (BDAG 756-757; Prov 31:21; Susanna 33; Josephus _Antiquities_ 1.193). This is confirmed in 3:31 as Jesus' brothers and mother seek his attention after this exchange. We know from John 7:5 that Jesus' brothers did not believe in him during a portion of his ministry and here the concern seems to be for Jesus' well being. Since official opposition to his extensive claims was rising, perhaps they desired to come and get him to prevent his being harmed. It was a well-intentioned but misguided attempt to protect Jesus (Lane [1974:138] calls it a "gross misjudgment"). Their view was that Jesus was "beside himself" and operating outside of normal boundaries. Thus the NLT's "out of his mind" conveys the sense well. Later Christians were viewed similarly (Acts 26:24-26; 1 Cor 14:23; 2 Cor 5:13; Marcus 2000:271).
3:22 **teachers of religious law.** This is a reference to the scribes (see 1:22 and note).
**He's possessed by Satan, the prince of demons.** As the NLT mg indicates, _Beel_ _zeboul_ [TG954, ZG1015] is named in the Gr. This name originally referred to a Canaanite god (Marcus 2000:272); it became an alternate way of referring to Satan as head of the demons and stands parallel to the "prince of demons" in this verse. For the hierarchy of demons in Jewish thinking, see 1QS 3:20-21 and _Testament of Solomon_ 2:9; 3:5; 6:1. Jews had many names for Satan, including Beliar/Belial ( _Jubilees_ 1:20; 2 Cor 6:15), Asmodeus (Tobit 3:8), and Mastema ( _Jubilees_ 10:8; 11:5; 17:16). The charge was important as recognition that supernatural power was at work through Jesus. There was no doubt that he was performing unusual works. The debate was over the source of his power. Later Jewish teachers also charged Jesus with practicing sorcery ( _b. Sanhedrin_ 43a; 107b; Lane 1974:142). Jesus' response to such charges follows.
3:23 **illustration.** The Gr. is plural and refers to the proverbial maxims that Jesus quoted; they are followed by a key parabolic image in 3:27 (Lane 1974:142).
**How can Satan cast out Satan?** Jesus' fundamental argument was that if Satan was casting out demons, he was undoing his own work; Jesus was asking if that really made sense.
3:24 **divided by civil war.** The NLT renders the sense of the phrase "if a kingdom is divided against itself." Jesus' point was that such internal division made a kingdom weaker and more susceptible to defeat. Satan would never follow such a strategy. "Satan has more sense than to destroy his own kingdom" (Hooker 1991:116). So that explanation for Jesus' authority was not credible. Jesus makes essentially the same point in 3:25, referring to a "family," which could refer to a dynasty of rulers, something also suggested by the idea of a kingdom or dominion.
3:26 **He would never survive.** Here the NLT renders the force of "is coming to an end." Jesus' point is still that Satan would not seek to destroy his own authority in this subversive way, which would bring his rule to an end of his own accord. Preservation, not self-destruction, is Satan's goal.
3:27 **Let me illustrate this further.** This phrase is not found in Mark. The NLT creates a transition to a fresh example that Jesus sets forth.
**tie him up.** This refers to "binding the strong man," who represents Satan. Jesus maintained that his miracles made it evident that one stronger than Satan had entered Satan's home and would plunder the power and possessions that Satan once controlled. In short, Jesus' presence meant Satan's defeat, and the miracles demonstrated this. Jesus' miracles were not evidence of power being exercised through Satan but the exact opposite. The judgment that Jesus casts out demons by Satan's power could not be more wrong. The remark shows that Jesus' battle was taking place on a cosmic, supernatural stage, since Satan was a chief enemy.
3:28 **I tell you the truth.** This introductory remark using _amēn_ [TG281, ZG297] is the first of thirteen uses of this term in Mark (excluding the occurrence after 16:8 in the shorter ending). The expression is only used with sayings of Jesus as it signifies extremely significant announcements. Jesus "solemnly guarantees the truth of what he is about to say" (Cranfield 1959:140), so this warning against blaspheming the Spirit is marked out as serious.
3:29 **anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit.** In the context of Mark, the sin was attributing to Satan work that the Spirit had done. It was the refusal to see Jesus' work and ministry as being rooted in the activity of God's Spirit. This is clear from 3:30, where Jesus refuted the charge that he was possessed by evil spirits and warned against slandering (i.e., blaspheming) the work of the Spirit. In Mark, this decisive and firm refusal to understand who Jesus is constitutes an unpardonable sin.
**eternal consequences.** The NLT brings out the effect of being guilty of an "eternal sin" by this rendering, which combines the idea of a sin that cannot be forgiven (lit., "does not have forgiveness unto the age") with that of an act having eternal duration.
3:30 **possessed by an evil spirit.** To say that Jesus "has an unclean spirit" is to suggest that a destructive spirit controlled the acts Jesus performed. The NLT rendering conveys this. In the Gr., there is an important juxtaposition here. Jesus acted by the Holy Spirit (3:29) despite the leaders' false claim that he had an unclean spirit. The verb used in the charge is in the imperfect ("they were saying"), so this charge was regularly leveled against Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This unit summarizes Mark's story to this point in his Gospel. Various opinions were gathering around Jesus' ability to heal. Only three options could explain what was taking place: (1) He had lost his mind and was thinking too highly of himself, as at least some in his family feared; (2) He was operating under the direction of a sinister power, as the scribes claimed; or (3) He was working by the power of the Spirit of God, the position Jesus defended by excluding the satanic option. The same idea is expressed in C. S. Lewis' famous "Liar, Lunatic, or Lord" options for who Jesus is, which are taken from the options Mark raises in this passage. Either Jesus lied about his authority (it was really from Satan, or was only a delusion; see 3:21), or he is Lord and his authority is from God, as affirmed by the Spirit (see 3:29).
Jesus' argument against the scribes was that if healings and exorcisms were taking place under Satan's power, then Satan was undoing his own work. It was not plausible for Satan to be consciously engaged in self-destruction. The leaders risked being guilty of an unforgivable sin if they persisted in their erroneous judgment, since they were slandering the work of God's Spirit as operative in Jesus. So the lines were drawn.
Jesus' opponents never questioned that Jesus was performing unusual deeds. The debate concerned their origin, not their existence. Mark describes the lines of the debate and warns about the eternal consequences of making the wrong choice. The blasphemy was serious, for it was "the conscious and deliberate rejection of the saving power and grace of God released through Jesus' word and act" (Lane 1974:145).
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Jesus' true family is those who do God's will (3:31-35; cf. Matt 12:46-50)
31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him. They stood outside and sent word for him to come out and talk with them. 32 There was a crowd sitting around Jesus, and someone said, "Your mother and your brothers[*] are outside asking for you."
33 Jesus replied, "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" 34 Then he looked at those around him and said, "Look, these are my mother and brothers. 35 Anyone who does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."
## NOTES
3:32 **Your mother and your brothers.** This text makes it clear that Mary had other children besides Jesus. It appears that they were seeking Jesus' attention in 3:21 as well. After "brothers," some manuscripts (AD 700) add "and your sisters." The note with this verse indicates some uncertainty about the inclusion of this phrase from the Gr. version of Mark. It was probably not original to Mark and there is good testimony against its inclusion ( B C L W). Culturally, it is unlikely that sisters would be included in seeking Jesus out in this manner (Metzger 1971:82). It also makes the remarks more parallel to 3:35, which does mention "sister." Thus, it is more likely to have been added than omitted, though an error of sight leading to omission is also possible (by skipping one phrase due to repeated mentions of _sou_ [TG4771, ZG5148]).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This short unit underscores how Jesus' presence was drawing new lines of community. The new demarcation emerges through the significance of Jesus' presence. Those who do God's will respond positively to him and become part of a new community whose shared loyalty to God might well transcend even the bond of family.
Jesus affirmed that his true family is not his biological family, but those who follow the will of God (Luke 11:27-28). Placed in this context and followed by the parables of the Kingdom, the point is to be responsive to Jesus' message about God and his plan, a message his mother and brothers were apparently struggling to accept. The account might be especially poignant if others who were responding to Jesus were facing the same lack of acceptance from family members (Marcus 2000:285-286). In effect, Jesus affirmed a new family and a new community. Since the family was the most significant of ancient relationships, this point was important. Even the most fundamental human relationships are not as central a defining point for identity and action as is loyalty to God.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Parable of the sower (4:1-20; cf. Matt 13:1-9)
1 Once again Jesus began teaching by the lakeshore. A very large crowd soon gathered around him, so he got into a boat. Then he sat in the boat while all the people remained on the shore. 2 He taught them by telling many stories in the form of parables, such as this one:
3 "Listen! A farmer went out to plant some seed. 4 As he scattered it across his field, some of the seed fell on a footpath, and the birds came and ate it. 5 Other seed fell on shallow soil with underlying rock. The seed sprouted quickly because the soil was shallow. 6 But the plant soon wilted under the hot sun, and since it didn't have deep roots, it died. 7 Other seed fell among thorns that grew up and choked out the tender plants so they produced no grain. 8 Still other seeds fell on fertile soil, and they sprouted, grew, and produced a crop that was thirty, sixty, and even a hundred times as much as had been planted!" 9 Then he said, "Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand."
10 Later, when Jesus was alone with the twelve disciples and with the others who were gathered around, they asked him what the parables meant.
11 He replied, "You are permitted to understand the secret[*] of the Kingdom of God. But I use parables for everything I say to outsiders, 12 so that the Scriptures might be fulfilled:
'When they see what I do,
they will learn nothing.
When they hear what I say,
they will not understand.
Otherwise, they will turn to me
and be forgiven.'[*]"
13 Then Jesus said to them, "If you can't understand the meaning of this parable, how will you understand all the other parables? 14 The farmer plants seed by taking God's word to others. 15 The seed that fell on the footpath represents those who hear the message, only to have Satan come at once and take it away. 16 The seed on the rocky soil represents those who hear the message and immediately receive it with joy. 17 But since they don't have deep roots, they don't last long. They fall away as soon as they have problems or are persecuted for believing God's word. 18 The seed that fell among the thorns represents others who hear God's word, 19 but all too quickly the message is crowded out by the worries of this life, the lure of wealth, and the desire for other things, so no fruit is produced. 20 And the seed that fell on good soil represents those who hear and accept God's word and produce a harvest of thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times as much as had been planted!"
## NOTES
4:1 **by the lakeshore.** This refers to the Sea of Galilee, which is about eight by fourteen miles in size.
**large crowd.** This is the largest gathering in the Gospel of Mark thus far. Jesus was still out in the open teaching people as in 3:9 (see also 2:13).
**boat.** This is the first of several boat scenes in Mark 4–8, others of which include the stilling of the storm (4:35-41), Jesus' walk on the water (6:45-52), and a discussion about leaven (8:14-21). Each of these scenes involves a criticism of the disciples, but in this first boat scene they were instructed. An ancient first-century BC–AD boat was found in Galilee in 1986. It measured 26.5 feet long by 7.5 feet wide by 4.5 feet deep (Hanson and Oakman 1998:110). It was probably typical of boats at this time.
4:2 **parables.** This term covers a wide array of teaching tools from short examples, maxims, or proverbial figures known in Heb. as _mashal_ [TH4912, ZH5442], to longer stories developed as theological illustrations (Lane 1974:150-51). The shorter ones are found in 3:23-27. Here we have a longer one.
4:3 **Listen!** The parable begins with a call to hear that marks out its importance.
**farmer.** In the Gr., this refers to a sower of seed, who was probably also a farmer, which explains the NLT rendering.
4:4 **footpath.** Alongside a field, there would often be a footpath where those traveling could walk without ruining the crops. The ground there would be packed down from all the foot travel, so seed would sit exposed on its surface where birds could get it. In Palestine, farmers sowed first and then plowed.
4:8 **thirty, sixty, and even a hundred times as much.** The seed that fell in the good soil stands in contrast to the three other seed groups that fell on the path, on shallow soil, and among the thorns. It did what seed is supposed to do, which is to bear fruit. Some seeds were more productive than others.
4:9 **should listen and understand.** This NLT rendering develops one of Jesus' common expressions—"the one with ears to hear, let him hear." The point is not merely for the sound to be perceived but for the message to be heeded, so the NLT rendering is a good one. Jesus was revealing a divine mystery (4:11), and he wanted people to pay attention to it.
4:11 **the secret of the Kingdom of God.** "Secret" renders the Gr. word for "mystery" ( _mustērion_ [TG3466, ZG3696]); Jesus' point was that the parables contained revelation about the Kingdom. This is the term's only occurence in Mark. In Mark's perspective, there are insiders and outsiders to understanding what God is doing—the disciples are privileged to know what is going on.
4:12 **learn nothing . . . not understand. Otherwise, they will turn.** This verse is a shortened citation from Isa 6:9-10. The key differences are that third person verbs open the first clause (rather than second person) and the concluding reference is to being forgiven rather than healed. These differences are like the targum of Isaiah (Marcus 2000:300). The differences so strongly paralleled in the Aramaic setting may indicate that the age of the tradition reaches back into Jesus' time. Unlike the other texts, the Gospel of Mark reverses the order of perception to seeing/hearing. Marcus (2000:300) suggests that this is because Mark liked to highlight the role of vision (8:22-26; 10:46-52; numerous times in ch 13; 15:32, 36, 39). In context, the statement explains that Isaiah's ministry was one of hardening.
**so that . . . Otherwise.** A huge debate swirls around the use of _hina_ [TG2443, ZG2671] at the beginning of the verse and _mēpote_ [TG3379, ZG3607] toward its end. Does _hina_ (in order that) mean that the purpose of the parables was to obscure belief (so Marcus 2000:299-300)? This takes the _hina_ as a final clause and stresses the Gr. Mark uses to introduce the quotation. Or does _mēpote_ (lest) introduce an indirect question and _hina_ stand as epexegetical (so Guelich 1989:211-12), so that the passage describes the effect of their failure to embrace the parables? This latter interpretation relies on the force of the commonly assumed Aramaic behind the saying (viz., "that is, seeing they learn nothing . . . if they had turned and been forgiven"). The decision here is not an easy one, especially granted that Matthew and Luke have softer renderings in Gr. (more like the proposed underlying Aramaic option—and it is likely the original saying was given in Aramaic), so that the Gr. differences are translational issues in the tradition. This Aramaic-based reading is less harsh than the way Mark's Gr. can be read. The NLT leaves the text somewhat ambiguous on this point by using "when" at the beginning of the citation and "otherwise" near the end. The OT idea of repentance is alluded to in the idea of turning ( _shub_ [TH7725, ZH8740]). In other words, parables are judgments that prevent outsiders from becoming responsive. The debate is whether that prevention is by previous divine design or the effect of an earlier lack of responsiveness. Either way, the use of parables meant that judgment was taking place.
4:14 **God's word.** Jesus begins by noting that the seed is "the word." In 4:11, the topic of this word is the message of the Kingdom, the key content of these parables. So this parable is about different ways that people respond to the word that comes from God about the Kingdom. Mark uses "the word" in this way to speak of the Gospel (1:14; 2:2; 4:33; cf. Acts 6:4; 10:36-37, 44; Col 4:3).
4:15 **The seed that fell.** This phrase is repeated with all four soils (4:16, 18, 20); it lit. reads, "these are those." The sowing imagery used in Judaism was flexible ( _4 Ezra_ 8:41; 9:31; Marcus 2000:308). In other words, the parable sometimes speaks of seed as the word that is sown (4:14), but elsewhere the seed is the different types of people with different kinds of heart attitudes into whom the word is sown (4:15, 16, 18, 20). The parable is not about the word as an abstract, isolated concept, but about the ways that the word is received and responded to once it is "taken in."
**Satan.** Some seed never has a chance to produce fruit (the goal within the imagery) because Satan snatches it from the surface of the path. In Judaism, Satan is sometimes compared to a bird ( _Apocalypse of Abraham_ 13:3-8). Despite being bound by having lost his battle with Jesus (3:27), Satan is portrayed as still being active (Hooker 1991:131).
4:16 **with joy.** The seed on the rocky soil initially reacts with openness, which sadly does not last (4:17).
4:17 **they don't have deep roots.** In Judaism, the wicked are commonly identified as rootless (Sir 23:25; 40:15; Wis 4:3; cf. Marcus 2000:309). Their temporary faith exposes them as lacking the genuine faith that brings forth fruit.
**fall away.** Gr. _skandalizontai_ [TG4624A, ZG4997]. The noun _skandalon_ [TG4625, ZG4998] refers to someone who views the message of the cross as an offense, a barrier to belief (1 Cor 1:23). To fall away is to trip over this obstacle. Jesus' point is that in these cases, the shame of persecution is greater than a person's embrace of the message, so they stumble over the message in times of trouble. This term denotes apostasy, or lack of real faith (TDNT 7:349).
**have problems.** Rootless believers fall away when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word.
4:19 **worries of this life, the lure of wealth, and the desire for other things.** The seed among thorns pictures those who get so encumbered with the basic enticements of this world that they produce no fruit. The seed again fails to accomplish its purpose. The terms used here do not appear frequently in the Synoptics. "Worries" is used elsewhere only in Luke 21:34; "lure" appears only here and in its parallel, Matt 13:22; and "desire" has no parallel akin to its use here, although it is used positively in Luke 22:15. The theme of riches and the problems of the rich are a concern (Matt 6:24-25; 19:23-24; Mark 10:25; Luke 1:53; 12:21). In this case, the failure lies with the distractions that prevent the person from benefiting from the word. The one thing the first three groups share is that none of them are fruitful. In the terms of the parable, they are all failures.
4:20 **hear and accept God's word and produce a harvest.** Here the seed reaches its goal. The word is heard, accepted, and has a yield. The idea behind the word for "accepting" is that of welcoming the word, of openly taking it in (Jas 1:21; Cranfield 1959:163).
**thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times.** These varying yields indicate that disciples have different levels of productivity. When the word reaches a prepared heart, it flourishes.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Mark 4, with its teaching on the Kingdom, is the first of two major teaching blocks in Mark, the other being the Olivet discourse in Mark 13. The opening section of Mark 4 indicates the importance of the Kingdom message to Jesus' preaching and to the hurdles he faced. Jesus began with the parable of a sower. By definition, parables teach by making a comparison and paint a picture through that comparison. What the parable of the sower depicts—the preaching of the word about the Kingdom—is not noted until 4:11, 14. This parable and those that follow, as a group, tell us important things about Jesus' message concerning the Kingdom and the plan that goes with it.
Jesus' main point is that the parables reveal the Kingdom of God. Those who get the point understand "the mystery of the Kingdom." The Greek term for mystery ( _mustērion_ [TG3466, ZG3696]) has roots in the Old Testament idea of raz [TA10661, ZA10661], where God discloses something that requires a gifted person to interpret what is said (someone like Daniel) or that is made clear with the coming of what was promised (Dan 2:18-19; 12:8-10; TDNT 4:814-821; the term also shows up at Qumran in CD 3:18; 1QH 13[5]:36; cf. Marcus 2000:298). The term is singular here, but probably operates as a collective idea. Thus, the "secret" (the "mystery") has many parts that as a whole comprise the mystery of the Kingdom. The key features of mystery in Mark 4 are tied to God's sovereign plan and to the various responses to the Kingdom, such as the great fruitfulness of those who respond, the availability of the Kingdom, the almost hidden way in which it grows, and the fact that it starts out small but ends up covering the whole earth. The disciples had access to the mystery, since the text says that it had been given to them to understand. Others did not understand, and these remained outside the Kingdom.
One of the functions of parables, as the citation from Isaiah 6:9-10 shows, is that they also judge those who are unresponsive, since they contain "concealed revelation." Those outside of Jesus' community would not understand the parables on their own. This failure to respond to what was seen and heard is a consistent theme in Mark (2:16; 3:2; 7:2-5; 11:18; 14:58, 64). Jesus compared the lack of response in Israel and his subsequent use of parables to the earlier ministry of Isaiah. In fact, Jesus' ministry, especially his use of parables, bears out the fulfillment of Isaiah 6:9-10: the judgment on a people already hardened meant that they would not be responding, for although something was put before them that they could see and hear, they did not respond with an understanding that would turn them toward forgiveness.
In 4:13, Jesus suggests that the parable of the sower is crucial to understanding the other parables, so he explains it to his disciples, thus unveiling the mystery. His explanation also relieves a tension that might suggest that 4:11 meant that the disciples should instinctively comprehend the parables without such an explanation. The advantage the disciples had over outsiders was that they had Jesus' interpretation of the parables.
The message of the parable is that there are varying degrees of receptivity to the word of God. Some people never grasp the word because Satan interferes before they even have a chance to interact with it. Others are distracted by the pressures of a world that does not welcome the message, or by the cares, concerns, and enticements of life. Many never yield fruit even when they are initially attracted to the word. By contrast, when the seed of the word encounters a receptive heart, it produces fruit in varying degrees. All disciples are urged to be receptive and fruitful, not allowing the rejection of the world to get in their way.
For these people, neither Satan, persecutions, nor the cares of this world distract them from embracing the word of the Kingdom. They will be the fruitful ones. Fruitfulness, including the imagery of large yields, was a common Old Testament metaphor portraying the blessings and products of the new age (Jer 31:12; Hos 2:21-22; Joel 2:22; Amos 9:13; Zech 8:12; Marcus 2000:295). The extraordinary sizes of the yields (a normal harvest would be about ten times the amount sown) point to the great success of the harvest (Witherington 2001:165-166).
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Parable of the lamp (4:21-25)
21 Then Jesus asked them, "Would anyone light a lamp and then put it under a basket or under a bed? Of course not! A lamp is placed on a stand, where its light will shine. 22 For everything that is hidden will eventually be brought into the open, and every secret will be brought to light. 23 Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand."
24 Then he added, "Pay close attention to what you hear. The closer you listen, the more understanding you will be given[*]—and you will receive even more. 25 To those who listen to my teaching, more understanding will be given. But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them."
## NOTES
4:21 **basket.** This was probably a two-gallon measure (Hooker 1991:133).
**Of course not!** The NLT accurately brings out the force of the rhetorical question. The structure of the initial question in Gr. expects a negative answer, just as the second expects a positive reply. The NLT breaks up the question into two clear parts with this exclamation as a transition between them. A lamp goes on a stand where it can give light.
4:22 **everything that is hidden will eventually be brought into the open.** Jesus brings a message with a note of accountability. This will accompany judgment when the Kingdom and its comprehensive character are completely revealed and the light is fully manifest in the end. Until then, the Kingdom seems like a hidden secret.
4:23 **should listen and understand.** See note on 4:9.
4:24 **The closer you listen, the more understanding you will be given.** This NLT rendering explains "the measure you give will be the measure you get back" (cf. NLT mg). The passage assumes that one will pay attention to the light and notes that such attention will be rewarded with more positive exposure to the light.
4:25 **even what little understanding they have will be taken away.** This is a warning that those who do not pay attention to the light will end up with nothing, even losing what little understanding they once had.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The main point of this parable is that the word of the Kingdom is like a light that God has set on a stand to guide people on their way and to expose what is really going on (4:22). The implication is that people should heed the light (4:23). But this parable is also enigmatic in its juxtaposition of light with that which is hidden. The Kingdom appears to be both: its character is light, but it is also hidden in that people are not seeing it for the light that it is. The Kingdom will not remain hidden forever. It is seemingly hidden now in that its full power is not evident, but even in its concealed form it will do an exposing work, and rejection of the Kingdom will one day be shown for what it is. In other words, what seems hidden now about the Kingdom's presence will one day be fully displayed and at the same time will expose all things. Jesus here notes that one of the functions of light is to expose (so Ps 119:105; Marcus 2000:318). Such exposure will take place one day in conjunction with the exercise of Kingdom authority. Even though the seed of the word gets various responses, as the previous parable showed, it will ultimately still achieve its goal of exposing what is present within people. The exhortation is to pay careful attention to the light, to hear and heed the Kingdom message. Those who do heed the message will be blessed with more revelation and blessing. Those who do not heed it will end up with nothing.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Parable of the growing seed (4:26-29)
26 Jesus also said, "The Kingdom of God is like a farmer who scatters seed on the ground. 27 Night and day, while he's asleep or awake, the seed sprouts and grows, but he does not understand how it happens. 28 The earth produces the crops on its own. First a leaf blade pushes through, then the heads of wheat are formed, and finally the grain ripens. 29 And as soon as the grain is ready, the farmer comes and harvests it with a sickle, for the harvest time has come."
## NOTES
4:28 **on its own.** The earth produces its yield automatically ( _automatē_ [TG844, ZG897]), by a process the farmer does not understand.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This parable is unique to Mark. The growth of the Kingdom is like the growth of seed. The humans who work the land do not fully understand how this growth takes place. There is something mysterious and inevitable about the Kingdom's development. God is responsible for how the crop will come to maturity.
In the end, the time will come to reap what has been sown. Harvest is an image of judgment, as Joel 3:13 indicates—a time when evil is judged and righteousness is vindicated. The seed of the Kingdom will grow, and judgment will come, even though the exact process is not clearly understood by the one who sows the seed.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. The mustard seed and a summary on parables (4:30-34; cf. Matt 13:31-35)
30 Jesus said, "How can I describe the Kingdom of God? What story should I use to illustrate it? 31 It is like a mustard seed planted in the ground. It is the smallest of all seeds, 32 but it becomes the largest of all garden plants; it grows long branches, and birds can make nests in its shade."
33 Jesus used many similar stories and illustrations to teach the people as much as they could understand. 34 In fact, in his public ministry he never taught without using parables; but afterward, when he was alone with his disciples, he explained everything to them.
## NOTES
4:31 **smallest of all seeds.** The mustard seed is proverbially called the smallest seed (TDNT 7:288).
4:32 **largest of all garden plants . . . birds can make nests in its shade.** The background to the birds nesting is probably Ezek 17:23. The small seed produces an unusually large plant that is eight to ten feet tall and one that birds can nest in. The backdrop is the replanting of the Davidic house that results in shelter (for the image of birds in the nest, see Ezek 31:6; Dan 4:12, 14, 21).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This final parable emphasizes the shelter that the Kingdom brings. There is some discussion as to whether the birds depict Gentiles, but in Mark's version of this parable that point is not clear. The summary in 4:33-34 simply reiterates that Jesus taught with parables and then explained everything to his disciples. This unit concludes one of two major discourses in Mark, the other being the Olivet discourse.
The Kingdom is the theme of Jesus' teaching. God is at work in the sowing of seed, but the seed's effectiveness is tied to the nature of its reception. The kingdom grows in mysterious ways. As light, it will expose all things and bring judgment. It will start small but grow to be a place of shelter (4:32). The kingdom may not have come in an expected way, but its coming and success are inevitable.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Jesus calms a storm (4:35-41; cf. Luke 8:22-25)
35 As evening came, Jesus said to his disciples, "Let's cross to the other side of the lake." 36 So they took Jesus in the boat and started out, leaving the crowds behind (although other boats followed). 37 But soon a fierce storm came up. High waves were breaking into the boat, and it began to fill with water.
38 Jesus was sleeping at the back of the boat with his head on a cushion. The disciples woke him up, shouting, "Teacher, don't you care that we're going to drown?"
39 When Jesus woke up, he rebuked the wind and said to the waves, "Silence! Be still!" Suddenly the wind stopped, and there was a great calm. 40 Then he asked them, "Why are you afraid? Do you still have no faith?"
41 The disciples were absolutely terrified. "Who is this man?" they asked each other. "Even the wind and waves obey him!"
## NOTES
4:37 **a fierce storm came up.** The Sea of Galilee is surrounded by hills except in the southern area, where the Jordan River exits. With certain wind patterns, air can funnel up into the lake and get trapped, creating quick and violent storms. That apparently happened in this case. Key biblical scenes involving storms and seas include Exod 14:21-31; Ps 107:23-32; Jonah 1:1-16; Acts 27.
4:38 **Jesus was sleeping.** Jesus was probably sleeping in the stern of the boat at the helmsman's station where there was some protection from getting wet. The cushion may have been a sandbag used for ballast (Marcus 2000:333). His sleeping may indicate his calm trust in God (Ps 4:8). Here is Mark's first description of discipleship failure (see the Major Themes section in the introduction).
**Teacher, don't you care that we're going to drown?** This question uses the negative particle _ou_ [TG3756, ZG4024] and is asked in a way that makes it clear that the disciples knew that Jesus cared about their well-being despite the tone of their question. The conflict shows their panic.
4:39 **he rebuked the wind and said to the waves.** This language is similar to that of an exorcism (1:25). Jesus' authority extended over creation and provoked the reflective question of 4:41. In some parts of the ancient world, the waters were associated with evil.
**Be still!** This command is lit. "Be muzzled" (Deut 25:4, LXX; 1 Tim 5:18), but the NLT picks up the effects of the muzzling: silence and peace (BDAG 1060; Luke 4:35).
4:40 **Why are you afraid?** Jesus questions their timidity; _deiloi_ [TG1169, ZG1264] indicates cowardice or lack of courage (Deut 20:8; Judg 7:3; 1 Macc 3:56). For Mark, fear is the opposite of faith (5:15-17, 36; 6:49-52; 10:32; 11:18; 16:8). Jesus' remark is a call to trust him.
**Do you still have no faith?** Jesus' final question uses the interrogative adverb _oupō_ [TG3768, ZG4037], which means "not yet" (BDAG 737). Jesus pressed the matter: "Do you still have no faith?"
4:41 **absolutely terrified.** The NLT very clearly translates the Semitic idiom retained in the Gr. "feared with great fear" (Jonah 1:10, LXX). Jesus' great authority left them in awe.
**Even the wind and waves obey him!** The remark points to Ps 107:29 and Ps 89:8-9. Jesus' actions revealed that he had divine control over creation. That such authority resided in a person left the disciples stunned. It raised the question of who Jesus was. By stopping the scene here (creating an "open ending"), Mark leaves the reader to ponder the answer to this question.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The storm must have been quite serious, since the experienced fishermen on board were terrified. Their fear of dying was much like that recorded in Jonah 1. Things were clearly beyond their control, so they asked Jesus to help. His help far exceeded their expectations; he didn't rescue them from the storm but stilled the storm itself.
This miracle begins a sequence of four miracles (see 5:1-43) that show Jesus' comprehensive authority. To begin with, creation is significant as a clearly divine domain. In ancient everyday life, perhaps no force was more powerful and omnipresent than nature. Coping with the elements was a factor of daily life, so Jesus' ability to calm the storm and his exhortation to the disciples to have faith and not be afraid was a basic lesson in their discipleship. But beyond the significance of their immediate deliverance was what this act suggested about Jesus' divine enablement. What kind of man could have power like that possessed by God? No man on his own can tame nature. The incident ends with a question about who Jesus really is. The rest of the Gospel answers that question.
In an interesting twist, 2 Maccabees 9:8 tells a story about the evil king Antiochus Epiphanes trying to calm a storm and failing. When he died, it was in part God's retribution for his trying to do something that only God had the right to do (Marcus 2000:333-334). At Qumran, such authority was said to reside in the Messiah (4Q521 2 ii 1).
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. The healing of the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20; cf. Luke 8:26-39)
1 So they arrived at the other side of the lake, in the region of the Gerasenes.[*] 2 When Jesus climbed out of the boat, a man possessed by an evil[*] spirit came out from the tombs to meet him. 3 This man lived in the burial caves and could no longer be restrained, even with a chain. 4 Whenever he was put into chains and shackles—as he often was—he snapped the chains from his wrists and smashed the shackles. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5 Day and night he wandered among the burial caves and in the hills, howling and cutting himself with sharp stones.
6 When Jesus was still some distance away, the man saw him, ran to meet him, and bowed low before him. 7 With a shriek, he screamed, "Why are you interfering with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In the name of God, I beg you, don't torture me!" 8 For Jesus had already said to the spirit, "Come out of the man, you evil spirit."
9 Then Jesus demanded, "What is your name?"
And he replied, "My name is Legion, because there are many of us inside this man." 10 Then the evil spirits begged him again and again not to send them to some distant place.
11 There happened to be a large herd of pigs feeding on the hillside nearby. 12 "Send us into those pigs," the spirits begged. "Let us enter them."
13 So Jesus gave them permission. The evil spirits came out of the man and entered the pigs, and the entire herd of about 2,000 pigs plunged down the steep hillside into the lake and drowned in the water.
14 The herdsmen fled to the nearby town and the surrounding countryside, spreading the news as they ran. People rushed out to see what had happened. 15 A crowd soon gathered around Jesus, and they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons. He was sitting there fully clothed and perfectly sane, and they were all afraid. 16 Then those who had seen what happened told the others about the demon-possessed man and the pigs. 17 And the crowd began pleading with Jesus to go away and leave them alone.
18 As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon possessed begged to go with him. 19 But Jesus said, "No, go home to your family, and tell them everything the Lord has done for you and how merciful he has been." 20 So the man started off to visit the Ten Towns[*] of that region and began to proclaim the great things Jesus had done for him; and everyone was amazed at what he told them.
## NOTES
5:1 **Gerasenes.** This is the reading in * B D. Other manuscripts read "Gadarene" (A C ) or "Gergesene" ( 2 L). The last reading is too poorly attested to be the likely original. Matthew's parallel reads "Gadarene," which possibly explains this textual variation as an effort to bring the two texts into tighter agreement. The better manuscripts of Mark have "Gerasenes" and Luke's reading is parallel to Mark. Gerasa (modern Jerash, Jordan) is about thirty-seven miles from the Sea of Galilee, while Gadara (modern Umm Qais, Jordan) is about six miles from it. In either case, the location was a predominantly Gentile area in what was known as the Decapolis region, so the tradition surrounding this miracle appears to be regional. Perhaps the better-known locale was cited rather than the actual one. Another possibility is that a lesser-known "Gerasa" on the eastern shore of Galilee was intended (so Cranfield 1959:176; Lane 1974:181).
5:2 **evil spirit.** This same expression appears in 1:23. For details, see that discussion.
5:3 **lived in the burial caves.** The tombs of the cemetery in an area outside the city were associated with death and ritual uncleanness. In later Judaism, spending the night on a grave was taken as a sign that one had gone mad ( _b. Hagigah_ 3b; Marcus 2000:343). People would want a cemetery cleansed so they could visit the graves of their loved ones (Gundry 1993:258, who also explains why an allusion to Isa 65:1-7, 11 LXX and its association of demons with tombs is not present, although the text from the prophet does show that such a connection was sometimes made).
**could no longer be restrained, even with a chain.** The attempt to fetter the man suggests that he was demon possessed and needed controlling. That the bonds could not hold him only reinforced that perception. The man's state was particularly dire; he was isolated and destructive, even self-destructive (5:5).
5:4 **he snapped the chains . . . smashed the shackles.** In Gr., the verbs are passive ("had been torn apart by him . . . had been smashed"). This unusual use of the passive may suggest that the man was not acting alone.
**No one was strong enough to subdue him.** The description reminds one of the strong man who was overcome by someone even stronger in 3:27. This man needed such a confrontation.
5:6 **bowed low before him.** The expression here is "worshiped" him, which often involved bowing before the one being honored. The only other place Mark uses this verb is at the mocking of Jesus (15:19).
5:7 **Why are you interfering with me?** Lit., "What do you have to do with me?" (see 1:24). The demon was trying to put Jesus off.
**Son of the Most High God.** The title "Most High God" is common in the LXX; Gentiles used it to refer to God (Gen 14:18-20; Num 24:16; Isa 14:14; Dan 3:26; 4:2 [3:32, LXX]; cf. 1 Esdras 2:3; 6:31; 8:19, 21; 2 Macc 3:31; 3 Macc 7:9; Acts 16:17). The title acknowledges God's residence in heaven and his sovereignty (Deut 32:8; Dan 4:17). For the title "Son of God," see the discussion of 1:1. Once again, supernatural forces make this confession (1:24).
**don't torture me!** Jesus' authority was recognized in the demons' request not to be punished. They used a term that often refers to the punishment of prisoners (BDAG 168; MM 104; NIDNTT 3:856). This is ironic since the man was already in torment, as is often the case with demon possession (1:26; 5:2-5; 9:17-18, 20-22, 26).
5:9 **Legion.** The demon has the name of the largest unit in the Roman army, consisting of 3,000–6,000 soldiers (Marcus 2000:345). The point of the name is to indicate that this man was a victim of multiple possessions. He was a severe case. It also shows that the battle Jesus faces here is one against a large number, not merely a one-on-one battle.
5:10 **begged.** The Gr. for this word is in the imperfect, so the pleading is vividly portrayed as ongoing, not as just a momentary request. Such pleas were not unprecedented in Judaism ( _Testament of Solomon_ 2:6).
**send them to some distant place.** The demons' request was that Jesus not remove them "outside the region" (as the Gr. reads). The NLT has rendered this as "some distant place." Perhaps they feared being judged and sent immediately to the abyss (see 5:7b). They may also have wanted to remain in the region where they were used to working (Guelich 1989:281).
5:11 **pigs.** The pigs indicate that this was a Gentile region; Jews would not work with these ceremonially unclean animals ( _m. Bava Qamma_ 7:7).
5:12 **Send us into those pigs.** The symbolism is important here. The unclean demons requested residence in the unclean pigs rather than experience judgment.
5:13 **the entire herd of about 2,000 pigs plunged down . . . into the lake and drowned.** This herd was large by ancient standards, as most were of about 150 animals (Gundry 1993:252). Many discuss the property damage that occurred here and raise a moral issue about what Jesus permitted. However, the damage was slight compared to what would have happened if such cosmic forces had been allowed to run around freely.
5:15 **saw the man who had been possessed . . . sitting . . . and perfectly sane.** This verse shows the evidence of the healing rather dramatically—the demoniac had a sound mind and was behaving calmly. This was quite a contrast after the people's inability to restrain him (5:4). His demon possession is expressed with a present participle ("the one who is demon possessed"). He was marked by who he had been. In 5:18, the participle switches to an aorist that describes "the one who had been demon possessed."
**they were all afraid.** In several passages in Mark, such fear is not respect for God, but a debilitating and paralyzing dread (5:36; 6:50; 9:32; 10:32; 11:18, 32; 12:12; 16:8).
5:17 **pleading with Jesus to go away.** It is not entirely clear what motivated this request for Jesus to leave. Two suggestions are that (1) the damage the healing had done to the local economy and religion was a concern. Pigs were used for food and for sacrifices in this region. How unpredictable it would be to have Jesus around! (2) More likely, however, this direct encounter with supernatural power made them uneasy. Despite the healing Jesus brought, he was not welcome. This stranger had "bound the strong man"—now who would restrain him?
5:18 **begged to go with him.** The former demoniac wanted to become a disciple who traveled with Jesus (lit., "that he might be with him"; see 3:14). In contrast to the townspeople of 5:17, this man appreciated what Jesus had done. Jesus refused the request for reasons that are not made clear.
5:19 **how merciful he has been.** Jesus told the man to stay at home and testify to what God had done for him. He was to emphasize God's mercy because divine benevolence had healed him.
5:20 **Jesus.** The man began to tell what Jesus had done. There was no way that the man could do this without including Jesus' part in the healing (Guelich 1989:286).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This miracle shows the extent of Jesus' authority over demons. Here he exorcised an entire legion of demons. The detail of the miracle is unprecedented. Much space is occupied in describing the man's helpless condition under demonic influence, including his self-destructive behavior and the devastating effects of demon possession. The unusual form of the exorcism only reinforces this impression. The journey of the pigs to their death in the sea enhances the sense of the destructiveness of Satan and his minions. The account affirms the danger of allowing evil to roam the earth unchecked, but Jesus is stronger than evil, and the demons cowered at his power. Jesus transformed the formerly possessed man and gave him new life.
As exciting as this should have been, however, those in the Decapolis wanted nothing to do with such an unpredictable divine presence or its consequences, so they asked Jesus to leave. The Gentile region was no more open to Jesus than the Jewish area was. They rejected the mercy of God.
The man who had been possessed was different. He accepted God's mercy and desired to be among those who traveled with Jesus. Denied that opportunity, he was told by Jesus to remain at home and witness to his neighbors. His call was to explain what God had done for him. Instead of being asked to keep silent as others had been, this man was encouraged to tell his story, possibly because the messianic mission (in Jewish terms) was less likely to be misunderstood in this Gentile area (for remarks that commentators on Mark overstate the theme of secrecy, see Hooker 1991:145). In fact, the man told what Jesus had done for him, or better, he "proclaimed" it ( _kērussō_ [TG2784, ZG3062]).
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. The woman with the hemorrhage and Jairus's daughter (5:21-43; cf. Luke 8:40-56)
21 Jesus got into the boat again and went back to the other side of the lake, where a large crowd gathered around him on the shore. 22 Then a leader of the local synagogue, whose name was Jairus, arrived. When he saw Jesus, he fell at his feet, 23 pleading fervently with him. "My little daughter is dying," he said. "Please come and lay your hands on her; heal her so she can live."
24 Jesus went with him, and all the people followed, crowding around him. 25 A woman in the crowd had suffered for twelve years with constant bleeding. 26 She had suffered a great deal from many doctors, and over the years she had spent everything she had to pay them, but she had gotten no better. In fact, she had gotten worse. 27 She had heard about Jesus, so she came up behind him through the crowd and touched his robe. 28 For she thought to herself, "If I can just touch his robe, I will be healed." 29 Immediately the bleeding stopped, and she could feel in her body that she had been healed of her terrible condition.
30 Jesus realized at once that healing power had gone out from him, so he turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my robe?"
31 His disciples said to him, "Look at this crowd pressing around you. How can you ask, 'Who touched me?'"
32 But he kept on looking around to see who had done it. 33 Then the frightened woman, trembling at the realization of what had happened to her, came and fell to her knees in front of him and told him what she had done. 34 And he said to her, "Daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace. Your suffering is over."
35 While he was still speaking to her, messengers arrived from the home of Jairus, the leader of the synagogue. They told him, "Your daughter is dead. There's no use troubling the Teacher now."
36 But Jesus overheard[*] them and said to Jairus, "Don't be afraid. Just have faith."
37 Then Jesus stopped the crowd and wouldn't let anyone go with him except Peter, James, and John (the brother of James). 38 When they came to the home of the synagogue leader, Jesus saw much commotion and weeping and wailing. 39 He went inside and asked, "Why all this commotion and weeping? The child isn't dead; she's only asleep."
40 The crowd laughed at him. But he made them all leave, and he took the girl's father and mother and his three disciples into the room where the girl was lying. 41 Holding her hand, he said to her, "Talitha koum," which means "Little girl, get up!" 42 And the girl, who was twelve years old, immediately stood up and walked around! They were overwhelmed and totally amazed. 43 Jesus gave them strict orders not to tell anyone what had happened, and then he told them to give her something to eat.
## NOTES
5:22 **leader of the local synagogue.** Jairus was a key figure at the synagogue who helped to direct the worship services and operate the building. A local synagogue could have more than one leader (Acts 13:15). He would have been a "lay leader." This is one of the few scenes in Mark in which a Jewish leader was responsive to Jesus.
**fell at his feet.** This prostration ( _piptō_ [TG4098, ZG4406]) indicated his respect for Jesus; the Syro-Phoenician woman will later do the same (7:25).
5:23 **is dying.** Lit., "has the last" or "has [it] terminally"; our idiom might be "is on her last leg." The leader understood that Jesus could heal her.
**lay your hands on her.** In the Heb. OT, there is no example of a healing that involved the laying on of hands. In the LXX, the idea is found in 2 Kgs 5:11 (Guelich 1989:295).
5:25 **constant bleeding.** This is lit. "a flow of blood," a euphemistic reference to vaginal bleeding. It made the woman ceremonially unclean (the language matches Lev 15:25-30) and a source of uncleanness, thus prohibiting her from marital relations and to some degree restricting a normal social life. Key Jewish texts for this condition include 11QTemple 45:7-17, 46:16-18, 48:14-17; Josephus _Antiquities_ 3.261; and _m. Niddah_. Marcus (2000:357-358) surveys the issues involved in the Jewish background of this scene. The unclean woman's social position and status were exactly opposite to those of Jairus. Jesus ministered to the whole gamut of society.
5:26 **had gotten worse.** In Judaism, doctors were viewed on a spectrum between esteem (Sir 38:1-5) and contempt ( _m. Qiddushin_ 4.14; Tob 2:10; Geulich 1989:297).
5:27 **touched his robe.** There was an ancient belief that a person's power could be conducted by his or her clothes (see 3:10; 6:56; Acts 19:12).
5:28 **If I can just touch his robe.** This is expressed as a Gr. third class condition, expressed as a pure hope with no presumption as to its likelihood. However, her willingness to violate the rules governing uncleanness showed her determination.
5:29 **the bleeding stopped.** Lit., "the well of her blood was dried up." The language reflects Lev 12:7, LXX, where the rite of cleanliness is described. The woman was restored.
**her terrible condition.** Her condition is described very graphically in Gr. as an affliction or "whipping" that had been removed (BDAG 620).
5:30 **healing power had gone out from him.** Jesus knew that someone had touched him. As one who possessed healing power and transcended any defilement that normally would result from such contact, Jesus now made public what the woman had naturally hoped would remain private.
5:31 **Who touched me?** The disciples were amazed that Jesus would ask such a question. The crowd was so tight around him that numerous people were touching him. Jesus, however, knew the difference between casual contact and what had taken place. God had acted graciously in healing this woman (Lane 1974:192-193) and she needed to understand that.
5:32 **who had done it.** This expression is feminine ("the woman who had done this"), indicating that either Jesus or the narrator knew that this was a woman. A narrative comment to that effect seems superfluous as the story makes this clear, so there is a hint here that Jesus was aware of who it was. Jesus sought her out for her sake, not his own.
5:33 **came and fell . . . and told him what she had done.** Jesus' question elicited the woman's public testimony. She was trembling because she had not been able to be healed anonymously. Would he be angry that she had made him unclean? She told "the whole truth" (so the Gr.) of what she had done and Jesus reassured her that all was well. She learned that what had taken place was not simply an ancient form of magic. While all of this went on, Jairus waited. One can only imagine how he felt about the delay in treating his daughter.
5:35 **Your daughter is dead.** The delay caused by the woman's healing was apparently devastating for Jairus and his daughter. In the messengers' view, she had died and it was too late to help her now. Jesus should be sent on his way.
5:36 **Jesus overheard them.** Jesus heard the message but continued as though nothing had been said. The NLT mg has "ignored" because the word _parakouō_ [TG3878, ZG4159] (overheard) can also mean "ignored," as it consistently does in the LXX. This is, in effect, what Jesus did (BDAG 767); he heard what the messengers said but continued on his mission to help Jairus. Having just commended the woman's faith, Jesus issued a call to recognize and trust what God could do through him. The present imperative call to faith means "keep on believing."
5:37 **except Peter, James, and John.** This is one of a handful of events, such as the Transfiguration, the Olivet discourse, and Gethsemane, where only the inner circle of the Twelve observed what took place (Taylor 1966:294). Crowds and mourners (5:40) were excluded. Luke 8:51 notes that the parents were also there.
5:38 **saw much commotion and weeping and wailing.** This is one of the clear indications that the girl had died. Mourners were customary in Judaism, although whether these were professional mourners or just friends and neighbors is not clear in Mark.
5:39 **only asleep.** This is a frequent euphemism that indicates that death is not permanent. It appears elsewhere in the NT with this meaning (see 1 Thess 5:10, with the same verb, _katheudō_ [TG2518, ZG2761]; see also Dan 12:7, LXX and Ps 87:6, LXX; Taylor 1966:295). _Genesis Rabbah_ 17.5 associates sleep with incomplete death. Jesus may be alluding to such an idea as he declares her not to be dead. Jesus knew that the girl would not remain dead; rather, her situation was more like a person taking a nap.
5:40 **laughed.** The crowd viewed Jesus' claim that the girl was not permanently dead as ridiculous. In their view, Jesus either misunderstood the tragic situation or he was being silly. _kategelōn_ [TG2606, ZG2860], the verb the NLT translates as "laughed," has a nuance of ridicule and is used only in this scene in the NT (Matt 9:24; Luke 8:53).
5:41 **Talitha koum.** Mark often uses Aramaic expressions directly and then explains them (3:17; 7:11, 34; 11:9-10; 14:36; 15:22, 34; Taylor 1966:296). Here it is Jesus' call for the girl to come back to life. As 5:42 indicates, she "arose" (aorist tense in Gr.) and "continued walking" (imperfect tense in Gr.). This miraculous resuscitation had precedent (cf. Elijah in 1 Kgs 17:17-23 and Elisha in 2 Kgs 4:18-37).
5:42 **totally amazed.** This term ( _ekstasis_ [TG1611, ZG1749]) is rare in the synoptic Gospels, appearing only here, in Mark 16:8, and in Luke 5:26. It is used only in the context of miracles.
5:43 **strict orders not to tell anyone.** Once again, Jesus restricted the discussion of this miracle. The possible reasons for this are considered in the note on Mark 1:34 (see also 1:25, 43; 3:11).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This double miracle completes a sequence of four consecutive miracles in Mark. Luke's Gospel keeps this tight sequence, while Matthew spreads these miracles across four chapters. The difference suggests that the unit is an anthology of Jesus' miraculous activities, with incidents placed side by side that show Jesus' authority over creation, demons, disease (and uncleanness), and death. His ministry had certainly taken on an unusual scope for a human. His display of power was divine. The power of the new era was overcoming the law of the old. The instantaneous nature of the woman's healing and of Jesus' immediate response indicates that something unusual had occurred. In the Greek it is clear that the power went out "from" him ( _ek_ [TG1537, ZG1666]), not "through" him (Cranfield 1959:185). Jesus was not the mere conduit of this power but its source.
The woman touched this source and was healed by her faith in that power. Jesus commended the faith of the woman who sought him out and explained that her faith had made her well (2:5; 10:52). Her willingness to recognize God's work through Jesus and to receive what God offered had restored her health. She could now go on in life knowing that she had been restored to peace (Heb., _shalom_ [TH7965, ZH8934]; Judg 18:6; 1 Sam 1:17) from the "whipping" of her disease.
Jesus' divine power was also manifest in raising Jairus's daughter after her death, but Jesus did not want to draw excessive attention to such healing. Although it underscored God's work through him, it also pictured a greater authority and deliverance that were crucial parts of his message. The danger was that people would be drawn to the miracles and remain oblivious to what they depicted—that God was uniquely working through Jesus to show his authority over creation, cosmic forces, disease, and life itself. This is the most important knowledge to grasp about Jesus.
All this activity continued despite opposition and the hesitation of some to accept what Jesus was doing. Mark wanted his readers to appreciate just how powerfully God was expressing his presence in and through Jesus.
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. Jesus faces rejection at Nazareth (6:1-6a; cf. Matt 13:53-58)
1 Jesus left that part of the country and returned with his disciples to Nazareth, his hometown. 2 The next Sabbath he began teaching in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed. They asked, "Where did he get all this wisdom and the power to perform such miracles?" 3 Then they scoffed, "He's just a carpenter, the son of Mary[*] and the brother of James, Joseph,[*] Judas, and Simon. And his sisters live right here among us." They were deeply offended and refused to believe in him.
4 Then Jesus told them, "A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family." 5 And because of their unbelief, he couldn't do any miracles among them except to place his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 And he was amazed at their unbelief.
## NOTES
6:2 **amazed.** Mark frequently uses this term to express the crowd's reaction to Jesus ( _exeplēssonto_ [TG1605, ZG1742]). In 1:22 and 11:18, the amazement is over Jesus' teaching in general. In 7:37, it is in reaction to his healing work. In 10:26, it is the reaction to his teaching about the difficulty of the wealthy entering the Kingdom. The term need not indicate belief, but simply astonishment.
6:3 **He's just a carpenter.** This is actually a question in Gr. that expects a positive reply. The NLT captures the point of the objection, which is that no common person living in Nazareth could be a major figure used by God. He worked as a "craftsman," a term often rendered "carpenter," because woodworking is the most likely referent (supported by widespread tradition in the early church associating Joseph with carpentry, though in 1 Kgs 13:19, LXX, the term refers to a stone craftsman; BDAG 995; MM 628-629). The passage then lists members of Jesus' family. These remarks about Jesus show how efforts by the apocryphal gospels to attribute miracles to a young Jesus are misguided and wrong. Nothing in these remarks indicates Jesus had done unusual acts earlier in his life. It was with the beginning of his public ministry that this kind of activity began.
**the son of Mary.** This reference is unusual because normally the son's father would be named, in this case, Joseph. It may allude to Jesus' unusual birth and show an awareness that Mary was Jesus' mother in a way that Joseph was not his father (Hurtado 1989:92). It also might simply indicate that Joseph was then deceased.
**were deeply offended.** This term ( _eskandalizonto_ [TG4624A, ZG4997]) is important in the NT; it refers to someone "tripping over" or "stumbling over" an idea so as to fall in rejecting it (see 4:17). Figuratively, it means being offended at something. It connotes a lack of belief, so the NLT reference to their refusal to believe brings out that implication.
6:4 **A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown.** This proverb appears in all the synoptic versions of this scene (Matt 13:57; Luke 4:24). There is evidence of its wide use (Taylor 1966:301).
6:5 **he couldn't do any miracles.** Jesus did not perform many miracles in Nazareth because the people were not in a frame of mind to appreciate their significance, and might attribute them to the wrong source, as 3:22 suggests.
6:6 **he was amazed.** Jesus was amazed by the Nazarenes' unbelief (on unbelief, see EDNT 1:121-123).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The people were amazed at Jesus' wisdom and miraculous power (see 5:30). Part of their amazement was that such power resided in this "hometown boy" (6:1, 3) whose family background was well known to them. Their familiar knowledge of him kept them from seeing Jesus' identity. Jesus said that "a prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown." Jesus affirmed himself as a prophet, but the people of Nazareth were hesitant to accept him at this revelatory level. If they rejected him even as a prophet, they would never entertain the thought that he was at the center of God's work for the Kingdom.
The failure of Jesus' hometown to accept even his prophetic status shows the difficulty Jesus faced in having his message received. His background was not what was expected for a major figure sent by God, so Jesus' work was restricted in Nazareth. The rising tone of Jesus' rejection took on a poignant note as it extended even into his home and family. Only the resurrection would reverse this for his brothers.
## TEXT [Commentary]
D. Challenge, Misunderstanding, and Confession (6:6b–8:26)
1. The Twelve are sent out (6:6b-13; cf. Luke 9:1-6)
6b Then Jesus went from village to village, teaching the people. 7 And he called his twelve disciples together and began sending them out two by two, giving them authority to cast out evil[*] spirits. 8 He told them to take nothing for their journey except a walking stick—no food, no traveler's bag, no money.[*] 9 He allowed them to wear sandals but not to take a change of clothes.
10 "Wherever you go," he said, "stay in the same house until you leave town. 11 But if any place refuses to welcome you or listen to you, shake its dust from your feet as you leave to show that you have abandoned those people to their fate."
12 So the disciples went out, telling everyone they met to repent of their sins and turn to God. 13 And they cast out many demons and healed many sick people, anointing them with olive oil.
## NOTES
6:7 **authority to cast out evil spirits.** Now Jesus extended his authority over demons to the Twelve. Despite opposition, the mission expanded awareness of the message. The issue of authority is important to Mark (1:22, 27; 2:10; 11:27-33). Traveling in pairs was common in Judaism (Luke 7:18; John 1:37).
6:8 **take nothing.** Jesus urged them to travel in a way that expressed both the urgency and the itinerant nature of their work.
**no traveler's bag.** Beggars and itinerant philosophers who sought donations often used this bag to collect money ( _Diogenes Laertius_ 6.13, 22; Gundry 1993:309 works through the background in detail and notes Jesus' action is distinct). Jesus forbade its use on this trip.
**no money.** This money was in copper coins.
6:9 **change of clothes.** This is lit. "two tunics," representing the luxury of a change of clothes (Taylor 1966:305). This explains the NLT rendering. The outer garment often functioned as a bedroll for poor people (Hurtado 1989:93, 97), so the point is that they were to trust God for every aspect of their care.
6:11 **shake its dust from your feet.** Culturally, this act meant that the "unclean" state of the town (for rejecting those whom God had sent) was no longer attached to the feet of the messengers (Matt 10:14; Mark 6:11; Acts 13:51; 18:6; cf. Neh 5:13).
**to show that you have abandoned those people to their fate.** This expanded rendering of the more ambiguous Gr. ("as a testimony against them") gives the symbolic meaning of the act. It also symbolized dissociation from someone.
6:12 **repent.** This key term for response to the Gospel is used in many synoptic texts (Matt 3:2; 4:17; 11:20-21; 12:41; Mark 1:15; Luke 13:3, 5; 15:7, 10).
6:13 **cast out many demons and healed many.** This summary looks like one that could be about Jesus, and that is the point. The ministry of the Twelve would replicate his ministry.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus expanded the coverage of his message by sending the Twelve out in pairs. They also had the authenticating authority over demons and disease that underscored the credibility of their message that the new era of God's rule had appeared. These messengers traveled in a way that showed their dependence upon God. Their commission was to enter a city and preach. If those in the city or town responded, then the pair of missionaries remained. If not, their departure was to make clear the city's accountability to God for rejecting the offer of the Gospel. They did this by shaking the dust off their feet. This was an act that pious Jews normally performed in leaving a Gentile city (Lane 1974:209; _m. Ohalot_ 2.3; _m. Teharot_ 4.5; _t. Bava Qamma_ I.5). As a result, the town was responsible for their decision to act like pagans. Guelich (1989:322-323) is right to say that the idea of the pagan act of the town and their culpability are both alluded to by this rebuke of the Jewish community.
The context for this passage is rejection, as the Nazareth scene precedes it and the John the Baptist scene follows. Both the forerunner and the promised One were experiencing rejection, but the word was still going forth.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. The death of John the Baptist (6:14-29; cf. Matt 14:3-12; Luke 9:7-10)
14 Herod Antipas, the king, soon heard about Jesus, because everyone was talking about him. Some were saying,[*] "This must be John the Baptist raised from the dead. That is why he can do such miracles." 15 Others said, "He's the prophet Elijah." Still others said, "He's a prophet like the other great prophets of the past."
16 When Herod heard about Jesus, he said, "John, the man I beheaded, has come back from the dead."
17 For Herod had sent soldiers to arrest and imprison John as a favor to Herodias. She had been his brother Philip's wife, but Herod had married her. 18 John had been telling Herod, "It is against God's law for you to marry your brother's wife." 19 So Herodias bore a grudge against John and wanted to kill him. But without Herod's approval she was powerless, 20 for Herod respected John; and knowing that he was a good and holy man, he protected him. Herod was greatly disturbed whenever he talked with John, but even so, he liked to listen to him.
21 Herodias's chance finally came on Herod's birthday. He gave a party for his high government officials, army officers, and the leading citizens of Galilee. 22 Then his daughter, also named Herodias,[*] came in and performed a dance that greatly pleased Herod and his guests. "Ask me for anything you like," the king said to the girl, "and I will give it to you." 23 He even vowed, "I will give you whatever you ask, up to half my kingdom!"
24 She went out and asked her mother, "What should I ask for?"
Her mother told her, "Ask for the head of John the Baptist!"
25 So the girl hurried back to the king and told him, "I want the head of John the Baptist, right now, on a tray!"
26 Then the king deeply regretted what he had said; but because of the vows he had made in front of his guests, he couldn't refuse her. 27 So he immediately sent an executioner to the prison to cut off John's head and bring it to him. The soldier beheaded John in the prison, 28 brought his head on a tray, and gave it to the girl, who took it to her mother. 29 When John's disciples heard what had happened, they came to get his body and buried it in a tomb.
## NOTES
6:14 **Herod Antipas.** He was one of the client-kings of Rome, the son of Herod the Great, and of Idumean descent. He had authority over the neighboring regions of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39.
**the king.** Officially, Herod Antipas was a "tetrarch," of lesser status than a king. However, he was popularly referred to as a king.
6:15 **Elijah.** Many regarded Jesus as some type of prophetic figure. He was called Elijah either because of his miraculous work (see 6:14) or because of Elijah's association with the end times (Mal 4:5-6).
6:16 **John, the man I beheaded, has come back from the dead.** He probably meant that the spirit of John inhabited Jesus, as Jews did not believe in an immediate individual bodily resurrection apart from the resurrection at the end times. In Acts 2 and at the close of the Gospels, Jesus' immediate bodily resurrection as himself is declared, _apart_ from the final resurrection.
6:17 **Philip's.** Some argue that Mark erred here in referring to Philip the tetrarch, but Mark probably referred to another Herod, adding the second name Philip to make his identity clear (Guelich 1989:331).
6:19 **bore a grudge.** This rare term ( _enechō_ [TG1758, ZG1923]) is used only here and in Luke 11:53 in the Gospels. It refers to someone who opposes someone or something. In Luke, it is used of the scribes and Pharisees who opposed Jesus after he rebuked them.
**without Herod's approval she was powerless.** The NLT renders the Gr. expression, "but she could not" with this explanatory detail. Without Herod's approval she could not have John killed.
6:20 **respected.** According to the Gr., Herod feared ( _phobeomai_ [TG5399, ZG5828]) John.
**he protected him.** Herod was captivated by John and respected his piety even in the face of criticism. The literal Gr. is that Herod "kept him safe."
**greatly disturbed.** The Gr. term means to be at a loss about something ( _aporeō_ [TG639, ZG679]). It describes the disciples' reaction when Jesus initially announced that he would be betrayed by one of them (John 13:22). It was the women's first reaction when they discovered the empty tomb (Luke 24:4).
6:22 **his daughter, also named Herodias.** This reading is supported by B D L. It is generally agreed that Salome is referred to here, so some speak of an error by Mark. However, it is possible that she also bore her mother's name. Another possibility is that the text follows the alternate textual reading in which she is simply identified as Herodias' daughter. That reading, found in the Textus Receptus, is not as well attested externally, but for a defense of its originality, see Gundry 1993:320. If this was Salome, she was in her middle teens.
**performed a dance.** Two options must be noted here. Either this dance was not as sexually suggestive as modern renderings tend to suggest, or Herod's family was not scrupulous as to the discretion of women in the family (Hooker 1991:161). It is hard to be sure which cultural scenario was at work here. The early church fathers describe such regal parties as similar to pagan rites (Origen _Commentary on Matthew_ 10.22; Marcus 2000:395. On Herod's lack of concern for Jewish sensibilities, see Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.38 or _War_ 2.2.5, where dancing in the family is noted). It may be that Herod was indifferent to the public behavior of his daughter.
**pleased.** The term here is _areskō_ [TG700, ZG743], which in the LXX often means being pleased by being aroused (Gen 19:8; Esth 2:4, 9; Job 31:10; cf. Jdt 12:14). The language is similar to that of Esth 2:9.
6:23 **up to half my kingdom!** This may be hyperbolic, but the point is that she was free to ask for whatever she wanted and Herod had bound himself by a public vow to honor her request. The language recalls Esth 5:3.
6:26 **he couldn't refuse her.** More lit., "he did not wish to break his word to her." The vow Herod made gave him no honorable alternatives. The culture was very much rooted in issues of honor and shame, so John had to be killed, much to Herod's regret. The term _perilupos_ [TG4036, ZG4337] means to be very sorrowful.
6:27 **executioner.** The term here is _spekoulatōr_ [TG4688, ZG5063], which refers to a body guard who does whatever the king requires. He could also perform executions (Marcus 2000:397; Tacitus _History_ 1.24-25; 2.11). As a client-king, Herod apparently had the authority to execute people.
6:28 **his head on a tray.** In the _Midrash on Esther_ 1:19-21, the head of Vashti is brought to the king on a platter (Guelich 1989:333).
6:29 **buried it in a tomb.** John's disciples were allowed to give his body an appropriate burial.
This verse also marks the end of an A-B-A pattern in ch 6 where the focus is first on rejection (1–6), then mission (7–13), and finally rejection and death (14–29). John the Baptist's fate before Herod pictures the kind of suffering those who affirm Jesus may face.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage explains how Herod killed John. The implication that Jesus ministered as though he were John the Baptist returned from the dead indicates that the injustice and guilt for executing John were being exacted in the continuation of his power despite John's death. Thus, the details about the death underscore Herod's sense of responsibility for what was continuing to take place (6:17 begins with an explanatory use of "for").
John the Baptist was arrested because he spoke out against the unlawful marriage of Herod and Herodias, who had both gotten divorced to marry each other. This was probably not the only point of contention with the law, as they had also married within the family (Lev 18:16; 20:21). One was not to marry a brother unless levirate marriage was invoked. Josephus also notes this event ( _Antiquities_ 18.5.2.116-119) and speaks of John's call to repentance as being of concern to the leader. He does not mention the marriage explicitly, although the previous section does mention the turmoil the marriage produced with King Aretas, the father of Herod's original bride.
This event is important because it shows the opposition to John's call for righteousness. Mark makes it clear that the stakes in this calling are high. One can lose one's life by speaking truth that those in power do not want to hear. The portrayal of such ruthlessness in Herod's house fits the history of his family, which often held power with an iron grip, going all the way back to Herod the Great, who even killed family members and a wife when he felt his grasp on power slipping. Mark was setting up his theme of suffering for following in God's way. John the Baptist was a forerunner to Jesus, not only in announcing his approach, but also in the pattern of obedience he represented—an obedience that cost him his life.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Jesus feeds five thousand (6:30-44; cf. Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-13)
30 The apostles returned to Jesus from their ministry tour and told him all they had done and taught. 31 Then Jesus said, "Let's go off by ourselves to a quiet place and rest awhile." He said this because there were so many people coming and going that Jesus and his apostles didn't even have time to eat.
32 So they left by boat for a quiet place, where they could be alone. 33 But many people recognized them and saw them leaving, and people from many towns ran ahead along the shore and got there ahead of them. 34 Jesus saw the huge crowd as he stepped from the boat, and he had compassion on them because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things.
35 Late in the afternoon his disciples came to him and said, "This is a remote place, and it's already getting late. 36 Send the crowds away so they can go to the nearby farms and villages and buy something to eat."
37 But Jesus said, "You feed them."
"With what?" they asked. "We'd have to work for months to earn enough money[*] to buy food for all these people!"
38 "How much bread do you have?" he asked. "Go and find out."
They came back and reported, "We have five loaves of bread and two fish."
39 Then Jesus told the disciples to have the people sit down in groups on the green grass. 40 So they sat down in groups of fifty or a hundred.
41 Jesus took the five loaves and two fish, looked up toward heaven, and blessed them. Then, breaking the loaves into pieces, he kept giving the bread to the disciples so they could distribute it to the people. He also divided the fish for everyone to share. 42 They all ate as much as they wanted, 43 and afterward, the disciples picked up twelve baskets of leftover bread and fish. 44 A total of 5,000 men and their families were fed.[*]
## NOTES
6:31 **to a quiet place.** This refers to a place in the wilderness ( _erēmos_ [TG2048A, ZG2245]), which 6:39 makes clear was not a wasteland but an isolated location. In 1:35, Jesus sought such a place to pray. By 1:45, he had to seek such space in order to handle the crowds, which were now so great that he needed a lonely place away from where he was ministering. In the midst of opposition, Jesus was still drawing crowds, and this continued to make him a threat. In John 6, this miracle is parallel to the provision of manna in the wilderness of the Exodus. It may be that the wilderness locale evoked such symbolism. The exact location of this event is not known. If Jesus was ministering in his normal setting, he could have been anywhere on the northern half of the Sea of Galilee.
6:34 **had compassion on them.** The leaderless condition of the people moved Jesus to compassion and he taught them despite his need for quiet time. Jesus was often moved to act out of his compassion (1:41; 6:34; 8:2; 9:22; Matt 9:36; 14:14; 15:32; 20:34; Luke 7:13).
6:37 **You feed them.** The disciples urged Jesus to let the people go get a meal since it was late and they had no food. Instead, Jesus challenged the disciples to feed the crowd.
**We'd have to work for months.** The Gr. indicates wages of 200 denarii (so NLT mg). This was almost a half-year's labor. The disciples were shocked that Jesus would expect them to buy and haul such provisions to this locale. There is almost a note of rebuke in their response that Jesus would make such a crazy suggestion. The disciples are totally clueless as to Jesus' real intent in making such a provision. This stark portrayal of them is softened in the parallel Gospels.
6:39 **green grass.** This is a particularly vivid detail. The scene has a serene, pastoral feel (cf. Ps 23:1-2), even though it was not yet clear where all the food would come from. The mood contrasts with the dilemma.
6:40 **fifty or a hundred.** Such groupings would facilitate distribution.
6:41 **He also divided the fish for everyone to share.** The Gr. explicitly says that two fish were divided among the vast crowd. Although some associate this scene with the Last Supper (see 14:23), the way Jesus gives thanks here is generic to all such scenes. The point is that all had their needs met and were satisfied by what Jesus provided (6:42). The miracle of Jesus' creative power also affirmed his ability to give sustenance.
6:43 **twelve baskets.** Jesus provided even more resources than were needed. The baskets in which the excess was collected were large enough to hold a human (Acts 9:25; Taylor 1966:325). The "twelve" may point to meeting the needs of the twelve tribes of Israel.
6:44 **5,000 men.** The crowd was significantly large. Since there were 5,000 men, the crowd was actually larger.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this section, we see Jesus as provider and protector. In this scene, he compassionately feeds a people in need. The idea of people lacking a shepherd has rich Old Testament roots. In Numbers 27:17, Moses appointed Joshua to such a role in view of his own impending death, so that the people would not be sheep without a shepherd. In Ezekiel 34, God rebuked the Jewish leaders for not being the shepherds he had called them to be (see Ezek 34:4). God said that he would be their shepherd, and that he would give them a shepherd from the house of David (Ezek 34:24). Mark portrays Jesus as stepping into that role, a depiction shared by Johns' Gospel (esp. John 10). Jesus was a leader-shepherd like Moses and Joshua, but greater than them because Jesus, through his creative power, provided a crowd of 5,000 men with an abundance of food. He not only met their need, but he did so to overflowing, as twelve huge baskets were filled with leftovers. Jesus was more than able to meet their basic needs.
All of this happened through the disciples that Jesus urged to make provision for the crowd. Incredulous at first, the disciples followed Jesus' instructions and met the people's need. Though real food was given, the scene is symbolic of how the disciples would be able to provide life-giving nourishment to those they served. A picture of their future ministry emerges here, although subsequent events show that they did not yet grasp the point.
A note on structure is also helpful here. We have two miracles that mention feeding (6:37, 52) connected to the disciple's failure framing a section which centers first on the connection between the disciples' failure and the Pharisees (also called "hardened" in 3:5 and 10:5 as the disciples are in 6:52) and then on the "little people" who do well. Failure is not a given. Some get it.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus walks on water (6:45-52; cf. Matt 14:22-33; John 6:14-21)
45 Immediately after this, Jesus insisted that his disciples get back into the boat and head across the lake to Bethsaida, while he sent the people home. 46 After telling everyone good-bye, he went up into the hills by himself to pray.
47 Late that night, the disciples were in their boat in the middle of the lake, and Jesus was alone on land. 48 He saw that they were in serious trouble, rowing hard and struggling against the wind and waves. About three o'clock in the morning[*] Jesus came toward them, walking on the water. He intended to go past them, 49 but when they saw him walking on the water, they cried out in terror, thinking he was a ghost. 50 They were all terrified when they saw him.
But Jesus spoke to them at once. "Don't be afraid," he said. "Take courage! I am here " 51 Then he climbed into the boat, and the wind stopped. They were totally amazed, 52 for they still didn't understand the significance of the miracle of the loaves. Their hearts were too hard to take it in.
## NOTES
6:45 **Bethsaida.** This village was located at the northern tip of the Sea of Galilee at the mouth of the Jordan River. In 8:22, it is the setting for the healing of a blind man. In Matt 11:21 (cf. Luke 10:13), it is one of the villages over which Jesus pronounced a woe.
6:46 **he went up into the hills by himself to pray.** Jesus again sought solitude with God (see 6:31). This is the last mention of Jesus praying until Gethsemane in ch 14.
6:48 **they were in serious trouble.** The imagery in the Gr. is of "being tormented in [their] rowing." They were not making progress, and rowing was a struggle. The wind was against them, and it was very late (the "fourth watch," or "three o'clock in the morning" as the NLT puts it). The fourth watch ( _phulakē_ ) in Roman reckoning actually indicated a time somewhere between three and six in the morning (BDAG 1067). Thus, they had been rowing in rough water for up to nine hours, assuming they left at dusk.
**walking on the water.** Here is another miracle showing Jesus' control over creation. Hurtado (1989:103) notes this as the second sea miracle in Mark (4:35-41; cf. Job 9:8; Ps 77:19, which speak of God possessing such power). Jesus was crossing the lake more easily on foot than the men were by using the oars.
6:50 **I am here!** It is hard to be certain of the Gr. meaning here, which reads _egō_ _eimi_ and can be rendered as "I am" or "it is I." The NLT has rendered it as Jesus' simple declaration of his presence. Some suggest that it echoes the self-identification of God (Isa 43:25; 48:12; 51:12) with a force like that in Exod 3:14. If this is the idea, it is subtly expressed.
6:51 **totally amazed.** This is the last time in Mark that people react in amazement at what Jesus has done (the paralytic, 2:12; raising of Jairus's daughter, 5:42). In each case a divine act caused the amazement (forgiving sins, raising from the dead, walking on water, halting the wind).
6:52 **didn't understand . . . Their hearts were too hard to take it in.** This remark makes it clear that there was more to these miracles than merely feeding people or calming nature. They pointed to who Jesus was, but even the disciples missed this (at least initially). Matthew 14:33 seems to indicate they did eventually get the point and understood the act pointed to Jesus' identity as the Son of God. Mark's comment here fits his thematic pattern of noting how the disciples often failed. Of the evangelists, only Mark ties the disciples' failure to hardened hearts. When they reacted instinctively to Jesus, rather than with a dependent faith, they reacted in a wrong way; they eventually outgrow this pattern, as Acts shows.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Once again Jesus showed his power over creation and astounded the disciples who were still trying to grasp Jesus' identity. Jesus' walk on the water startled them and caught them unprepared, as it would most anyone. The disciples thought he was an apparition or spirit ( _phantasma_ [TG5326, ZG5753]). In Jewish thought, such a being might be perceived as a demon, often associated with the sea and chaos (Hurtado 1989:106). Even more mysterious, the text says that Jesus' initial intent was simply to walk past the boat over to the other side. Only the disciples' reaction stopped him. Some scholars understand Jesus' wanting to pass them by as being like God's "passing by" Moses (Exod 33:17–34:8; Marcus 2000:426). This idea of divine revelation can be affirmed by Jesus' statement in 6:50— _egō_ _eimi_ (see note). Jesus responded to the disciples' cry and revealed himself to them. He had placed himself in a position to encourage them if they sought his aid and could understand his power. Two Old Testament figures, Moses and Elijah, are associated with miraculous events concerning water (Exod 14:21-22; 2 Kgs 2:8). However, both of these were partings of the water; Jesus' act was without precedent.
For a second time, Jesus miraculously calmed the weather and thereby revealed his divine power, but the disciples' hearts were hardened and they did not yet understand (6:52). Mark indicates that the disciples did not yet appreciate the creative, life-giving, divine power at work in Jesus. They had failed to learn the lesson of the feeding of the multitudes. (Mark will say this again of the disciples in 8:17.) This ending differs from Matthew's positive conclusion in which the disciples bow before Jesus and declare him to be the Son of God. However, in Matthew's context, it may be that they recognized Jesus' messianic authority but still without appreciating fully who they were confessing. In short, Matthew saw the glass of the disciples' understanding as half full, while Mark saw it as half empty.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Healing of the sick in Gennesaret (6:53-56; cf. Matt 14:34-36)
53 After they had crossed the lake, they landed at Gennesaret. They brought the boat to shore 54 and climbed out. The people recognized Jesus at once, 55 and they ran throughout the whole area, carrying sick people on mats to wherever they heard he was. 56 Wherever he went—in villages, cities, or the countryside—they brought the sick out to the marketplaces. They begged him to let the sick touch at least the fringe of his robe, and all who touched him were healed.
## NOTES
6:53 **Gennesaret.** The exact location is not certain. It is either a small plain on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee south of Capernaum or a town on that plain (Lane 1974:239).
6:56 **to let the sick touch at least the fringe of his robe.** The attitude here is like that of the woman in 5:25-28 (see note on 3:10 about touching; see also Acts 5:15; 19:11-12 for healing through touch).
**the fringe of his robe.** The reference is probably to the tassels on the fringe of Jewish garments that signified dedication to God (Hurtado 1989:91; Marcus 2000:437; Num 15:38-40; Deut 22:12; Matt 23:5).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This summary shows that Jesus was continuing his ministry of compassion (see 3:7-12) even though the crowds did not really understand his work. Jesus' comprehensive power attested to his divine identity, but the people continued to see him as a wonder-worker. For Mark, this was an unfortunate attitude, because Jesus was so much more than this.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Jesus' views on cleanliness and purity (7:1-23; cf. Matt 15:1-20)
1 One day some Pharisees and teachers of religious law arrived from Jerusalem to see Jesus. 2 They noticed that some of his disciples failed to follow the Jewish ritual of hand washing before eating. 3 (The Jews, especially the Pharisees, do not eat until they have poured water over their cupped hands,[*] as required by their ancient traditions. 4 Similarly, they don't eat anything from the market until they immerse their hands[*] in water. This is but one of many traditions they have clung to—such as their ceremonial washing of cups, pitchers, and kettles.[*])
5 So the Pharisees and teachers of religious law asked him, "Why don't your disciples follow our age-old tradition? They eat without first performing the hand-washing ceremony."
6 Jesus replied, "You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you, for he wrote,
'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7 Their worship is a farce,
for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God.'[*]
8 For you ignore God's law and substitute your own tradition."
9 Then he said, "You skillfully sidestep God's law in order to hold on to your own tradition. 10 For instance, Moses gave you this law from God: 'Honor your father and mother,'[*] and 'Anyone who speaks disrespectfully of father or mother must be put to death.'[*] 11 But you say it is all right for people to say to their parents, 'Sorry, I can't help you. For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you.'[*] 12 In this way, you let them disregard their needy parents. 13 And so you cancel the word of God in order to hand down your own tradition. And this is only one example among many others."
14 Then Jesus called to the crowd to come and hear. "All of you listen," he said, "and try to understand. 15 It's not what goes into your body that defiles you; you are defiled by what comes from your heart.[*]"
17 Then Jesus went into a house to get away from the crowd, and his disciples asked him what he meant by the parable he had just used. 18 "Don't you understand either?" he asked. "Can't you see that the food you put into your body cannot defile you? 19 Food doesn't go into your heart, but only passes through the stomach and then goes into the sewer." (By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God's eyes.)
20 And then he added, "It is what comes from inside that defiles you. 21 For from within, out of a person's heart, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, 22 adultery, greed, wickedness, deceit, lustful desires, envy, slander, pride, and foolishness. 23 All these vile things come from within; they are what defile you."
## NOTES
7:2 **hand washing before eating.** Mark explains this practice in 7:3. This is one indication that his audience was not primarily Jewish.
7:3 **poured water over their cupped hands.** The practice was to wash "the fist" (cf. NLT mg), but the exact meaning of this term is disputed. Did it mean one washed up to the wrist? Did it indicate the amount of water to be poured? Did one pour with a cupped hand? The full details are not clear, but it seems that only a small amount of water was needed to meet the requirement. Hooker notes that the instruction from the Mishnah ( _m. Yadayim_ 1.1; 2.3) was to use an amount of water equivalent to the size of one and a half eggs. Observance of this custom was especially important after coming from the marketplace, where uncleanness might easily be contracted (cf. _y. Shevi'it_ 6.1, 36c; Marcus 2000:442).
**required by their ancient traditions.** Lit., "the tradition of the elders" (for discussion on this, see Josephus _Antiquities_ 13.297, 408). According to the law, priests were to wash their hands before offering a sacrifice (Num 18:8-13), something that kept them from becoming "common" or unclean (Lev 15:11, LXX). This instruction was then extended to lay people in the first century, especially by the Pharisees and Essenes (Guelich 1989:363-364; Hooker 1991:174-175; _b. Hullin_ 105a, 106a-b; _b. Shabbat_ 13b-14b). The Pharisees appear to be pressing Jesus on this matter.
7:4 **ceremonial washing of cups, pitchers, and kettles.** Commands regarding washings and issues of cleanliness covering all kinds of situations can be found in Lev 11–15. Jewish tradition came to expand this practice to discuss the specific objects washed in detail so as to protect a person from uncleanliness. This raised issues of _teharot_ (cleannesses) for the Jews, something an entire order of the Mishnah discusses in twelve tractates, one of which ( _m. Yadayim_ ) is entirely on the subject of hands (Guelich 1989:364; also Jdt 12:7; _Epistle of Aristeas_ 305; _Sibylline Oracles_ 3:591-593).
7:5 **follow our age-old tradition.** Lit., "walk according to the tradition of the elders." To "walk" in Judaism is to "live" in a certain way. Jewish _halakha_ (from the verb for "go" or "walk") taught about the walk of actual religious life and practice. The expression "tradition of the elders" refers back to 7:3.
7:6-7 **You hypocrites!** This phrase is far more common in Matthew (thirteen times) than in Mark, where this is its only use. Luke uses it three times. A hypocrite is really an "actor" (LSJ 1886), and not the person he or she appears to be.
**their hearts are far from me. . . . Their worship is a farce for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God.** The citation is from Isa 29:13, especially as it appears in the LXX.
7:8 **substitute your own tradition.** Lit., "hold fast the tradition of men." By saying this, Jesus demoted the "elders" (Gundry 1993:351). If they did not act in accord with God's will, then their authority was worthless. The point is important. Religious authority is derived from God and from following him; it is not a matter of appointment or appearances.
7:9 **skillfully sidestep God's law.** The language here is actually a little stronger than the NLT suggests. The Gr. reads, "You reject the command of God well." Jesus argued that they were in complete disobedience. The adverb "well" adds a touch of sarcasm, because they did this so "beautifully" ( _kalōs_ [TG2573, ZG2822]).
**in order to hold on to your own tradition.** Their rejection was to "establish" or "validate" their tradition. God's voice was muted by their tradition. The next few verses illustrate how this worked.
7:10 **Honor your father and mother.** Jesus' example was not an obscure law but one of the Ten Commandments. In Judaism, honoring one's parents was one of the most important duties a person could undertake (Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16; cf. Exod 21:17; Lev 20:9).
**Anyone who speaks disrespectfully of father or mother must be put to death.** The death penalty shows the seriousness of the violation of cursing one's parents.
7:11 **But you say.** What Moses said (see 7:10) stood in contrast to what "you say." It was commandment versus tradition, and tradition had won.
**vowed to give to God.** Jesus was discussing the "Corban" (cf. NLT mg), a vow that cancelled other obligations. The term "corban" means "gift" and the associated vow designated something one owned as belonging to God and thus rendered it unusable for any other purpose (Lev 2:1, 4, 12-13; Josephus _Antiquities_ 4.73; _Against Apion_ 1.167; _m. Nedarim_ 5.6). Taking this religious vow either prevented a person from using his resources to help care for his parents or became such a focal point that he simply disregarded their needs. Jesus saw the act as a violation of the divine command to honor one's parents. An ancient ossuary has this inscription over it to protect the contents, "All that a man may find to his profit in this ossuary is an offering ( _qorban_ [TH7133, ZH7933]) to God from him who is within it" (Hooker 1991:177). By the third century, this practice was rejected in Judaism but apparently only after some debate ( _m. Nedarim_ 9.1; Marcus 2000:445; Guelich 1989:369-370). Jesus may not be rebuking all Pharisees here, but those among them who were so strict about such vows and traditions.
7:12 **disregard their needy parents.** They no longer did anything on behalf of their parents because the vow to God released them from their obligations.
7:13 **you cancel.** They cancelled or set aside God's word by giving such a controlling status to tradition. This verb ( _akuroō_ [TG208, ZG218]) is used only three times in the NT (in the parallel Matt 15:6 and in Gal 3:17).
7:14 **the crowd.** Jesus broadened his remarks beyond the Pharisees and scribes; he called on the crowd to really comprehend what he was saying.
7:15 **you are defiled by what comes from your heart.** Lit., "the things that come out of a person are the common [or defiled] things of a person." The NLT rendering anticipates the detailed explanation Jesus gives to the disciples in 7:21, where the heart is prominent.
7:16 This verse is not in the earlier MSS of Mark ( B L 0274) and thus it is absent in many recent translations. It restates the call to hear already given in 7:14.
7:18 **Can't you see?** This question expects a positive reply. They should be able to make this observation.
**cannot defile you.** Jesus turned his attention from hand washing to food. He explained why food is not an ultimate concern, since it both enters and exits the body (7:19). In this, Jesus was in continuity with the OT prophets (Isa 1:10-20; Amos 5:21-27; Hurtado 1989:111).
7:19 **goes into the sewer.** The NLT renders the imagery as graphically as the Gr. does.
**By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God's eyes.** The Gr. is a participial phrase, "cleaning all foods." As he often does, Mark treats this as a narrative aside, indicating that this was his own remark about what Jesus said (3:30; 5:8; 7:3-4; 13:14). The disciples probably did not realize this implication at the time, but they came to appreciate the saying later. Peter's vision of the sheet with all kinds of food on it in Acts 10 shows that it was several years before the disciples realized how God viewed this issue of food. The NT relates ongoing discussion about appropriate diet (Rom 14; Gal 2:1-21). In making such remarks, Jesus showed his authority over the law, which discussed clean and unclean foods.
7:20 **what comes from inside . . . defiles you.** The key principle for Jesus is that it is what proceeds from within, from the heart (7:21)—actions and thoughts that impact relationships—that defiles a person.
7:21 **evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder.** This list of vices resembles the "deeds of the flesh" in Gal 5:19-21 (cf. Wis 14:25-26; 1QS 4:9-11; Rom 1:29-31; 1 Pet 4:13). Such lists were common, and some were very long (Philo _Sacrifices of Cain and Abel_ 32 has 150 items; Marcus 2000:459). These destructive behaviors damage relationships. The "evil thoughts" almost have the force of "evil devising" because the term for "thoughts" includes the idea of "pondering" (Taylor 1966:345). How one handles the sexuality of the body, possessions, and life completes the list in 7:21. Completing the list in 7:22 are marital infidelity, an unhealthy desire for possessions, a misleading lack of integrity, general lack of decency, jealousy of others (lit., "an evil eye"), false accusation, arrogance, and a flippant lack of judgment. On the evil eye, see Deut 15:9; Prov 28:22; Sir 14:8-10; 35:8-10.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage is significant because it presents Jesus' handling of traditional Jewish issues and his attitude about certain laws. Part of Jesus' defense of his disciples' not washing their hands before the meal to prevent ritual uncleanness was to accuse the Pharisees of majoring on minors and adding to the law, while hypocritically honoring God with their lips but not with their hearts. Furthermore, they nullified God's commands for the sake of their tradition (7:6-8). In light of this, Jesus cited Isaiah's identical complaint against Israel centuries earlier. The age-old tradition was met by an appeal to age-old prophecy. Isaiah's rebuke comprehensively addressed hearts distant from God, empty worship, and commands to follow man-made teachings. For words and inner actions to be estranged constituted a serious offense by a people who were to honor God with heart, mind, and strength as the key Jewish confession of Deuteronomy 6:4-5 urged. This confession was affirmed regularly, but Jesus said that their practices violated it. Jesus complained that their worship was empty ( _matēn_ [TG3155, ZG3472]), an expression that the NLT renders as a farce, thus communicating the emotional force of the idea. The LXX makes the point about empty worship more explicitly than the Hebrew, but the idea is implied in what the Hebrew says (Guelich 1989:366-367).
Jesus then illustrated their hypocrisy with the example of the Corban (see notes on 7:9-13). The "handed down" tradition passed on from generation to generation got more attention and was valued more than God's word. The Corban example was but one among many. In a few verses, Jesus said that they had neglected and nullified God's word (Guelich 1989:370).
Jesus then exposed their whole notion of ritual purity. His statement is potent: "It's not what goes into your body that defiles you; you are defiled by what comes from your heart." He then said that the things that really damage our lives are not those things that come from creation, but the ways in which we treat one another. A series of vices that are mostly relational or tied to thought processes are specified in 7:21-22. Mark calls this remark a "parable" in 7:17, where that term takes on the meaning of a "wise saying." The remark in its original Jewish setting did not reject the food laws, as it seems clear from Acts that the early church in Jerusalem continued such practices. Jesus was not challenging or rejecting purity and food laws, but stating the priority of relationships, much as the prophets challenged sacrifices by saying that God wanted true hearts (Hos 6:6; Hooker 1991:179). The effect of the remark, however, was to relativize the importance of such practices. Gundry (1993:354) notes that Isaiah's distinction between lips and heart may have motivated the remark. Jesus was criticizing the idea that unwashed hands transmitted the uncleanness of common food to the eater (Marcus 2000:446). The point is not about hygiene but about ritual purity and spirituality. In the Mishnah ( _m. Eduyyot_ 5.6), there is an account of a rabbi who questioned such cleansing practices and was put under a ban (a call to separate that ended with a stone being placed on his coffin to show the rejection of his teaching). Such an account shows how serious Jesus' remarks were.
Here Jesus pronounced an authoritative ruling: what defiles is not what goes into a person only to be biologically eliminated, but what comes forth from the heart. This makes the food law relative without explicitly annulling it. It states that what God is most concerned about is the heart and relationships. Numerous passages about Jesus show him making this point, whether in the texts from Matthew in which Jesus cites Hosea 6:6 (Matt 9:13; 12:7) or in his complaining that the leaders tithed but neglected major things such as justice and love (Matt 23:23; Luke 11:42). That such a saying came to be seen as removing distinctions between clean and unclean foods is not surprising, given Jesus' focus on issues tied to behavior over those about the condition of food.
Two key concerns emerge from this text. The first has to do with Jesus' definition of spirituality in terms of heart actions, thought, and interaction with others. This is an extension of Jesus' emphasis on the law of loving God and loving one's neighbor, where the focus is on right relationship. The second is the implication that Jesus' remarks had for his own authority. Who had the right to make pronouncements about issues tied to Jewish tradition and to the law? Jesus' apparent comfort in speaking on matters pertaining to the law and with making judgments about them suggests a self-understanding that he could speak for God in his divine role and call.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. The Syrophoenician woman's faith leads to healing (7:24-30; cf. Matt 15:21-28)
24 Then Jesus left Galilee and went north to the region of Tyre.[*] He didn't want anyone to know which house he was staying in, but he couldn't keep it a secret. 25 Right away a woman who had heard about him came and fell at his feet. Her little girl was possessed by an evil[*] spirit, 26 and she begged him to cast out the demon from her daughter.
Since she was a Gentile, born in Syrian Phoenicia, 27 Jesus told her, "First I should feed the children—my own family, the Jews.[*] It isn't right to take food from the children and throw it to the dogs."
28 She replied, "That's true, Lord, but even the dogs under the table are allowed to eat the scraps from the children's plates."
29 "Good answer!" he said. "Now go home, for the demon has left your daughter." 30 And when she arrived home, she found her little girl lying quietly in bed, and the demon was gone.
## NOTES
7:24 **Tyre.** Relations were strained between Galilee and Tyre since agricultural resources often migrated from Galilee to Tyre, leaving some Jewish folks in Galilee with little to eat (Josephus _Against Apion_ 1.13).
7:25 **fell at his feet.** This act of respect shows that the woman saw Jesus as superior to herself. The only other one to do this in Mark is Jairus (5:22).
**evil spirit.** Lit., "unclean spirit," (see 1:23 and note); the description sets up yet another exorcism. This miracle deals with another kind of uncleanness from that just discussed in 7:1-23. Jesus was battling for people against the unclean spirits.
7:26 **born in Syrian Phoenicia.** This description gives the woman's specific nationality. She was from an area north of Israel in the Roman province of Syria (which includes modern day Lebanon), rather than from Libya.
7:29 **the demon has left.** Jesus proclaimed that the healing was complete as a result of the woman's response of faith, a fact confirmed in 7:30. Like the centurion of Luke 7, this Gentile appreciated Jesus' authority.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Once again, Jesus was trying to gain some time away from the crowds. This time he went to a Gentile region in the hope that leaving Israel would give him a break. The effort was not successful. Right away he encountered a Syrophoenician woman who begged him to heal her demon-possessed daughter.
The verbal exchange between Jesus and the woman is remarkable. He told her, "It isn't right to take food from the children and throw it to the dogs." This proverbial statement compared Israelites to children (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:6; Hos 11:1) and people of other nations to dogs. Both are a part of the home but caring for the family comes before caring for pets. The dogs in this image are not scavengers or wild dogs, so the image is not as derogatory of Gentiles as it could be. It is a way of picturing Israel's priority as covenant recipients at this time. Many claim that the Gospels reflect a later church attitude, but this saying is clearly rooted in Jesus' ministry, given the way Gentiles are placed second to Israelites (Hurtado 1989:115).
The woman's response is remarkable: "That's true, Lord, but even the dogs under the table are allowed to eat the scraps from the children's plates." The woman accepted Jesus' point but added that even pets get some of the leftovers. Since the imagery has the pet dogs under the table and accepting what fell to them, her reply showed a humility and persistence that Jesus honored as exemplary faith. She clearly believed that Jesus could heal her child even though she was a Gentile.
This passage shows Jesus acting on behalf of a Gentile; it also highlights a Gentile that was more responsive to Jesus than most Israelites. The text shows Jesus' initial focus on Israel, but his compassion extended to anyone who recognized his or her need and Jesus' ability to meet it. Mark has now given us one exemplary male and one exemplary female Gentile, showing the balance in Jesus' ministry (the demoniac of Mark 5 likely was a Gentile since he lived in a region where pigs were raised). However, there is another important contrast: that between the failure of the disciples in this section of Mark and the faith and response of both the deaf mute (a male) and the Syro-Phoenician woman. Once again, common people do well.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Jesus heals a deaf and mute man (7:31-37; cf. Matt 15:29-31)
31 Jesus left Tyre and went up to Sidon before going back to the Sea of Galilee and the region of the Ten Towns.[*] 32 A deaf man with a speech impediment was brought to him, and the people begged Jesus to lay his hands on the man to heal him.
33 Jesus led him away from the crowd so they could be alone. He put his fingers into the man's ears. Then, spitting on his own fingers, he touched the man's tongue. 34 Looking up to heaven, he sighed and said, "Ephphatha," which means, "Be opened!" 35 Instantly the man could hear perfectly, and his tongue was freed so he could speak plainly!
36 Jesus told the crowd not to tell anyone, but the more he told them not to, the more they spread the news. 37 They were completely amazed and said again and again, "Everything he does is wonderful. He even makes the deaf to hear and gives speech to those who cannot speak."
## NOTES
7:31 **Ten Towns.** This was the Decapolis, a predominantly Gentile region consisting of ten towns east of the Jordan River. Jesus is now moving outside of Israel, a hint of where the church will go.
7:32 **man with a speech impediment.** The Gr. term _mogilalos_ [TG3424A, ZG3652] is used only here in the NT and only at Isa 35:6 in the LXX (see commentary).
7:33 **touched the man's tongue.** In this verse, either Jesus was making clear by his actions what he intended to do or these actions reflected other healings of this type in the ancient world (cf. Hurtado 1989:117; Mark 8:23; John 9:6; and the healings alleged of Vespasian, an emperor who came after Jesus—Tacitus _Histories_ 4.81; Suetonius _Vespasian_ 7; Taylor 1966:354).
7:34 **Looking up to heaven.** Jesus showed his connection with heaven.
**Ephphatha.** Mark again simply repeats the Aramaic (see 3:17 NLT mg; 5:41; 11:9-10 NLT mg; 14:36; 15:22, 34), then translates it into Gr. as "be opened."
7:35 **his tongue was freed.** The Gr. metaphor is hard to render in English. It says, "The bonds of his tongue were loosed." His tongue was "unshackled" (Marcus 2000:475).
7:36 **told the crowd not to tell anyone.** Since 1:25, Jesus has attempted to silence efforts to promote his healings (1:34, 44-45; 3:12; 8:26; see comments on the "messianic secret" in the Major Themes section of the introduction). The crowds that gathered for the healings were becoming very large, and people continued to speak even more openly. The verbs here are imperfect, so Jesus was continually making such efforts, and the people were continually declaring his work.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Yet another miracle focuses on what God was doing through Jesus. As he looked to heaven, Jesus healed a deaf and dumb man. The entire act evoked the hope of Isaiah 35, an important prediction of a future time when God would heal the blind, deaf, lame, and mute. The last statement of the passage ("He even makes the deaf to hear and gives speech to those who cannot speak") echoes Isaiah 35:6 and its prediction that at a special time, God would work to heal his people. The statement may allude to the entire context of Isaiah 35:1-10.
God was working through Jesus in a special way to deliver his people. All kinds of astonishing miracles were coming through the hands of one special person. The crowds were "completely amazed" at the scope and consistency of Jesus' healings (this is the only place where Mark expresses this degree of astonishment). They knew that God had to be at work, but what did it all mean? A further round of miracles in Mark 8 will further explain what was happening.
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. Jesus feeds four thousand (8:1-10; cf. Matt 15:32-39)
1 About this time another large crowd had gathered, and the people ran out of food again. Jesus called his disciples and told them, 2 "I feel sorry for these people. They have been here with me for three days, and they have nothing left to eat. 3 If I send them home hungry, they will faint along the way. For some of them have come a long distance."
4 His disciples replied, "How are we supposed to find enough food to feed them out here in the wilderness?"
5 Jesus asked, "How much bread do you have?"
"Seven loaves," they replied.
6 So Jesus told all the people to sit down on the ground. Then he took the seven loaves, thanked God for them, and broke them into pieces. He gave them to his disciples, who distributed the bread to the crowd. 7 A few small fish were found, too, so Jesus also blessed these and told the disciples to distribute them.
8 They ate as much as they wanted. Afterward, the disciples picked up seven large baskets of leftover food. 9 There were about 4,000 men in the crowd that day, and Jesus sent them home after they had eaten. 10 Immediately after this, he got into a boat with his disciples and crossed over to the region of Dalmanutha.
## NOTES
8:2 **I feel sorry for these people.** This note of compassion for the hungry crowds that had been with Jesus for three days opens this miracle account. Mark often notes Jesus' compassion (e.g., 1:41; 6:34).
8:4 **How are we supposed to find enough food?** The disciples responded in this way when Jesus said that the crowd was too tired to be sent home for food. Despite the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44), the disciples were incredulous about how they could feed such a large group. For a defense that this event is distinct from Mark 6 and is not a doublet of the same event, see France (2002:306-307). Presumably, Jesus was still in the Decapolis region, so this was probably a Gentile crowd. If so, Jesus' divine provision extended beyond Israel.
8:5 **Seven loaves.** This compares to the five loaves and two fish of the earlier feeding. If there is symbolism in the number, it is no longer clear (Guelich 1989:405; cf. Marcus 2000:488-489, who says it simply suggests fullness).
8:6 **took . . . broke . . . gave . . . distributed.** The description almost matches the earlier miracle, with three differences: (1) There is no mention here of Jesus' looking up to heaven; (2) Jesus gave thanks instead of a blessing; and (3) there is no mention of dividing the crowd up into groups.
8:7 **A few small fish.** Unlike the earlier account, the fish are noted almost as an afterthought. However, their presence shows that the passage does not intend Eucharistic symbolism.
8:8 **as much as they wanted.** There was more than enough, as the seven baskets full of leftovers show. In the earlier miracle, there were twelve baskets left over, though Mark uses a different term for basket here ( _spuris_ [TG4711, ZG5083] versus the earlier _kophinos_ [TG2894, ZG3186]—see note on 6:43). Such baskets could be large enough to hold a person (Acts 9:25), although some were only the size of a lunch pail. While the distinct term may suggest smaller baskets, these were probably of the larger sort.
8:9 **4,000 people.** There were 5,000 men at the earlier feeding miracle (6:44). Here the entire crowd was 4,000 people.
8:10 **Dalmanutha.** This is the best reading among variants of the verse, as most of the major uncial MSS ( A B C L 0274) have it. Dalmanutha is unknown today, but the parallel in Matt 15:39 reads "Magadan," while variants for Mark read "Mageda" (Dc) or "Magdala" (Θ). Lane suggests that this is an alternate name for Magdala (Lane 1974:275). Others have placed the event in the Gerasa region (Taylor [1966:361] mentions Eusebius and Jerome for this view, while suggesting that the locale was near Tiberias and that the obscure name shows that the tradition was primitive).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The second feeding miracle continues the theme of Jesus' special activity in light of Isaiah 35. God supplying manna to the Israelites is the Old Testament parallel to Jesus providing food for people in the wilderness. Jesus was demonstrating that a new era of God's deliverance had come, a period that fulfilled Isaiah 35. In this case, Gentiles were the beneficiaries.
Jesus' work replicated what he had done elsewhere and underscored his ability to provide for life through his disciples. The miracle also replicated what God had done in the wilderness for the nation of Israel during the Exodus, so this act had multifaceted significance. This miracle sequence makes the impending rejection even harder to understand. Mark's point is that only people with closed eyes and hearts could fail to appreciate that Jesus was working by the power of God.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. The Pharisees demand a sign (8:11-13; cf. Matt 16:1-4)
11 When the Pharisees heard that Jesus had arrived, they came and started to argue with him. Testing him, they demanded that he show them a miraculous sign from heaven to prove his authority.
12 When he heard this, he sighed deeply in his spirit and said, "Why do these people keep demanding a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, I will not give this generation any such sign." 13 So he got back into the boat and left them, and he crossed to the other side of the lake.
## NOTES
8:11 **Testing him, they demanded that he show them a miraculous sign from heaven to prove his authority.** The NLT adds the explanatory phrase "to prove his authority" to the request for a heavenly sign, a request that was also a test. The addition makes explicit what such a sign would indicate. The mention of testing points to the dispute that has been a constant part of Mark's account (2:6-12, 16-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-5; 7:1-23; Hurtado 1989:130).
8:12 **he sighed deeply.** Mark again notes Jesus' emotions (1:41; 3:5; 6:6; 10:14; 14:34). This term appears in the LXX (Sir 25:18; 2 Macc 6:30).
**Why do these people keep demanding a miraculous sign?** Only the blind could fail to see what God was doing through Jesus and thereby ask for more proof. Mark rarely refers to a sign; he views such requests negatively, since they reflected a lack of belief (as here) or a readiness to be deceived (as in 13:4, 22).
**I will not give this generation any such sign.** In Gr., the unusual construction used to express this refusal makes the remark emphatic (Taylor [1966:362] calls the refusal "absolute"). Mark omits the appeal to the sign of Jonah that is included in Matthew and Luke. Mark's version is curt and brusque.
8:13 **to the other side.** Jesus again crossed the lake that was at the center of his activity. Only this general description of the setting is given.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus refused the demand for a specific sign. In all likelihood, the request was for some apocalyptic, Elijah-like sign that would definitively point to the arrival of the end time. Perhaps the request was for something that would make Jesus distinct from others who healed and exorcised. Since Jesus had done nothing but give signs, the request for a very specific sign ignored the great variety of evidence Jesus had already provided concerning his authority from God.
Jesus was already showing them who he was and that God was working through him. Therefore, Jesus refused their request for a sign and noted that they were placing inappropriate demands on God's work, dictating what it should look like by seeking a specific indicator. The generation that saw Jesus had enough evidence to believe in him as the Messiah, the Son of God. To ask for more evidence was to manifest their unbelief.
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. Dialogue about yeast among the Pharisees and Herod (8:14-21; cf. Matt 16:5-12)
14 But the disciples had forgotten to bring any food. They had only one loaf of bread with them in the boat. 15 As they were crossing the lake, Jesus warned them, "Watch out! Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and of Herod."
16 At this they began to argue with each other because they hadn't brought any bread. 17 Jesus knew what they were saying, so he said, "Why are you arguing about having no bread? Don't you know or understand even yet? Are your hearts too hard to take it in? 18 'You have eyes—can't you see? You have ears—can't you hear?'[*] Don't you remember anything at all? 19 When I fed the 5,000 with five loaves of bread, how many baskets of leftovers did you pick up afterward?"
"Twelve," they said.
20 "And when I fed the 4,000 with seven loaves, how many large baskets of leftovers did you pick up?"
"Seven," they said.
21 "Don't you understand yet?" he asked them.
## NOTES
8:14 **only one loaf of bread.** Mark's reader is now conditioned to expect that the absence of provisions will lead to some form of teaching from Jesus. Although some have seen the one loaf as referring either to Jesus or to the Lord's Table, these seem distant from the point. Jesus turned the circumstance of the single loaf into a symbol about his opponents, not himself.
8:15 **Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and of Herod.** Jesus made a symbol of the bread, although the disciples were slow to realize it. The Gr. mentions "leaven" ( _zumēs_ [TG2219, ZG2434]), which technically is distinct from yeast (Marcus 2000:506; BDAG 429). However, "yeast" is the closest common equivalent in our experience. This was an apt symbol for the spreading of evil by the Pharisees because in making bread, a little leaven would spread through all the dough. Matthew's version mentions the Sadducees, not Herod (Matt 16:6; also 15:12), and ties the image to their teachings, while Luke 12:1 notes only the Pharisees and their hypocrisy.
8:16 **began to argue.** Still thinking on the material plane of literal food, the disciples argued, probably about who was responsible for the omission (8:17). The reference to not bringing any bread meant, in context, that not enough bread had been brought to take care of everyone.
8:17-18 **Don't you know or understand even yet? . . . hearts . . . eyes . . . ears? . . . Don't you remember anything at all?** Jesus asked a series of five questions that pointed to the disciples' failure to understand or appreciate the meaning of what he had just done with the bread. This is the fourth such text in Mark (4:13, 40; 6:52—again, _hard hearts_ ). The first question echoes a question in Isa 40:21, a call to embrace God's sovereignty and power. The references to eyes and ears recall Jer 5:21, where the nation's lack of understanding led her into exile. The rebuke was a serious call (Ps 95:8; Isa 6:9-10; 63:17; Ezek 12:2), a call to understand, to open their hearts, to see, and to hear (see Deut 29:2-4, LXX; Marcus 2000:513). This rebuke is placed between two scenes in which Jesus demonstrated that he could heal physical blindness (8:22-26) and deafness (7:31-37); these picture his ability to heal at a deeper level and bring the messianic era such healing suggests.
8:19 **how many baskets of leftovers?** Maintaining the distinction in the terminology for baskets in these events, Jesus reviewed how many leftovers the feedings of the 5,000 and the 4,000 had produced. These two questions make a total of seven questions, the same number as the number of baskets of leftovers at the end of this event.
8:21 **Don't you understand yet?** The concluding question to ponder gives this passage an "open" literary ending. Jesus asked if the disciples did not yet understand the meaning of his work of provision. This concludes his rebuke and sets up the confession at Caesarea Philippi, where Peter will step forward with a reply.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The disciples were still processing the significance of Jesus' work and they were slow to get the point. This incident in which the disciples were preoccupied with not having brought enough bread triggered Jesus' warning to the disciples about an evil inclination in Herod and in the teaching of the Pharisees. Jesus warned that their reactions corrupted spiritual sustenance.
The background for this was the prohibition of yeast or leaven at Passover (Exod 12:14-20). In Judaism, such leaven signified evil inclinations (Taylor 1966:365; _Genesis Rabbah_ 34.10; 1 Cor 5:6-8). That the Jewish leaders sought signs while refusing to believe indicated their corrupt hearts, as 7:1-23 has already suggested. Those who reject a sign such as that given to Israel during the Exodus (i.e., manna from heaven) will miss out on blessing and stand condemned.
Jesus drew the disciples' attention to his ability to provide physical sustenance; he also said that the provision of food was a picture of what he could provide spiritually. This "picture in kind" was not unusual in Jesus' teaching. In Luke 5:1-11, the miraculous catch of fish stood for how Jesus would make the disciples fishers of people. After an exorcism, Jesus noted that this demonstrated his overtaking the house of Satan, the strong man. However, the disciples did not understand. The numbers of twelve and seven indicate God's care for his people and the fullness of that provision. A new era of provision, like that of the Exodus, had come.
## TEXT [Commentary]
12. A blind man's healing at Bethsaida (8:22-26)
22 When they arrived at Bethsaida, some people brought a blind man to Jesus, and they begged him to touch the man and heal him. 23 Jesus took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village. Then, spitting on the man's eyes, he laid his hands on him and asked, "Can you see anything now?"
24 The man looked around. "Yes," he said, "I see people, but I can't see them very clearly. They look like trees walking around."
25 Then Jesus placed his hands on the man's eyes again, and his eyes were opened. His sight was completely restored, and he could see everything clearly. 26 Jesus sent him away, saying, "Don't go back into the village on your way home."
## NOTES
8:22 **Bethsaida.** This town of a few thousand was located on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee.
**they begged him to touch the man and heal him.** The crowd interceded for the blind man.
8:23 **led him out of the village.** One unusual feature of the healing was that Jesus took the man away to heal him. This was probably to keep from drawing excessive attention to the event.
**spitting on the man's eyes.** Jesus also did something like this in 7:33. Its significance is discussed in the commentary to that passage. This narrative is very parallel to 7:32-37 (see Taylor 1966:368-369, who concludes that two events are in view, not a doublet).
8:24 **looked around.** The verb here can mean "regained his sight" (Matt 11:5; Mark 10:51-52; Luke 18:41-43; John 9:11; Acts 9:17-18). That is probably its significance here, but to report on his seeing, he would have had to look around.
**They look like trees walking around.** Since the man knew what trees looked like, he was probably not born blind. There is a Gr. parallel somewhat similar to this account in which the god Asclepius heals a man in his temple at Epidauros and the man first sees trees in the temple (Johnson 1960:145; _Inscriptiones Graecae_ , IV2.1.121-122, entry 18).
8:25 **His sight was completely restored.** Jesus completed the two-stage healing. This miracle, not included in Matthew and Luke, is one of the few Marcan texts that does not show up in another Gospel. It may have been omitted elsewhere because of the stages involved in the healing.
8:26 **Don't go back into the village.** Once again, Jesus tried to limit the attention given to his healing work.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus was sought to bring sight to the blind. This further allusion to Isaiah 35:5-6 recalls the earlier rebuke in which the disciples were said to have eyes that did not see (8:18). In one sense, full restoration to spiritual health is a process. Jesus' healing the blind man in stages illustrated the disciples' gradual move toward clarity of understanding. Peter's following confession that Jesus was the Messiah represented a major advance in their understanding.
## TEXT [Commentary]
III. To Jerusalem, Passion, and Vindication (8:27–16:8)
A. Passion Predictions and Discipleship Teaching (8:27–10:52)
1. Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi (8:27-30; cf. Matt 16:13-20; Luke 9:18-21)
27 Jesus and his disciples left Galilee and went up to the villages near Caesarea Philippi. As they were walking along, he asked them, "Who do people say I am?"
28 "Well," they replied, "some say John the Baptist, some say Elijah, and others say you are one of the other prophets."
29 Then he asked them, "But who do you say I am?"
Peter replied, "You are the Messiah.[*]"
30 But Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.
## NOTES
8:27 **Caesarea Philippi.** This town was north of the Sea of Galilee at the source of the Jordan River, southwest of Mount Hermon. It was a predominantly non-Jewish area ruled by Herod Philip. It was named after Caesar and Philip and was known for its beauty.
**As they were walking along.** The theme of "the way" appears frequently in Mark 8–10 (8:3, 27; 9:33-34; 10:17, 32, 46, 52). Jesus was on a divinely directed journey.
**Who do people say I am?** This question introduces the turning point in Mark's Gospel.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This crucial passage in Mark concerns the disciples' understanding of Jesus' identity. Peter took the lead in confessing that Jesus was the Messiah. Once this confession was made, the discussion turned to the kind of Messiah Jesus would be, namely, one who suffered. But first, Jesus asked who other people thought he was. The point of the passage is the contrast between the crowd's perceptions and that of the disciples.
The crowds thought that Jesus was either "John the Baptist . . . Elijah . . . [or] one of the other prophets." The crowds respected Jesus as one through whom God was working, in contrast to the rejection from the Jewish leaders. The answer was significant in communicating the crowd's regard for Jesus, but it was still inadequate. The reference to John the Baptist probably suggested that the spirit of John the Baptist was present in Jesus. Elijah pointed to the nearness of the eschatological age (Mal 4:5).
Jesus turned the question to the disciples, who had been with him for some time. Had their familiarity with him helped them understand who he was? Peter answered for the group by confessing, "You are the Christ." Although there is some difference in this answer in each synoptic (Matthew has "Christ, Son of the Living God" and Luke has "the Christ of God"), the gist they affirm is that Jesus is the Christ. Peter affirmed that Jesus was the unique, promised, anointed one of God. The reply evokes 1:1, while 14:61-62 shows the title as a key point of dispute with the Jewish leaders. The point of the answer was in the contrast between Jesus as merely a prophet and as the promised, chosen One of God. If Jesus was the Messiah, then he stood at the center of God's plan and there was no other like him. The disciples understood this much, but they had much more to learn about the Messiah. They had expected a powerful conquering figure, probably very much like the militaristic victor pictured in the _Psalms of Solomon_ 17–18.
After the confession, Jesus commanded the disciples not to say this to anyone else. The type of Messiah they expected and the type of Messiah he would be were very different, as the next few passages will show. Until they understood who Jesus was as the Messiah, they were to remember the confession but not proclaim it. This feature shows the authenticity of the passage, for the early church openly proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah. This restriction applied only until the disciples appreciated who Jesus was in his suffering. Until they appreciated that dimension of his work, they were not ready to explain Jesus' role within the Kingdom. The rest of the Gospel is dedicated to making that role clear and to showing its impact on Jesus' disciples, who must walk the same path. Taylor (1966:377) also argues that proclaiming Jesus as Messiah would have had political overtones that had to be avoided until Jesus' use of the term was really understood.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Jesus begins to speak about his death and resurrection (8:31-33)
31 Then Jesus began to tell them that the Son of Man[*] must suffer many terrible things and be rejected by the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law. He would be killed, but three days later he would rise from the dead. 32 As he talked about this openly with his disciples, Peter took him aside and began to reprimand him for saying such things.[*]
33 Jesus turned around and looked at his disciples, then reprimanded Peter. "Get away from me, Satan!" he said. "You are seeing things merely from a human point of view, not from God's."
## NOTES
8:31 **the Son of Man must suffer many terrible things . . . be killed, but three days later he would rise from the dead.** Here in a nutshell is the first prediction of what lay ahead (cf. 9:30-32; 10:32-34). Jesus now described himself with his favorite self-designation, "Son of Man." As a representative of humanity and one who would one day be their judge, he first must suffer judgment himself. The use of the term about necessity ( _dei_ [TG1163, ZG1256]) underscores the divine nature of the plan. These things must occur.
8:32 **talked about this openly.** The passage indicates that Jesus spoke of these things in an open and direct way. He said them plainly. It was almost too clear and too much for them to accept. The powerful Messiah would die! The disciples never grasped these predictions prior to Jesus' death and resurrection.
**Peter . . . began to reprimand him.** One of the wordplays of this passage occurs when Jesus and Peter exchange rebukes in 8:32-33, as the verb _epitimaō_ [TG2008, ZG2203] appears in both passages (see also 8:30).
8:33 **looked at his disciples, then reprimanded Peter. "Get away from me, Satan!"** The verb that the NLT translates as "reprimand" means "to rebuke," matching the verb in 8:32. Jesus looked at his disciples as he spoke to Peter, showing that the remark was intended for all of them. The rebuke could not be stronger. Peter was addressed as Satan's proxy, having expressed a satanic idea, namely, that Jesus would never suffer (France 2002:338).
**You are seeing things merely from a human point of view, not from God's.** This explains the rebuke. A human perspective argues that Jesus should exercise his messianic prerogatives as an expression of raw power with no suffering. However, God's plan was that by suffering, Jesus would identify with the fallen condition of people and take care of sin on their behalf. The rejection and suffering were an integral part of the plan, and now with this introduced, Jesus can fully address the nature of discipleship (8:34–9:1).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The exchange between Jesus and Peter after Peter's great confession of Jesus as the Messiah shows that the disciples still had much to learn. They had no clue as to the importance or necessity of Jesus' suffering. This strong rebuke sends the first of many signals in the next few passages that these disciples (as well as Mark's readers) need to understand the path that Jesus would take, one the disciples would also have to follow. The passage indicates how aware Jesus was of his mission and of the suffering he would face as well as his resolve to face it. Jesus interpreted suggestions that such suffering should not be undertaken as the thoughts of Satan, even when they came from the lips of a major disciple like Peter. Jesus had a calling, and he would answer that call.
Jesus would be rejected by the religious leaders, be put to death, and then be raised from the dead. The passive verbs used to express these realities show that Jesus was part of a plan in which he was the key object. The leaders would reject and kill him, as 12:10 also shows, and God would bring him back to life. The disciples did not want to include this prediction as part of the plan, but Jesus' response showed that it was at its very center. The disciples had much to learn about how God would work through Jesus. Some questioned the prediction of this text, but anyone who had seen what happened to John the Baptist could understand the risk Jesus faced. Jesus' understanding of his ultimate vindication simply showed how clearly he understood his mission and his appreciation that God would not abandon him or it.
By contrast, the disciples did not grasp that Jesus was not only the Son of Man and the Messiah, but also the suffering servant. So surprising was this that Peter, who had just acknowledged Jesus as the unique Messiah, took Jesus aside to reprimand him. The rebuke was surely because Jesus did not highlight himself as a conquering hero. Peter conducted his own private theological class for Jesus, but it was Peter who had to learn the lesson.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Following Jesus (8:34–9:1; cf. Matt 16:21-28; Luke 9:22-27)
34 Then, calling the crowd to join his disciples, he said, "If any of you wants to be my follower, you must give up your own way, take up your cross, and follow me. 35 If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake and for the sake of the Good News, you will save it. 36 And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?[*] 37 Is anything worth more than your soul? 38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my message in these adulterous and sinful days, the Son of Man will be ashamed of that person when he returns in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."
CHAPTER 9
1 Jesus went on to say, "I tell you the truth, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Kingdom of God arrive in great power!"
## NOTES
8:34 **be my follower.** The NLT is paraphrasing here, as the Gr. reads, "come after me." Of course, what is intended is following in Jesus' path as a disciple, so the NLT brings out the force of the metaphor of "coming after" Jesus.
**give up your own way.** Once again, the NLT is bringing out the force of the Gr., which translates as, "must deny oneself." The essence of this denial is not asceticism, but turning from a selfish focus in life to doing things God's way (Cranfield 1959:281-282; Hooker 1991:208).
**take up your cross.** This instruction is also an aorist imperative. Since Jesus had not yet spoken of his crucifixion, this metaphor alluding to his coming crucifixion is proleptic. The picture will become a reality.
**follow me.** This command is in the present imperative. Unlike the previous two commands that look at a basic reorientation, the following of Jesus is a constant, ongoing call, a sustained pursuit of Jesus' way (Taylor 1966:381). Following is not an act accomplished in one moment, but the constant practice of one who embraces Jesus. This means that following Jesus is the greatest vocation in life, regardless of what others think or do to one as a result.
8:35 **If you try to hang on to your life.** Lit., "whoever would save his life." There is a wordplay with the key term, _psuchē_ [TG5590, ZG6034], which can be translated "life" or "soul," and refers to "real life" or "inner life"—that which is truly central (see BDAG 1098-1099; France 2002:340-341). The play is on preserving the earthly life (seen as preserving the life that includes a soul), only to lose the opportunity to possess the "real life" in the end.
**But if you give up your life.** This renders the phrase "whoever loses his life." It is opposite to the previous scenario and the result is opposite as well. Paradoxically, to lose one's earthly life is to save one's inner life for the life to come.
**for my sake and for the sake of the Good News.** The text shows that a disciple's allegiance is to the person Jesus and to God's Gospel, his Good News, at the same time (10:29). They are interrelated.
8:36 **And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?** The key term for life ( _psuchē_ [TG5590, ZG6034]) is still being used here. Jesus makes clear what is at stake, echoing the language of Ps 49:7-8. The reference to "soul" is a way of discussing one's life and eternal wellbeing; the "saving" and "losing" look back to the saving and losing of 8:35; issues of eternal life and the life beyond are in view in the earlier wordplay.
8:37 **Is anything worth more than your soul?** The NLT again brings out the force of the Gr., "What might a man give in exchange for his soul?" with a paraphrase. The wordplay with _psuchē_ [TG5590, ZG6034] (soul) continues. The term for "exchange" appears only here in the NT. The expected answer is that nothing is as valuable as preserving the soul, because nothing is worth more than the soul. As BDAG (86) notes, "nothing would compensate for such a loss."
8:38 **me and my message.** Jesus and the message of the Kingdom are again linked (8:35).
**these adulterous and sinful days.** This renders the phrase "in this sinful and adulterous generation," in which "generation" has a moral overtone about the people of that time. The phrase "sinful and adulterous" appears only here, but the idea of people adulterating their relationship with God is common in the OT (Isa 1:4, 21; Hos 2).
**the Son of Man will be ashamed of that person.** The Son of Man is here viewed as a judge at the end times. Those who had paid attention to Jesus' use of the phrase "Son of Man" would recognize this indirect reference to himself as that coming authority. (The parallel in Matt 10:33 simply says "I.") This remark indicates the key issue of the Gospel. Will one identify with Jesus, the Son of Man to whom one's soul is ultimately accountable? To shun the Son is to face the prospect of being shunned by him when he returns with the angels to exercise judgment in the power and glory of the Father (14:62). That is, to lose one's soul. This is the first clear reference to a return in Mark, though 4:21-22, 30-32 have suggested it (France 2002:342 dissents, seeing it as about the Son of Man's entry into authority, an unlikely reading, given the "shame" concept and the language of "coming in glory").
9:1 **some standing here right now will not die before they see.** These words of Jesus have been debated, but the most likely meaning is that some of the disciples would get a glimpse of the Kingdom's full glory in the Transfiguration that follows. For seven interpretive options, see Cranfield (1959:286-289). Peter, James, and John get the glimpse of Jesus transformed and all it implied about his authority. Peter's commentary appears in 2 Pet 1:16-18.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
These words weren't just addressed to the twelve disciples. Jesus spoke to the crowd, making it clear that he wanted those who followed him to appreciate the significance of responding to him (Lane 1974:306). Since life and death are mentioned here, the passage does not treat discipleship as a distinct step in responding to Jesus. The teaching is not for an elite but for all, so Jesus presents the entire package of what faith means when one embraces Jesus. It means believing Jesus on his own terms.
To follow Jesus means to turn from a selfish orientation, pick up "the cross," and take on the rejection that is part of associating with Jesus in a world that does not appreciate him. The cross pictures the rejection and humiliation that was associated with crucifixion. A disciple must understand that this rejection that comes with following Jesus may even lead to death, for the disciple's experience may well be like the teacher's.
Since Jesus suffered, his disciples would do the same. Some people will consider this and want to be spared persecution and rejection rather than to identify with Jesus and his message. One can choose to hold onto life and acceptance in the world at the expense of one's soul and one's life with God. The prospective disciple that protects the earthly life will not face rejection by others in the world, but will lose the life of the world to come.
Jesus urges would-be disciples to experience the rejection of this world and thus gain spiritual well-being. More than the loss of physical life is being discussed here, for what is lost is something thought to be protected and retained through the preservation of physical life. The choice to gain the world but lose one's soul ends in emptiness as the self is obliterated in the process of rejecting God's way.
Those who reject Jesus in this lifetime are ashamed of the Son of Man. In the last day, when the Judge comes in power and glory, he will be ashamed of those who have rejected him. The implication is that identification with the Son of Man preserves one's spiritual well-being, both now and in the judgment to come.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus' transfiguration (9:2-13; cf. Matt 17:1-13; Luke 9:28-36)
2 Six days later Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up a high mountain to be alone. As the men watched, Jesus' appearance was transformed, 3 and his clothes became dazzling white, far whiter than any earthly bleach could ever make them. 4 Then Elijah and Moses appeared and began talking with Jesus.
5 Peter exclaimed, "Rabbi, it's wonderful for us to be here! Let's make three shelters as memorials[*]—one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah." 6 He said this because he didn't really know what else to say, for they were all terrified.
7 Then a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my dearly loved Son. Listen to him." 8 Suddenly, when they looked around, Moses and Elijah were gone, and they saw only Jesus with them.
9 As they went back down the mountain, he told them not to tell anyone what they had seen until the Son of Man[*] had risen from the dead. 10 So they kept it to themselves, but they often asked each other what he meant by "rising from the dead."
11 Then they asked him, "Why do the teachers of religious law insist that Elijah must return before the Messiah comes?[*]"
12 Jesus responded, "Elijah is indeed coming first to get everything ready. Yet why do the Scriptures say that the Son of Man must suffer greatly and be treated with utter contempt? 13 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they chose to abuse him, just as the Scriptures predicted."
## NOTES
9:2 **Six days.** Outside of the Passion week, no other statement of timing is this exact. There may be an allusion to Exod 24:16-17 (Lane 1974:317).
**Peter, James, and John.** At a few points, Jesus gives this inner circle of disciples a unique experience (5:37; 14:33; cf. 13:3 with Andrew).
**mountain.** The mountain where this took place is unknown, but among the suggestions are Mount Tabor, Mount Hermon, or a site to the southeast of Caesarea Philippi such as Mount Meron (France 2002:350).
**Jesus' appearance was transformed.** Jesus was "metamorphosed"; his appearance blazed in bright light with the glory of his heavenly origin (Dan 12:3; _2 Baruch_ 51:3, 5, 10, 12; _1 Enoch_ 38:4; 104:2; another conceptual parallel could be the transfiguration of Moses's face at Sinai).
9:3 **his clothes became dazzling white.** This glorious brightness indicated Jesus' cosmic character. Dazzling white clothes are a sign of supernatural existence, as seen with angels or other images of God (Dan 7:9; Matt 28:3; Mark 16:5; John 20:12; _1 Enoch_ 14:10; _2 Enoch_ 22:8-9; France 2002:351 notes that this term for "shining" is often used of shining stars). No effort to bleach the garments could have made them whiter.
9:4 **Elijah and Moses.** These major OT saints add importance to the moment.
9:5 **make three shelters as memorials.** Peter wanted to celebrate something like the Festival of Shelters (Lev 23:39-43) to honor Moses, Elijah, and Jesus. This feast recalled the Exodus and God's provision during their travel in the wilderness. There was an idea that in the end, Israel might return to life in tents as at the beginning of their national journey (Hooker 1991:217). That expectation may be at play here. Israel's history was represented, so in Peter's view the moment should be celebrated with the three great men as guests of honor. It appears that Peter expected the three disciples to serve and honor the three guests.
9:6 **didn't really know what else to say.** Peter really did not understand the scene; he spoke without knowledge and out of fear (for fearing, see 1:22). A voice from heaven would set the scene right and make Jesus' uniqueness clear.
9:7 **a cloud overshadowed them.** This is the imagery of the Shekinah presence of God, like the cloud at Mount Sinai when Moses received the law (Exod 19:9, 16; 24:15-16; 40:35). It means that God was present and about to speak, and it was his voice that came from the cloud.
**This is my dearly loved Son. Listen to him.** The divine utterance at Jesus' baptism (1:11) is repeated, with three differences: (1) God says "this" is my beloved Son, not "you are" my beloved son; (2) there is no mention of "in whom I am well pleased"; and (3) the phrase "listen to him" from Deut 18:15 is added. The first difference identifies Jesus as the royal Son in the language of Ps 2 for the sake of the disciples, unlike the more private experience of the voice at the baptism. The connection with the baptism reminds Mark's reader that this Son is also a Servant. The switch from "well pleased" to "listen to him" is a call to follow this prophet, who like Moses reveals God's will and way. The point is that Jesus is greater than Moses or Elijah.
9:8 **Moses and Elijah were gone.** The Gr. reads, "they no longer saw anyone," which the NLT renders in an explanatory way. With Jesus revealed and his uniqueness declared, there was no other need to have Moses or Elijah present. As the verse ends, "only Jesus" was necessary.
9:9 **not to tell anyone what they had seen until the Son of Man had risen from the dead.** The disciples were not yet ready to preach Jesus because they didn't yet appreciate precisely how he fit into God's plan. Jesus told them to remain silent until the Son of Man (that is, Jesus) had risen, a remark that echoes 8:31. The "silence" motif reaches from 1:25 to as recently as 8:29. This strong injunction uses the verb _diesteilato_ [TG1291, ZG1403] that appears elsewhere in similar contexts (5:43; 7:36; 8:15).
9:10 **they kept it to themselves.** The disciples kept their experience private, as the verb _krateō_ [TG2902, ZG3195] means "to guard, keep, or hold onto something" (Cranfield 1959:297). Other scholars (Hooker 1991:219) take the phrase to mean, "they seized on this saying," but this does not readily follow the thought of 9:9.
**asked each other what he meant by "rising from the dead."** The Gr. here could be rendered, "questioning what the rising of the dead meant." The disciples still did not understand how to fit Jesus' declaration about rising from the dead into a messianic portrait. They were hearing Jesus' words but did not grasp them because Judaism only recognized a general resurrection at the end of time, not an individual resurrection separate from the end.
9:11 **Elijah must return.** The disciples could not figure out the resurrection, but from Jewish teaching about the end times, they did know that Elijah must return before the Messiah would come. The roots of this promise are in Mal 3:1 and 4:5-6; Sir 48:10 also says that the Messiah will participate in the restoration of the nation. Elijah's presence with Jesus seems to have sparked the question.
9:12 **Elijah is indeed coming first to get everything ready.** Jesus affirmed the promise of Elijah's coming but did not immediately give details. The Gr. text speaks of the "restoration of all things." This promise throughout the prophets that God would bring the nation of Israel into a golden era came to include messianic expectations (Jer 15:19; 16:15; 24:6-7; 31:31-34; 50:19-20 [27:19-20 LXX]; Ezek 34–37; Hos 11:8-11; Amos 9:11-15). The question implies an era of power and glory.
**why do the Scriptures say that the Son of Man must suffer . . . and be treated with utter contempt?** Jesus returned to the theme of the Son of Man's suffering, for the disciples had to grasp this as well as the images of glory.
9:13 **Elijah has already come.** This describes John the Baptist, who had "found his Jezebel in Herodias" (Taylor 1966:395, citing Swete).
**they chose to abuse him, just as the Scriptures predicted.** John the Baptist is a type of Elijah. Both suffered rejection during bleak times of spiritual defection in Israel's history (1 Kgs 19:2, 10). Implied is that the Son of Man will also experience what John experienced. The disciples should be prepared.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The transfiguration was a crucial event in Jesus' career in that his unique status was again confirmed. This confirmation did not come from just anyone. God spoke from heaven on behalf of Jesus, his Son, who was completely transfigured in the presence of three disciples. These disciples were told not to speak of the event until after the Son of Man was raised, because affirmation of Jesus as God's beloved Son also came with the call to listen to him. John alludes to this experience of seeing Jesus' glory in John 1:14 and 1 John 1:1-3. Peter speaks of it explicitly in 2 Peter 1:16-18.
Two significant figures, Moses and Elijah, appeared alongside Jesus. Moses, who received the law, looked back to the formation of Israel. Here he is important as one who predicted that a prophet like himself would come (Deut 18:15-19), while Elijah was regarded as the prophet who pointed to the new era (Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). There is also a tradition linking Moses to Elijah as one who did not experience death (2 Kgs 2:1-12, for Elijah; for Jewish tradition on Moses, see Josephus _Antiquities_ 4.48; cf. Deut 32:50-51).
The wording from Deuteronomy 18:15 ("listen to him") presents Jesus as a second prophet like Moses, one who issued a new instruction from God as Moses did. Since the disciples' understanding of God's program was flawed, thinking only of glory and not of suffering, they needed instruction on what Jesus would do. That class began almost immediately, as they were reluctant to speak of Jesus' resurrection and asked about Elijah instead. In 9:13, Jesus makes it clear that Elijah had come, was abused, and suffered—a reference to the ministry of John the Baptist. In Matthew 17:11, there is a hint that Elijah was still to come, despite John's coming, which seems to mean that he will reappear at the end. Thus, Jesus turned Elijah into a type. He is John the Baptist, who suffered as Elijah did and as the Son of Man would.
The great era the disciples expected would not come without pain; the Son of Man must suffer. It appears that Jesus combined references to the Son of Man with imagery of the servant (Isa 52:13–53:12) and of the righteous sufferer of the Psalter (Pss 22; 69, among others) to make this point. Jesus wanted the disciples to see that the mission of the Messiah was not glory and triumph alone. There was a painful mission that he must first carry out. Hurtado (1989:147) says that "intelligent talk of the glory of Jesus cannot be done apart from emphasis upon his death and resurrection, and that any Christian preaching and devotion that is not centered on the meaning of these events is shallow and confused."
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Jesus performs an exorcism after the disciples' failure (9:14-29; cf. Matt 17:14-21; Luke 9:37-43)
14 When they returned to the other disciples, they saw a large crowd surrounding them, and some teachers of religious law were arguing with them. 15 When the crowd saw Jesus, they were overwhelmed with awe, and they ran to greet him.
16 "What is all this arguing about?" Jesus asked.
17 One of the men in the crowd spoke up and said, "Teacher, I brought my son so you could heal him. He is possessed by an evil spirit that won't let him talk. 18 And whenever this spirit seizes him, it throws him violently to the ground. Then he foams at the mouth and grinds his teeth and becomes rigid.[*] So I asked your disciples to cast out the evil spirit, but they couldn't do it."
19 Jesus said to them,[*] "You faithless people! How long must I be with you? How long must I put up with you? Bring the boy to me."
20 So they brought the boy. But when the evil spirit saw Jesus, it threw the child into a violent convulsion, and he fell to the ground, writhing and foaming at the mouth.
21 "How long has this been happening?" Jesus asked the boy's father.
He replied, "Since he was a little boy. 22 The spirit often throws him into the fire or into water, trying to kill him. Have mercy on us and help us, if you can."
23 "What do you mean, 'If I can'?" Jesus asked. "Anything is possible if a person believes."
24 The father instantly cried out, "I do believe, but help me overcome my unbelief!"
25 When Jesus saw that the crowd of onlookers was growing, he rebuked the evil[*] spirit. "Listen, you spirit that makes this boy unable to hear and speak," he said. "I command you to come out of this child and never enter him again!"
26 Then the spirit screamed and threw the boy into another violent convulsion and left him. The boy appeared to be dead. A murmur ran through the crowd as people said, "He's dead." 27 But Jesus took him by the hand and helped him to his feet, and he stood up.
28 Afterward, when Jesus was alone in the house with his disciples, they asked him, "Why couldn't we cast out that evil spirit?"
29 Jesus replied, "This kind can be cast out only by prayer.[*]"
## NOTES
9:15 **overwhelmed with awe.** The use of _xethambēthēsan_ [TG1568, ZG1701] here is the first of four uses of this verb in Mark (14:33; 16:5-6), the only NT writer to use the word. It refers to great surprise or perplexity (BDAG 303). In this context, the term could indicate surprise and excitement.
9:17 **an evil spirit that won't let him talk.** The possessed boy was also unable to speak. This is one of several similar scenes in Mark (cf. 1:25-26, 34; 5:8, 12-13; 7:29, 35, 37).
9:18 **it throws him violently to the ground.** This demon was particularly vicious in his treatment of the boy, which added to his father's concern. These details of hostile treatment in vv. 18, 20, 22, and 26 are lacking in Matthew.
**becomes rigid.** After the seizures, the boy was left wasted and spent. The verb ( _xērainetai_ [TG3583A, ZG3830]) means "to dry up." The boy was immobilized by the seizures.
**they couldn't do it.** The disciples' failure probably motivated the debate that becomes the hub of the passage. Once again the disciples fail and will need to learn from Jesus as v. 19 suggests.
9:20 **violent convulsion.** The demon seized the boy just as described in 9:18. The situation was desperate and dangerous.
9:21 **Since he was a little boy.** Jesus asked how long this had been going on and was told that the boy had suffered from this terrible condition for some time—ever since he was a small child.
9:22 **trying to kill him.** As with the Gerasene demoniac, this demon's presence had a destructive effect on the person it possessed, which is what demons always seek to do.
**Have mercy on us and help us.** The request for Jesus' aid and compassion was made with the understanding that this could not be demanded, but only received as Jesus' kind work of mercy. The mention of compassion ("have mercy") is the last of four passages where this verb ( _splanchnizomai_ [TG4697, ZG5072]) appears in Mark (1:41; 6:34; 8:2). However, this is the only place in Mark where Jesus' compassion is requested. Other texts simply note that he exercised it. The request for help will be renewed in 9:24 with respect to faith. These are the only two verses where Mark uses the verb _boētheō_ [TG997, ZG1070], often used in appeals for God' help (Taylor 1966:399).
9:24 **help me overcome my unbelief!** The man was of two minds. With one mind, he believed; with the other, he did not believe. The man asked for help in overcoming his doubt, so Jesus acted on his behalf. The term used for "help" is the same one used in 9:22. Jesus met the man's doubt with affirming action. Here is another common person seeking Jesus and being aided by him.
9:25 **come out of this child and never enter him again!** Jesus rebuked the spirit and ordered him out. In this verse, we are told for the first time that the boy was both deaf and mute; he had been imprisoned in a world of silence. Jesus' miracle changed that.
9:26 **the spirit screamed and threw the boy into another violent convulsion.** The spirit departed quite visibly with one last attempt to damage the boy. The mention of the convulsion recalls 9:18, 20, 22.
**He's dead.** The crowd reacted to the danger of the convulsion out of their lack of appreciation for Jesus' power and authority. They soon discovered they were wrong.
9:27 **helped him to his feet.** Jesus helped the boy get up to show that he had been healed. There is a wordplay in Gr. with the phrase, "raised him up." Mark 5:41-42 describes a similar proof of healing.
9:28 **Why couldn't we cast out that evil spirit?** The disciples were still questioning and learning. Apparently they viewed their healing gift as automatic. Jesus corrected this impression with his reply.
9:29 **only by prayer.** This is one of two passages in Mark that mention prayer using _proseuchē_ [TG4335, ZG4666] (cf. 11:17), and this is the only term he uses for the practice. The term refers to prayer in a general and comprehensive sense and not so much to daily requests as other terms for prayer that mean "to ask" ( _aiteō_ ) or "to request" ( _deomai_ ; Balz and Schneider 1993:3.166). Some MSS add "and fasting" here, but it is more likely that these words were added than that they were dropped from the original text of Mark (Cranfield 1959:304-305).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
When Jesus returned from the mountain of Transfiguration with James, John, and Peter, there was a dispute going on among the other disciples, the crowd, and the scribes. As the transfiguration was taking place on the mountain, the remaining disciples had gotten themselves into a disagreement about how to handle a demon-possessed boy. Apparently, since the disciples were unable to heal him, the scribes were challenging the validity of their ministry. Jesus intervened and performed another exorcism, one of four in the book of Mark (1:21-28; 5:1-20; 7:24-30). In this case, the focus was less on the miracle than on the attitudes of those around it.
Jesus rebuked all the people for their lack of faith, calling them a "faithless generation" (so the Gr.). This is the only place in Mark that this phrase appears (Matt 17:17 and Luke 9:41 are parallel accounts). Jesus' rebuke suggests that the people's rejection and lack of faith had a role in what failed to occur. The Greek term for "generation" ( _genea_ [TG1074, ZG1155]) is used in a negative ethical sense in 8:12, 38. The conceptual roots of this expression may go back to Deuteronomy 32:5, which refers to a twisted and deceitful generation. Jesus' rebuke, "How long must I be with you? How long must I put up with you?" implied that he would not remain with them long and that the disciples, therefore, needed to develop their faith. The people's lack of faith was a painful reality with which Jesus had to cope. Yet despite their failure, Jesus compassionately healed the boy.
The man seeking healing for his boy also needed encouragement to believe, so Jesus said, "Anything is possible if a person believes." Jesus underscored the importance of faith (1:15; 5:36; 11:23-24) in his call for the man to believe and trust in his ability to overcome the destructive forces dwelling in the child. Jesus did not promise a magic mantra, but underscored that anything could be accomplished through faith within the context of God's will. He affirmed faith and submission.
The disciples needed to understand that their ministry was not an automatic exercise of giftedness. They needed to depend on the Father, looking to him in prayer and relying on his presence and power. Their failure was not in their giftedness but in how they used their gifts. The prayer in question was not formulaic, and Jesus never used such prayer to heal. Rather, he turned to God, asking him to exercise his authority and power.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Jesus predicts his death again (9:30-32; cf. Matt 17:22-23; Luke 9:43-45)
30 Leaving that region, they traveled through Galilee. Jesus didn't want anyone to know he was there, 31 for he wanted to spend more time with his disciples and teach them. He said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of his enemies. He will be killed, but three days later he will rise from the dead." 32 They didn't understand what he was saying, however, and they were afraid to ask him what he meant.
## NOTES
9:31 **The Son of Man is going to be betrayed. . . . He will be killed, but . . . he will rise.** This is the second of three predictions in this central unit of Mark (8:31; 10:32-34). There is also mention of the Son of Man's rising from the dead in 9:9, which (according to 9:10) the disciples did not understand. This is the briefest of the three predictive passages. The note of betrayal may echo Isa 53:6, 12, LXX (Lane 1974:337; also in Paul, Rom 4:25; 8:32). The betrayal is presented proleptically (as already accomplished) in the present tense: The Son of Man "is being betrayed" (Taylor 1966:403). The verse begins with Jesus teaching and saying these things to the disciples; expressed in Gr. by the imperfect tense, the point is that Jesus was telling them these things regularly.
9:32 **They didn't understand . . . they were afraid to ask.** As in 9:10, the disciples did not comprehend the remarks about the resurrection. Their fear about asking him also parallels the earlier remarks.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus again sought to withdraw from the crowds for a moment (cf. 6:46). He wanted to concentrate on teaching his disciples, whose need for instruction was made obvious by the previous scenes. For the second time, he told them that the Son of Man was going to be betrayed, killed, and raised from the dead. Significantly, it is the "Son of Man" who experiences death and resurrection in all three predictions, although Mark 10 is more detailed. According to the Greek, the Son of Man was betrayed into the hands of men; this is ironic because the one who represented humanity was given over to humanity to meet his death (France 2002:372).
The disciples still did not understand what Jesus was talking about. It is not clear why they were reluctant to ask, as they often did make queries (4:10; 7:17; 9:11, 28; 10:10; 13:3; France 2002:372). Perhaps they understood just enough of the situation, especially in light of Jesus' rebuke of Peter, that they thought the details were best left undisclosed. They may have feared the answer. For those who expected a glorious redeemer, such remarks would have been surprising and disturbing. Only the resurrection would make matters clear. The contrast between Jesus' selfless perspective and the selfish focus of the disciples is still another example of discipleship failure and indicates what they must learn.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. The greatest in the Kingdom (9:33-37; cf. Matt 18:1-14; Luke 9:46-48)
33 After they arrived at Capernaum and settled in a house, Jesus asked his disciples, "What were you discussing out on the road?" 34 But they didn't answer, because they had been arguing about which of them was the greatest. 35 He sat down, called the twelve disciples over to him, and said, "Whoever wants to be first must take last place and be the servant of everyone else."
36 Then he put a little child among them. Taking the child in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Anyone who welcomes a little child like this on my behalf[*] welcomes me, and anyone who welcomes me welcomes not only me but also my Father who sent me."
## NOTES
9:33 **Capernaum.** Jesus traveled back to his ministry headquarters.
**What were you discussing?** The verb for "discuss" ( _dialogizomai_ [TG1260, ZG1368]) often means "to reason"; here it suggests that sides have been taken and the issue has been discussed in detail (BDAG 232; Luke 9:46, where the related noun is present). Perhaps the question about who was greatest was sparked by the fact that only Peter, James, and John were taken up the mountain with Jesus (9:2-8).
9:35 **Whoever wants to be first must take last place and be the servant of everyone else.** Jesus' reply went in the exact opposite direction as the debate; he stressed that those who took the last place and served others stood in first place, as far as he was concerned. The term "servant" ( _diakonos_ [TG1249, ZG1356]) stands for one engaged in everyday service, such as Elisha was for Elijah (Josephus _Antiquities_ 8.354), or like government officials, table attendants, and couriers (Rom 13:4; Col 4:7).
9:36 **little child.** Mark uses the general term for a child ( _paidion_ [TG3813, ZG4086]), so it is not clear just how old he was. Since Jesus took the child into his arms, he was probably small. Children were largely ignored in the ancient world, so they are good examples of people lacking status.
9:37 **Anyone who welcomes a little child like this on my behalf welcomes me . . . not only me but also my Father who sent me.** In bringing up a "little child" ( _paidion_ ), Jesus illustrated his point about service (Luke 9:48) in a natural way, since the word for "child" in Gr. ( _pais_ ) could also be used to mean "servant" (Hurtado 1989:153). The expression "on my behalf" is more lit. "in my name," and could indicate that the "child" was a follower of Jesus.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The juxtaposition of Jesus announcing his approaching suffering and the disciples debating who was the greatest is ironic, for it shows how little they understood God's way. The sense of embarrassment suggested in the text underscores their sense that something was wrong with their debate.
This passage discloses Jesus' values. Humanity is of value and so is service. Concern about rank should not be an issue for disciples. An apparently insignificant child provided an example. The one who welcomed this child of no status was actually welcoming Jesus and the Father. In this remark, Jesus elevated "nobodies" to a position of great significance, so that status became meaningless. If you are a person, you are important. Another point is more subtle. Given the rejection Jesus had faced, welcoming him was commendable, just as welcoming someone else of seeming insignificance was.
The tone of this text is similar to that of Matthew 25:31-46. To act kindly on someone's behalf was to perform this act for Jesus. If everyone is important, then the status question the disciples were debating was meaningless. This reversal of the world's values is the major lesson of this text.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Miscellaneous remarks about relationships and accountability (9:38-50)
38 John said to Jesus, "Teacher, we saw someone using your name to cast out demons, but we told him to stop because he wasn't in our group."
39 "Don't stop him!" Jesus said. "No one who performs a miracle in my name will soon be able to speak evil of me. 40 Anyone who is not against us is for us. 41 If anyone gives you even a cup of water because you belong to the Messiah, I tell you the truth, that person will surely be rewarded.
42 "But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone hung around your neck. 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It's better to enter eternal life with only one hand than to go into the unquenchable fires of hell[*] with two hands.[*] 45 If your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It's better to enter eternal life with only one foot than to be thrown into hell with two feet.[*] 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out. It's better to enter the Kingdom of God with only one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 'where the maggots never die and the fire never goes out.'[*]
49 "For everyone will be tested with fire.[*] 50 Salt is good for seasoning. But if it loses its flavor, how do you make it salty again? You must have the qualities of salt among yourselves and live in peace with each other."
## NOTES
9:41 **that person will surely be rewarded.** The one who gives a cup of water to a person who bears the name of Christ will be rewarded. The scorching sun of the area made the simple offer of a cup of water an act of hospitality.
9:42 **if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin.** The warning is probably directed toward a serious sin such as defection. The verb _skandalizō_ [TG4624, ZG4997] refers to stumbling over an obstacle (Cranfield 1959:313).
**it would be better . . . to be thrown into the sea.** To lead someone to reject Christ is to face serious consequences. A cruel demise such as being drowned by the weight of a millstone would be a better fate. Even the least of those who belong to Jesus means this much to him. We must avoid being a conduit for sin.
9:43 **If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.** Jesus now follows with three illustrations that take the same form. If a hand, foot, or eye is a cause of sin, one should "cut it off" or "gouge it out." The remark is rhetorical, for if the command were followed literally, only two violations would be permitted (on the debate as to whether these remarks are literal or rhetorical, see France 2002:382, who notes that Deut 14:1 prohibits self-mutilation)! On tracing sin to different body parts, see Job 31:1, 5, 7; Prov 6:16-19; Rom 3:1-18.
**the unquenchable fires of hell.** The Gr. term for "hell" is _geenna_ [TG1067, ZG1147]. In 9:48, Jesus states that in Gehenna, the "maggots never die and the fire never goes out." Jdt 16:17 gives a Jewish view of judgment as endless conscious torment, since the condemned weep forever. See also Sir 7:17, where fire and worms await the dead. Hooker (1991:232) argues that Mark's image is of a fire that burns endlessly, not of a body that burns endlessly. Judith does not read that way. See also _1 Enoch_ 27:2; 54:1-6; 90:26-27; _4 Ezra_ 7:36-44, which do appear to teach annihilation; see _4 Ezra_ 7:61, where the dead are extinguished by fire, so also _2 Baruch_ 85:13-15. In contrast, _Sibylline Oracles_ 2:283-312 foresees eternal torment.
9:44, 46, 48 **where the maggots never die and the fire never goes out.** Mark 9:44 and 9:46 are part of a textual problem, since many key MSS ( B C L W) do not include them. The parallelism with the end of v. 48 that vv. 44 and 46 reflect might suggest that the verses belong to Mark, as then all three illustrations would be virtually parallel in wording. It is harder to explain how the verses dropped out, if they were original (Metzger 1971:102), so it is likely that 9:44, 46 were not originally part of Mark. However, 9:48 is original to Mark.
9:49 **tested with fire.** The Gr. reads "salted with fire," which the NLT has rendered in a way that makes the figure clear. In addition, some MSS add, "and every sacrifice will be salted with salt." This makes each sacrifice accountable as well. This reading, which comes with variations in the Gr., is not in the best MSS and is probably not original to Mark. The first remark shows the "word stitch" character of this section as it connects with the mention of the fire of Gehenna in the earlier verse. There is no contextual carryover of subject, merely a linking of texts using fire or salt. This verse underscores that everyone has ongoing accountability to Jesus for their actions. Testing through persecution should keep each person fresh (Lane 1974:349; 1 Pet 1:7; 4:12). The root of the image is in OT sacrifices that contained salt (Lev 2:13; Ezek 43:24).
9:50 **if it loses its flavor.** Jesus used the figure of salt, again on the word stitch basis, to call for effectiveness from his disciple. Salt is for seasoning, but if it loses its taste, it is worthless.
**You must have the qualities of salt among yourselves and live in peace with each other.** The exhortation is to "remain salty"—to exercise distinctive behavior that leads to peace and unity with others. This is one way the disciples would mark themselves out as different from the world.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
John of Zebedee, of the inner circle of the disciples, saw someone performing an exorcism in Jesus' name. John thought this person should be stopped because he was not one of the Twelve. Jesus said the issue was not whether he belonged in the group, but whether God was working through him in such a way as to affirm God's presence in Jesus. Thus Jesus said, "No one who performs a miracle in my name will soon be able to speak evil of me" (9:39). Jesus affirmed that ministry in his name was not limited to an elite few and that a person who was a vessel of God's power was not an enemy, but an ally in ministry. This was yet another blow to the disciples' impression that they had special status (France 2002:376).
Jesus said, "Anyone who is not against us is for us." In the context of rejection surrounding Jesus, those who supported him or who did not oppose him should be appreciated (see Num 11:26-29). Those who were responsive to him should be seen as allies with the potential to be more fully responsive. The new community Jesus was building was not an exclusive club. Those who appreciated Jesus or were open to him were welcome. France (2002:378-379) says that in all of these examples, "disciples are called on to be cautious in drawing lines of demarcation. They are to be a church, not a sect."
Jesus then addressed the serious issue of upsetting another person's faith. Jesus warned: "if you cause one of these little ones who trust in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone hung around your neck." Then Jesus spoke of avoiding anything that would cause a person to sin. Better to destroy one's hand, foot, or eye than to go to hell. The point is that the hand, foot, or eye should not be used as instruments for sin and should be severed from such a use. "Whatever in one's life tempts one to be untrue to God must be discarded, promptly and decisively, even as a surgeon amputates a hand or a leg in order to save a life" (Lane 1974:348).
The second of the three illustrations has only a slight variation in form in that the Greek changes from referring to entry into "the life" (eternal life) to entry into the Kingdom of God. The shift shows that the "what" (the life) takes place in the context of the "where," through entry and membership in the Kingdom. "It's better to enter eternal life/the Kingdom of God. . . than . . . be thrown into hell." It is far better to deal with sin and to handicap the agent of sin than to leave sin unaddressed and find oneself condemned to hell ( _geenna_ [TG1067, ZG1147]). This is the only place that Mark refers to Gehenna, whose name comes from the place where Jerusalem endlessly burned its garbage (2 Kgs 23:10). Jesus very graphically called his disciples to deal seriously with sin, removing it at its root.
Gehenna (hell) is a place of endless destruction and torment where maggots do not die and the consuming fire always burns. The NLT image of the maggot is a modern expression for the idea expressed in Greek that the "worm" never dies. That image comes from Isaiah 66:24, where the damned are tormented by a never-dying worm that signifies the permanence of judgment. The image is intended to be gruesome. Gehenna is a place to avoid at all costs.
By way of summary, this unit is a collection of sayings about relational responsibilities. The disciples were not to be elitists. Ministry in Jesus' name by those who were responsive to him should be respected. However, disciples should be intolerant of their own sin, knowing that they are accountable before God. Leading a disciple to defect from God is worse than criminal and deserves a punishment worse than drowning. Disciples should separate themselves from those dynamics within themselves that lead to sin. Correcting the sin that limits our "freedoms" is better than experiencing judgment in Gehenna. Finally, we need to be salt, recognizing that each act is weighed by God to keep us fresh, even through suffering. The call to be salt also means that disciples should be at peace with each other. Disciples should not be concerned with rank or with trying to control who can minister in God's name.
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. Jesus' remarks on divorce (10:1-12; cf. Matt 19:1-12)
1 Then Jesus left Capernaum and went down to the region of Judea and into the area east of the Jordan River. Once again crowds gathered around him, and as usual he was teaching them.
2 Some Pharisees came and tried to trap him with this question: "Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife?"
3 Jesus answered them with a question: "What did Moses say in the law about divorce?"
4 "Well, he permitted it," they replied. "He said a man can give his wife a written notice of divorce and send her away."[*]
5 But Jesus responded, "He wrote this commandment only as a concession to your hard hearts. 6 But 'God made them male and female'[*] from the beginning of creation. 7 'This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife,[*] 8 and the two are united into one.'[*] Since they are no longer two but one, 9 let no one split apart what God has joined together."
10 Later, when he was alone with his disciples in the house, they brought up the subject again. 11 He told them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery against her. 12 And if a woman divorces her husband and marries someone else, she commits adultery."
## NOTES
10:1 **Judea.** Jesus left the region of Galilee, where most of his ministry had taken place, and moved in the direction of Jerusalem. This placed him in an area where John the Baptist had also worked.
**crowds gathered . . . he was teaching them.** Jesus' remarks were made in a public setting, in contrast to his earlier teaching of the disciples. The parallel passage in Matt 19:1-12 is more detailed.
10:2 **tried to trap him.** The narrative remark makes it clear that these Pharisees were not interested in the answer for its informational value. They were hoping to use it against Jesus. Perhaps they could catch Jesus in a remark that would get him in trouble with Herod Antipas, as John the Baptist had been (Hurtado 1989:160).
**Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife?** The question was a source of dispute in Judaism. Some argued that a man could divorce a woman for any act, even one as trivial as a badly cooked meal. Others held the view that immorality was the only legitimate cause for divorce ( _m. Gittin_ 9.1-3, 10 gives examples of writs of divorce). In ancient Judaism, only a man could get a divorce, while in the Gentile world, either party could seek one. Divorce was important, for it allowed a woman to retain her dowry when leaving the marriage unless she had been sexually unfaithful (Hurtado 1989:167; Hanson and Oakman 1998:37-43). The dowry was in part intended to be passed to any children of the couple. Divorce also gave a woman the right to seek a new husband.
10:3 **What did Moses say in the law about divorce?** Jesus drew the discussion back to Scripture, working behind the tradition to the sacred text.
10:4 **he permitted it. . . . He said a man could give his wife a written notice of divorce and send her away.** The reply, which is discussed in detail in the Jewish tradition of the Mishnah in _m. Gittin_ , addresses the right to divorce but is silent as to the situations that permit it. Jewish writs of divorce broke the marriage bond and came with the right to remarry. The reply looks back to Deut 24:1-4, where a writ is permitted upon having discovered "something wrong with her." The meaning of this phrase was debated among the rabbis.
10:5 **as a concession to your hard hearts.** In the Gr., the phrase about hard hearts is moved forward, so that it is emphasized ("for your hard hearts Moses wrote this command"). It refers to human stubbornness (Deut 10:16; Jer 4:4; Sir 16:10) and sin as the cause of divorce. In Deuteronomy, the context is to love God with a whole heart, not in stubbornness.
10:6 **God made them male and female.** Jesus cites Gen 1:27 and makes the point that at the creation, man and woman were intended to work side by side.
10:8 **the two are united into one.** Genesis 2:24 makes it clear that God's design was for marriage to be a relationship of oneness, with husband and wife forming a unit. The NLT brings out this sense by its rendering of the literal "the two shall become one flesh." Although some might read Jesus' refusal to engage Deut 24 as a rejection of the law, the use of Genesis shows his respect for the law alongside a recognition that some laws exist because people fall short of righteousness.
**Since they are no longer two but one.** Here is the key idea. Marriage makes a unit put together before God and by God (see 10:9—God has joined them together).
10:9 **let no one split apart what God has joined together.** This order is reversed in the Gr.: "what God has joined together no man should split apart." The verb for God's "yoking [the two] together" makes the union a sacred act, not one of merely human choice ( _suzeugnumi_ [TG4801, ZG5183]; BDAG 954).
10:10 **he was alone with his disciples.** The final remarks about marriage belong to an elaboration the disciples had requested. His attention to adultery shows how seriously Jesus took the marriage commitment and union. Such comments for the sake of the disciples are common in Mark (4:1-12, 33-34; 7:17-23; 9:28-29).
10:12 **And if a woman divorces her husband and marries someone else, she commits adultery.** Textual variants make the issue one of a woman's desertion and remarriage, but they are less well supported by the manuscript evidence.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In these verses, Jesus shows little patience with the view that one could get a divorce for just about any reason. In fact, Jesus noted that divorce, even on the narrow grounds allowed by Moses, was only tolerated, not recommended. Jesus never gave acceptable grounds for divorce. Rather, he said that God's intent was that the marriage union should make a new kind of unit that would remain together. Even the exceptions given in Matthew on the basis of sexual immorality do not contradict the desire that marriage be maintained, although they recognize that this may not always be possible.
Marriage was designed to be permanent. God is responsible for the union, and those in the union are accountable to God for their commitment to it. Relational commitments to God and to each other govern ethics, not figuring out what a person can get by with. The effect of Jesus' remarks was that women, who tended to be treated as property in marriage, should be seen as equal partners, since marriage is a male-female unit with no special preference given to men (Hurtado 1989:160-161).
Jesus said, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery against her" (10:11). He thereby applied the standard that the marriage commitment was to be permanent. Thus, divorce that leads to remarriage is adultery, for the first bond is still in place. Mark presents the remark without qualification, while Matthew notes sexual immorality as an exception. The remark is in the context of marriage as a divine design, as an ideal that should especially be followed in a community that says it honors God. The act violates the seventh commandment (Exod 20:14). Another key point is that the violation is against the spouse, giving the woman an ethical right in the marriage. The same is true in the next verse about the man. In Judaism, adultery was understood as a violation against the other husband, not against one's wife (Cranfield 1959:321; Hooker 1991:236). Relational sensitivity to the bond between the partners is the key point here, not the statement of the law.
Jesus then added, "and if a woman divorces her husband and marries someone else, she commits adultery" (10:12). The key to this statement is that what is true for the man is also true for the woman. Since only Mark has this, some scholars suggest that Mark added it to address a Gentile reality that did not apply in Judaism. However, this assumes that Jesus was not aware of or concerned about Gentile practice and that he would limit himself to dominant Jewish concerns on such a question, not to mention the recent public example of Herodias, in which a prominent Jewish woman did undertake such an initiative (Evans 2001:85-86). Jesus' independent handling of several issues in Judaism makes such assumptions questionable. Jesus made it clear that the same ethical standard applied to both genders. In a Jewish culture that normally saw divorce as a right controlled and determined only by men, this was a significant recognition of the woman's ethical responsibility (for evidence that Jewish women could act in limited circumstances, see _m. Ketubbot_ 7.10; Evans 2001:85).
This passage has had a significant impact on the discussion of marriage in the church. Jesus states clearly that by divine design, marriage is to be for life; he affirms reluctance to divorce because of its ethical consequences. It was permitted by Moses as a concession to hardheartedness, not as a right to be pursued. The relational equality of the man and woman and their shared ethical responsibility show that Jesus' concern was not to issue a new law, but to affirm the integrity of the relational bond and the mutual responsibility of the divinely designed oneness that marriage forms. As to the contemporary application of such standards in a culture where divorce and remarriage are common, the words of France (2002:394) state the balance well:
The practical application of this teaching in a society in which both adultery and divorce are common and legally permissible cannot be straightforward. But Mark's Jesus offers no direct guidance on the problem, simply a clear, unequivocal, and utterly uncompromising principle that marriage is permanent and divorce (together with the resultant remarriage) is wrong. Whatever the other considerations which pastoral concern may bring to bear, some of them no doubt on values drawn from Jesus' teaching on other subjects, no approach can claim his support which does not take as its guiding principle the understanding of marriage set forth in vv. 9 and 11-12.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. Jesus blesses the children (10:13-16; cf. Luke 18:15-17)
13 One day some parents brought their children to Jesus so he could touch and bless them. But the disciples scolded the parents for bothering him.
14 When Jesus saw what was happening, he was angry with his disciples. He said to them, "Let the children come to me. Don't stop them! For the Kingdom of God belongs to those who are like these children. 15 I tell you the truth, anyone who doesn't receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it." 16 Then he took the children in his arms and placed his hands on their heads and blessed them.
## NOTES
10:13 **the disciples scolded the parents for bothering him.** The Gr. simply says, "The disciples rebuked them." They wanted to stop people from bringing children to Jesus for his blessing.
10:14 **he was angry with his disciples.** Jesus rejected the disciples' response and their devaluing of these children. Once again in Mark, the disciples have much to learn, and only Mark notes Jesus' emotion at this event. They had forgotten the point of Jesus' teaching in 9:37.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
That the disciples desired to prevent Jesus from taking time with children reflected a cultural view of children as unimportant. Lane (1974:361) cites a papyrus in which a husband writes to tell his wife that if an expectant child is a boy she should let it live, but if it is a girl, she should cast it out ( _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_ 4.744, lines 9-10). In a culture in which children were devalued, they could be callously exposed to death.
Jesus reversed the cultural attitudes by saying that "the Kingdom of God belongs to those who are like these children" (10:14). The Kingdom is made up of people who are as simple and devalued as they are. If children are important to the Kingdom, everyone is important to the Kingdom, and it is "to those who are like these" that the Kingdom belongs (Matt 5:3; Luke 12:32). Children are symbols of what believers are like.
Jesus then added, "Anyone who doesn't receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it" (10:15). Jesus made an example of the childlike qualities of low social status and dependence. As children have no inherent credentials to make them acceptable, disciples also bring no resume of merited status that will commend them to God ("he is utterly helpless in his relationship to the Kingdom," Lane 1974:360). Disciples before God are like children who are dependent on adults to make their way in the world. To receive the Kingdom is to welcome it on the terms on which it is offered, which here means realizing that no one has a right to possess it. It is a gift of divine grace.
Jesus thus elevated the stature of all people of any background by welcoming these children. They represent every member of the Kingdom; those who come to God are dependent on him and no stature of their own gives them kingdom rights. The kingdom is to be received as children receive things in their lives.
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. Jesus encounters a rich man (10:17-31; cf. Matt 19:16-30; Luke 18:18-30)
17 As Jesus was starting out on his way to Jerusalem, a man came running up to him, knelt down, and asked, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
18 "Why do you call me good?" Jesus asked. "Only God is truly good. 19 But to answer your question, you know the commandments: 'You must not murder. You must not commit adultery. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. You must not cheat anyone. Honor your father and mother.'[*]"
20 "Teacher," the man replied, "I've obeyed all these commandments since I was young."
21 Looking at the man, Jesus felt genuine love for him. "There is still one thing you haven't done," he told him. "Go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
22 At this the man's face fell, and he went away sad, for he had many possessions.
23 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God!" 24 This amazed them. But Jesus said again, "Dear children, it is very hard[*] to enter the Kingdom of God. 25 In fact, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!"
26 The disciples were astounded. "Then who in the world can be saved?" they asked.
27 Jesus looked at them intently and said, "Humanly speaking, it is impossible. But not with God. Everything is possible with God."
28 Then Peter began to speak up. "We've given up everything to follow you," he said.
29 "Yes," Jesus replied, "and I assure you that everyone who has given up house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or property, for my sake and for the Good News, 30 will receive now in return a hundred times as many houses, brothers, sisters, mothers, children, and property—along with persecution. And in the world to come that person will have eternal life. 31 But many who are the greatest now will be least important then, and those who seem least important now will be the greatest then.[*]"
## NOTES
10:17 **on his way to Jerusalem.** The NLT rendering is more specific than the Gr., which has only "setting out on the way." The destination of the journey is made explicit in 10:32, so by adding "to Jerusalem," the NLT anticipates that later clarification.
**what must I do to inherit eternal life?** This question is really about how the man can be sure to participate in the resurrection of the righteous (Dan 12:1-2), as 10:23-30 makes clear. Mark 9:42-48 equates this to entering the Kingdom. The question presupposes that salvation is the product of human effort (Lane 1974:365). This is the only place that Mark uses the verb "inherit."
10:18 **Why do you call me good?** Jesus rejected the "good teacher" greeting of the questioner, probably to avoid condescension by the rich man. The man's remark was not insincere, just misdirected. Jesus would answer as required, and not because he was complimented. Jesus' saying that "only God is truly good" puts the man on notice that he would get a direct reply and that his only concern was with God's honor (Evans 2001:96). It is too subtle to see Jesus as affirming his own deity or as making any statement concerning himself and sin (France 2002:402).
10:19 **you know the commandments.** Jesus responded by noting the second part of the Ten Commandments, which deals with human relationships (Exod 20:12-16; Deut 5:16-20), thus showing his commitment to the relational aspect of spiritual life. God desires a response that pursues righteousness. The reference to defrauding replaces the idea of coveting, and possibly concretizes that commandment. The fifth commandment comes last in this list, the only commandment listed that isn't expressed negatively.
10:20 **I've obeyed all these commandments since I was young.** The rich man had no sense of lack, for he said that his record of obedience was unblemished. He had kept (lit., "guarded") the commandments from his youth. He possibly anticipated affirmation, but Jesus had not finished with him yet.
10:21 **Jesus felt genuine love for him.** The text makes it clear that Jesus' demand was rooted in his love for the man and in his awareness that he needed to redirect his life priorities.
**sell all . . . follow me.** The call to go and sell is expressed as an aorist imperative, which calls for a single decisive act.
10:22 **he went away sad, for he had many possessions.** The man's departure answers the questions. This is the first place in Mark's narrative that we are told that the man was wealthy. He left because he could not respond positively to Jesus' instruction. There is some question as to whether the man departed with sadness or anger, as the term _stugnazō_ [TG4768, ZG5145] speaks of a face that falls and can refer to anger (Ezek 26:16; Dan 2:12; Wis 17:5), to being gloomy (BDAG 949), or to being appalled (Ezek 27:35; 32:10), which may fit best here. His possessions meant more to him than serving others with what he owned and more than following Jesus to gain eternal life. The passage echoes 4:19 and 8:35-37. Affluence can be a real barrier to knowing God (France 2002:400-401).
10:23 **How hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God!** Jesus used the rich man's reaction to typify the problem the rich have in responding to Jesus and his teaching on the Kingdom. The illustration that follows argues that such entry is impossible without God's help. The idea is repeated in 10:24 to emphasize the point. The word used for "hard" ( _duskolōs_ [TG1423, ZG1552]) usually pictures someone who is hard to please (France 2002:404), but here it pertains to something that is difficult to accomplish (BDAG 265).
10:24 **This amazed them.** The remarks amazed ( _ethambounto_ [TG2284, ZG2501]) the disciples; the term used suggests that they were surprised and could not entirely process what Jesus was saying (1:27; 10:32; Acts 3:11; BDAG 442).
10:25 **it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.** Despite efforts to argue otherwise by differently interpreting the eye of the needle, Jesus' point is that in human terms, entry into the Kingdom by the rich is impossible, as 10:27 makes clear (Cranfield 1959:332; France 2002:405). The rhetorical point is that it is harder for a rich person to enter the Kingdom on his or her own than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Rabbis used the illustration of an elephant going through the eye of a needle ( _b. Bava Metzi'a_ 38b).
10:26 **Then who in the world can be saved?** The disciples' reaction came from their understanding that the rich were blessed by God (Job 1:10; 42:10; Isa 3:10; Lane 1974:369). If the rich could not enter into the Kingdom, who could? In this verse, the disciples have moved from the amazement of 10:24 to exceeding astonishment. The verb _exeplēssonto_ [TG1605, ZG1742] means being amazed to the extent of being overwhelmed (1:22; 6:2; 7:37; 11:18; BDAG 308).
10:27 **Everything is possible with God.** Jesus' reply makes it clear that God is able to do what man cannot do (on this idea, see Gen 18:14; Job 10:13, LXX; 42:2; Zech 8:6, LXX). A heart changed by God _can_ embrace Jesus and his call.
10:28 **We've given up everything to follow you.** Now Peter wanted reassurance that the disciples had responded to Jesus' call. He asked with some uncertainty and anxiety (Lane 1974:37), hoping that Jesus would affirm the disciples' commitment, which he did. The verb for "leaving" is in the aorist tense, denoting a renunciation that took place in the past, while the perfect tense of "following" looks to the ongoing effects of choosing to follow Jesus (Cranfield 1959:333).
10:30 **will receive now in return a hundred times as many . . . along with persecution.** Jesus promised that a new family and home—those of the church—would await the follower who made this sacrifice, but they would also experience persecution. The term for persecution ( _diōgmos_ [TG1375, ZG1501]) always refers to religious persecution in the NT (Acts 8:1; 13:50; 2 Cor 12:10; 2 Thess 1:4; BDAG 253).
**And in the world to come that person will have eternal life.** Now the passage comes full circle back to the rich man's question in 10:17. People who align themselves with Jesus and the Gospel will gain eternal life in the world to come. A person is not saved by something he or she does, but by the one with whom they establish a relationship. In other parts of the NT, this means exercising faith in God and in the one he sent, Jesus Christ.
10:31 **many who are the greatest now will be the least important then . . . least important now will be the greatest.** There is some discussion as to whether the remark affirms the disciples' choice or is a rebuke in light of Peter's outburst in 10:28, but the reaffirmation of their commitment in 10:29-30 favors an affirmation here. When Jesus issues a rebuke, especially in Mark, he usually does not confront so subtly (but see France 2002:409, who sees a subtle rebuke of any sense of superiority as Peter's outburst might imply).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' request of the rich man is the keynote of this passage: "Go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me" (10:21). Jesus challenged the man to exchange the blessings of this life for those of the life to come (see Matt 6:19-21; _Psalms of Solomon_ 9:5; _2 Baruch_ 24:1; Sir 29:10-12; cf. Evans 2001:99). The instruction to sell all, give to the poor, and follow Jesus exposed the man's priorities. Jesus explicitly answered the man's question about attaining eternal life by calling him to leave his earthly attachments behind and follow. This is not a universal reply to every situation, as others who are said to be part of the Kingdom were not asked to sell all (Cranfield 1959:330; cf. Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10). Jesus tested whether the man's possessions on earth were of more value to him than what the "Good Teacher" valued and taught. The entire passage is very important, for in it Jesus clarified what commitment to him entailed and what it would take to receive eternal life—namely, an alliance with him and with the gospel. This seems to run counter to the idea that salvation is by grace, but this impression reflects a superficial understanding of Jesus' point. Alliance to Jesus means being rejected by those who reject him. It also means that preferring acceptance by the world and what it offers will prevent one from embracing Jesus and his call. The rich man refused Jesus because the treasure of earth meant more to him than the treasure of heaven.
It was different for the disciples. Jesus affirmed what the disciples had done and what they would receive for choosing to follow him. He noted that their sacrifice was for Jesus' sake and for the gospel, as the two are closely intertwined in God's plan. God acknowledges the gifts of family, material benefits, and property when they are relinquished for the sake of the gospel.
Jesus affirmed that Peter and the disciples would receive rich blessings in this life—a new family and new types of possessions—and eternal life in the world to come. The rich man missed the eternal life he requested and wished to earn his own salvation; the disciples received it by coming to Jesus in the gracious way that he asked, allowing the things of earth to matter less to them than Jesus and the gospel.
To conclude this section, Jesus touched on the theme of eschatological reversal that would be part of the judgment. Many who were presently in power would not be in power then. Many of the neglected and persecuted would then be exalted. God's standards are not those of the world. To sacrifice now will bring later abundance. The remark probably reminded the disciples that those who chose riches in this life would be lacking later.
## TEXT [Commentary]
12. Jesus predicts his death again (10:32-34; cf. Matt 20:17-19; Luke 18:31-33)
32 They were now on the way up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them. The disciples were filled with awe, and the people following behind were overwhelmed with fear. Taking the twelve disciples aside, Jesus once more began to describe everything that was about to happen to him. 33 "Listen," he said, "we're going up to Jerusalem, where the Son of Man[*] will be betrayed to the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. They will sentence him to die and hand him over to the Romans.[*] 34 They will mock him, spit on him, flog him with a whip, and kill him, but after three days he will rise again."
## NOTES
10:32 **to Jerusalem.** As in Luke 9:51–19:44, Jesus is portrayed as being on a journey to Jerusalem, where his suffering awaited. This is the first time in Mark that Jerusalem is clearly noted as Jesus' destination.
**awe . . . fear.** These notes about the emotions of the disciples and the crowds add an air of drama to the journey. There is a sense that this will not be a normal trip to Jerusalem; it is possible that the people even sensed the divine presence with Jesus (Evans 2001:108).
10:33 **hand him over to the Romans.** Lit., "hand him over to the Gentiles" (cf. NLT mg). This is the one prediction that notes a handing over to the Gentiles.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This is the third major section in which Jesus predicts what will happen to him in Jerusalem (8:31-33; 9:30-32). This prediction highlights both the Jewish and the Roman involvement, including the mocking, spitting, and beating Jesus will suffer (Lane 1974:375; for their fulfillment in Mark 14–16, see Evans 2001:106). These details are unique to this prediction; only his death and resurrection are noted in the earlier versions. The account of the disciples' and crowds' emotion during Jesus' journey to Jerusalem is followed by details that prepare us for the monumental events that will take place there, the significance of which his audience did not yet appreciate.
First, Jesus stated that the Son of Man would be handed over to the chief priests and scribes. The Jewish leaders would decide his fate by sentencing him to death and delivering him to the "Gentiles," which in this context refers to the Roman leadership of Pilate. Then, Jesus predicted the details of his suffering: "They will mock him, spit on him, flog him with a whip, and kill him." He followed this with a prediction of his resurrection: "but after three days he will rise again." Jesus would be dishonored, beaten, and put to death. France (2002:413) notes the Isaianic roots of this language (Isa 50:6; 53:3, 5, 8-9, 12; also Ps 22:7). This death would not be the end, however; there would be a resurrection. No one reacted to Jesus' prediction at this time. As with Jesus' earlier predictions, the disciples still did not understand these remarks about his death and resurrection. Their reaction to his arrest, death, and burial would continue to display their confusion over this issue, but Jesus' resurrection would finally open their ears.
## TEXT [Commentary]
13. Jesus teaches about service (10:35-45)
35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came over and spoke to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do us a favor."
36 "What is your request?" he asked.
37 They replied, "When you sit on your glorious throne, we want to sit in places of honor next to you, one on your right and the other on your left."
38 But Jesus said to them, "You don't know what you are asking! Are you able to drink from the bitter cup of suffering I am about to drink? Are you able to be baptized with the baptism of suffering I must be baptized with?"
39 "Oh yes," they replied, "we are able!"
Then Jesus told them, "You will indeed drink from my bitter cup and be baptized with my baptism of suffering. 40 But I have no right to say who will sit on my right or my left. God has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen."
41 When the ten other disciples heard what James and John had asked, they were indignant. 42 So Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. 43 But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of everyone else. 45 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many."
## NOTES
10:35 **do us a favor.** The NLT renders the Gr., "do for us whatever we ask," into idiomatic English.
10:36 **What is your request?** The NLT renders the Gr., "what do you want me to do?" idiomatically.
10:37 **we want to sit in places of honor.** The Gr. reads, "we want to sit in your glory," which the NLT renders concretely by mentioning places of honor.
10:38 **Are you able to drink from the bitter cup of suffering . . . to be baptized with the baptism of suffering?** The cup refers to the judgment Jesus would experience for others and the rejection it would entail (Ps 23:5; 116:13; 75:8; Isa 51:17-22; Jer 25:15-28; 49:12; 51:7; Ezek 23:31-34; Taylor 1966:440-41). The NLT refers to the cup and baptism of suffering to make the implied point explicit.
10:40 **But I have no right to say.** Jesus said that he was not in a position to decide who would sit where in his Kingdom. God has chosen certain people to have these roles, and he knows "those for whom it is prepared." The NLT renders this as **God has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen**.
10:41 **indignant.** This verb is used only two other times in Mark. One is in 10:14, where Jesus was angered by the disciples' refusal to let the children see him. The other is in 14:4, where the disciples were angry with the woman who anointed Jesus with the expensive perfume.
10:42 **Jesus called them together.** Jesus called the disciples over to hear the instructions in these verses, thus underscoring the importance of his pronouncement (3:23; 7:14; 8:34; 12:43; France 2002:418).
10:43 **among you it will be different.** Jesus made it clear that it would not be so among his disciples. They must lead in a different way.
**servant.** Jesus used this term to describe a leader that is different from the world. It is an everyday term ( _diakonos_ [TG1249, ZG1356]) describing one who serves others (TDNT 2:82-85, 88). It referred to various types of attendants, such as those who serve a king (Matt 22:13; John 2:5).
10:44 **the slave of everyone else.** Jesus intensifies the imagery by referring to a slave or bondservant, a position most would wish to avoid. To be great or to be first means being a servant or a slave of all. There is a sense of obligation about a slave's work that is important to the description (BDAG 260; TDNT 2:261; Rom 6:17-20).
10:45 **the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.** This verse is one of the most important in Mark (for a detailed but succinct treatment, see Evans 2001:119-125). It is Jesus' mission statement that the one with authority, the Son of Man, came to serve (on such mission statements by Jesus, see 2:17; Matt 5:17; 10:34-35; Luke 5:31-32; 12:49; 19:10; John 9:39; 10:10). _diakonēsai_ [TG1247, ZG1354] is the verb form of the noun "servant." That service extended to Jesus giving his life (his soul, _psuchē_ [TG5590, ZG6034]) for ( _anti_ [TG473, ZG505], "on behalf of, in the place of") many (NIDNTT 3:1179-1180). The expression has roots in Isa 53:10, 12 and expresses the way that Jesus would serve by paying the debt of sin (see the linking of giving, ransom, and life in Exod 21:30, LXX; Sir 29:15; 1 Macc 2:50; note also Isa 43:3-4; Mark 14:24). The idea of ransom also appears in 1 Tim 2:6 (NIDNTT 3:189-200; TDNT 4:340). It looks to the release of prisoners and other captives (Josephus _Antiquities_ 14.107). Roots for such atoning ideas already existed in Judaism (2 Macc 7:37-38; 4 Macc 1:11; 11QtgJob 38:2-3; _Prayer of Azariah_ 3:15-17 [English]; _Life of Adam and Eve_ 3:1; Evans 2001:122).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The sons of Zebedee looked forward to the day when Jesus would rule with power and authority from his throne. They wanted a major share in his power, with seats that would rank them right next to Jesus in importance (being seated on the right and the left meant having the seats of greatest power; cf. 1 Kgs 2:19; Ps 45:9; 110:1; Mark 12:36; 14:62). Once again, the disciples missed a major aspect of Jesus' teaching, so Jesus corrected them. This repeats a similar kind of failure, seen in 9:32-33.
Jesus reminded them of the one thing they had been slow to accept—that he would suffer greatly. Jesus had told them repeatedly that associating with him was not about power. To sit with him in glory required them to undergo what he would go through. After the sons of Zebedee said that they could drink this cup, Jesus promised that they would share in it. Indeed, James was martyred for his faith (Acts 12:2).
When the other disciples heard the request of James and John, they were indignant (see note on 10:41). Probably their indignation was not righteous, but fueled by the same ambition that led the sons of Zebedee to ask their question. Evans (2001:118) notes the suggestion that James and John were related to Jesus as cousins. If so, their request had a touch of nepotism in it. The other disciples did not appreciate their request, and Jesus rejected it.
Jesus corrected their error by pointing out how the nations equated leadership with giving orders and authority with lording it over others. The significance of this instruction is seen in the exhortation to elders in 1 Peter 5:3. Unlike the world, leadership in the Kingdom is not defined by power or the way in which leaders direct others. Rather, leadership means service and caring to the point of being a slave of those served.
Jesus said, "The Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many." As such, he provided the ultimate example of servanthood and drew many to himself (see extensive note on 10:45). To rank before God, one should forget about rank. Leadership is not about having a high position but about how one cares for others.
## TEXT [Commentary]
14. Jesus heals the blind man Bartimaeus (10:46-52; cf. Matt 20:29-33; Luke 18:35-43)
46 Then they reached Jericho, and as Jesus and his disciples left town, a large crowd followed him. A blind beggar named Bartimaeus (son of Timaeus) was sitting beside the road. 47 When Bartimaeus heard that Jesus of Nazareth was nearby, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"
48 "Be quiet!" many of the people yelled at him.
But he only shouted louder, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"
49 When Jesus heard him, he stopped and said, "Tell him to come here."
So they called the blind man. "Cheer up," they said. "Come on, he's calling you!" 50 Bartimaeus threw aside his coat, jumped up, and came to Jesus.
51 "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked.
"My Rabbi,[*]" the blind man said, "I want to see!"
52 And Jesus said to him, "Go, for your faith has healed you." Instantly the man could see, and he followed Jesus down the road.[*]
## NOTES
10:46 **Jericho.** At this point, Jesus was only fifteen miles northeast of Jerusalem and five miles west of the Jordan River.
10:48 **Be quiet! . . . But he only shouted louder.** The crowd thought that Bartimaeus was not worthy to call out to Jesus, impose demands upon him, or take his time, so they told him to be quiet. The blind man did not back off, but continued to cry out to Jesus. This is expressed in the imperfect tense ( _ekrazen_ [TG2896, ZG3189]), emphasizing that his call was ongoing.
10:50 **threw aside his coat.** The blind man had laid his cloak on the ground to collect alms from compassionate people. He now tossed it aside.
10:51 **My Rabbi.** The blind man addressed Jesus respectfully in a way that may indicate that he saw Jesus as his Lord. The term means "my master" as well as "my teacher" (Evans 2001:134).
**I want to see!** The blind man clearly trusted Jesus' power to heal and he had the courage to call out to him despite the crowd's opposition. This is a picture of persistent faith.
10:52 **your faith has healed you.** Jesus commended the man's faith as the means by which he was healed (5:34; Luke 7:50; 17:19). Once he was healed, the man became Jesus' follower.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The opening description of Bartimaeus as a "blind beggar" indicates that he had no social rank or importance. Since he was blind, he had to beg for his basic needs. The crowds' rejection of his pleas (10:48) showed his lack of status, but this did not matter to Jesus.
Though Bartimaeus was blind, he understood a great deal about Jesus; he called out to him as "Son of David" and asked him to heal him out of his mercy (cf. _Psalms of Solomon_ 17:21). The idea that the Son of David could heal might seem strange, but in Judaism there was a tradition that Solomon, as David's son, was specially enabled by God to heal (Josephus _Antiquities_ 8.41-47; cf. 4Q521). Jesus never discouraged the use of this title. As Jesus drew near to Jerusalem, his previous hesitation to allow people to name him as the Messiah was lifted (France 2002:424).
Bartimaeus's healing highlights Jesus' continued work of compassion and his ability to bring sight to those in darkness. It also dramatizes an example of faith. Unlike the rich man a few scenes earlier who had everything except spiritual insight, the blind man had nothing but saw clearly. He understood that Jesus, as Son of David, could heal, and that he had the power of God to bring renewal of life. Jesus commended the faith by which he spoke up in the midst of a crowd that wanted to silence him. The man was healed; he came to full sight and followed Jesus to Jerusalem. This last healing in Mark exemplifies how Jesus brought sight to those who could not see. This is also the last section of Jesus' training of the disciples.
## TEXT [Commentary]
1. Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem (11:1-11; cf. Matt 21:1-11; Luke 19:29-44; John 12:12-19)
1 As Jesus and his disciples approached Jerusalem, they came to the towns of Bethphage and Bethany on the Mount of Olives. Jesus sent two of them on ahead. 2 "Go into that village over there," he told them. "As soon as you enter it, you will see a young donkey tied there that no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 3 If anyone asks, 'What are you doing?' just say, 'The Lord needs it and will return it soon.'"
4 The two disciples left and found the colt standing in the street, tied outside the front door. 5 As they were untying it, some bystanders demanded, "What are you doing, untying that colt?" 6 They said what Jesus had told them to say, and they were permitted to take it. 7 Then they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their garments over it, and he sat on it.
8 Many in the crowd spread their garments on the road ahead of him, and others spread leafy branches they had cut in the fields. 9 Jesus was in the center of the procession, and the people all around him were shouting,
"Praise God
Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the LORD!
10 Blessings on the coming Kingdom of our ancestor David!
Praise God in highest heaven!"[*]
11 So Jesus came to Jerusalem and went into the Temple. After looking around carefully at everything, he left because it was late in the afternoon. Then he returned to Bethany with the twelve disciples.
## NOTES
11:1 **Bethphage and Bethany.** Jesus was now very close to Jerusalem. Bethany is located two miles from the city, with Bethphage about a half mile away. The Mount of Olives, with its peak of over 2,600 feet, was just to the east of Jerusalem.
11:2 **young donkey.** The Gr. word _pōlos_ [TG4454, ZG4798] describes the colt of a horse or an ass (BDAG 900; TDNT 6.959-961). Since it had not been ridden, it was suitable for a king ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 2.5), since no one but a king was to ride a king's horse (note also the sacred use of animals in Num 19:2; Deut 21:3; 1 Sam 6:7; Lane 1974:395).
11:3 **The Lord needs it.** This declaration invokes a custom known as _angaria_ (from _angareuw_ [TG29, ZG30]; cf. Matt 5:41; 27:32), in which a person of significance (most commonly an officer of the Roman government) could take possession of someone else's property or require them to perform a task. Since Jesus was such a respected figure, this remark was sufficient for the disciples to secure the animal.
11:6 **they were permitted to take it.** The animal was found and taken just as Jesus had indicated. As often happened toward the end of his ministry, Jesus was very aware of what would take place.
11:7 **threw their garments over it.** This act recalls a coronation (1 Kgs 1:38-40; 2 Kgs 9:13; Evans 2001:143).
11:8 **spread their garments . . . spread leafy branches.** Clothes laid on the road made a "red carpet" for someone of significance (2 Kgs 9:13). The Greeks also did this (Plutarch _Cato Minor_ 7; Evans 2001:144). The laying of palms and other materials took place at the Feast of Tabernacles (2 Macc 10:7, the welcome of Judas Maccabaeus; _m. Sukkah_ 3–4; France 2002:433).
11:9 **Praise God!** This is the NLT's rendering of the Gr. _hōsanna_ [TG5614, ZG6057], which means "save now!" It was used as a call to praise, which explains the NLT's wording ( _m. Sukkah_ 4.5). "Hosanna" shows up again at the end of the cry of praise in 11:10b. The expression can express praise or be the cry of a prayer as the Psalter shows.
**who comes in the name of the Lord!** This allusion to Ps 118:26 welcomes a leader who approaches the Temple.
11:10 **kingdom of our father David.** This remark shows the praise involves the promise of God to David and the hope for a delivering king (2 Sam 7:6-16, the Davidic covenant; Ps 132). In other words, the praise is for the arrival of messianic promise.
11:11 **went into the Temple.** Jesus went directly to the Temple but did not stay because it was late. Pilgrims often stayed just outside of Jerusalem; Jesus returned to Bethany for the night.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
In this scene, Jesus entered the city as a humble dignitary in a way that recalls the Zechariah 9:9 prediction that the Messiah-King would come into Jerusalem (Zion) riding on a donkey. Jesus rode into the city, whereas pilgrims were supposed to walk. This shows that Jesus intended to be noticed (France 2002:428-29)—his riding a donkey was a sign of his kingship.
The disciples and the crowds began to praise him in the words of Psalm 118, acclaiming Jesus as "the one who comes in the name of the Lord." They shouted, "Blessings on the coming Kingdom of our ancestor David." Their praise was motivated by the promise of a future Davidic rule. Jesus presented himself as a king and was acknowledged as such. He did nothing to prevent this perception of him. This is the second connection of Jesus with David, as Bartimaeus had called out to the Son of David for healing (10:47).
The crowd, of course, did not fully understand what they were acclaiming, as their reaction to Jesus later in the week would show. Nonetheless, the entry was important; it shows Jesus accepting such praise, since he was the one who arranged for the animal he rode into the city. He seems to have intentionally evoked the fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9. This was Jerusalem's chance to receive Jesus as one sent from God. It seemed that they were going to do so, but the drama quickly took a dark turn. The one who was welcomed as the Messiah-King would be killed within the week.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. Jesus curses the fig tree and clears the Temple (11:12-25; cf. Matt 21:12-22; Luke 19:45-48)
12 The next morning as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13 He noticed a fig tree in full leaf a little way off, so he went over to see if he could find any figs. But there were only leaves because it was too early in the season for fruit. 14 Then Jesus said to the tree, "May no one ever eat your fruit again!" And the disciples heard him say it.
15 When they arrived back in Jerusalem, Jesus entered the Temple and began to drive out the people buying and selling animals for sacrifices. He knocked over the tables of the money changers and the chairs of those selling doves, 16 and he stopped everyone from using the Temple as a marketplace.[*] 17 He said to them, "The Scriptures declare, 'My Temple will be called a house of prayer for all nations,' but you have turned it into a den of thieves."[*]
18 When the leading priests and teachers of religious law heard what Jesus had done, they began planning how to kill him. But they were afraid of him because the people were so amazed at his teaching.
19 That evening Jesus and the disciples left[*] the city.
20 The next morning as they passed by the fig tree he had cursed, the disciples noticed it had withered from the roots up. 21 Peter remembered what Jesus had said to the tree on the previous day and exclaimed, "Look, Rabbi! The fig tree you cursed has withered and died!"
22 Then Jesus said to the disciples, "Have faith in God. 23 I tell you the truth, you can say to this mountain, 'May you be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and it will happen. But you must really believe it will happen and have no doubt in your heart. 24 I tell you, you can pray for anything, and if you believe that you've received it, it will be yours. 25 But when you are praying, first forgive anyone you are holding a grudge against, so that your Father in heaven will forgive your sins, too.[*]"
## NOTES
11:12 **Jesus was hungry.** This brief remark sets the context for the cursing of the fig tree, a rare case in which Jesus used his power to judge.
11:13 **fig tree.** Often associated with the vine and having a rich and varied symbolic role in the OT, this tree and its fruit frequently represent the people of God (TDNT 7:752; Isa 28:4; Jer 8:13; 24:1-10; 29:17; Hos 9:10; France 2002:439-440).
**it was too early in the season for fruit.** Jesus sought figs from a tree whose fruit was not yet ripe. It was early to mid-April. Early figs ripened in May and June, while later figs came in August to October. The remark may indicate something about the timing for Israel, or better, the lack of timing for her. It is not yet her time. It was "too early" for her.
11:15 **Jesus . . . began to drive out the people buying and selling animals for sacrifices. He knocked over the tables of the money changers.** The key point of background for this scene is the likelihood that over the objections of the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas had just relocated the place where sacrifices could be purchased. He had moved it closer to the central Temple area (France 2002:444), so what used to take place at the Mount of Olives was now located in the outer court of the Gentiles. This setup only lasted for a two to three week period during Passover (Hooker 1991:268).
11:16 **he stopped everyone from using the Temple as a marketplace.** The NLT's rendering is very interpretive. The Gr. says that Jesus did not allow anyone to carry anything through the Temple, which the NLT renders as a judgment against using the Temple as a "marketplace." This was perhaps the case. Such activity was necessary because of the legal requirements that certain currency be used (Tyrian "shekels"; Exod 30:11-16) and the need for unblemished sacrifices ( _m. Sheqalim_ 1.1, 3; Lane 1974:405). Questions would have been about the location of such activity and how it was being done.
11:20 **The next morning . . . the disciples noticed it had withered from the roots up.** The curse had taken effect overnight. Matthew 21:19 simply notes that the tree withered at once.
11:21 **The fig tree you cursed has withered and died!** Peter noted that Jesus' words had resulted in the fig tree's death. The remark invited a comment from Jesus, which he supplied.
11:22 **Have faith in God.** Jesus began by noting that the unusual things they saw resulted from faith in God. His exhortation to have faith was also an observation that faith had a role in this event.
11:23 **you can say to this mountain, 'May you be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and it will happen.** Jesus used the rhetorical illustration of a particular mountain uprooting itself and being tossed into the sea. His point was that faith can accomplish things that would otherwise be impossible. "It will happen" renders "it will be done," with the passive verbal suggesting that God will do it. It should be noted that the prayer in v. 24 is a corporate one; the text is not focused on private prayer (France 2002:448). The Mount of Olives or the Temple mount may be the particular mountain in view here. Evans (2001:188-89) opts for an eschatological reading rather than a proverbial one. His point is that Jesus was picturing a mountain's removal, not mountain moving activity. God was bringing a transforming salvation to the earth (others, such as Hooker 1991:270, suggest that Mark is referring to the judgment of Israel, pictured as the Temple Mount in Jerusalem). This salvation is prayed for and the answer is about salvation. This could be the meaning of the passage. However, the generic reference to "all prayer" in 11:24 makes this view less likely, as it appears to look at prayer in principle, but it is possible that 11:24 expands as a principle that which the specific prayer of 11:23 addresses (Lane 1974:410).
**But you must really believe it will happen and have no doubt in your heart.** Here the NLT renders "does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass" (see Jas 1:6). Jesus emphasized that believing in God's capacity to act was a significant part of the request.
11:25 **first forgive anyone you are holding a grudge against, so that your Father in heaven will forgive your sins, too.** As Jesus noted, an unwillingness to forgive impedes prayer. Jesus mentions this theme elsewhere and it also shows up in the epistles (as the principle behind the request for forgiveness in the Lord's prayer, Matt 5:21-26; with reference to worship, Matt 18:21-35; and with reference to forgiving, 1 Pet 3:7). The Father will hesitate to answer the prayer of an unforgiving spirit.
[11:26] See NLT mg on 11:25. This verse, which is not attested in the older MSS of Mark, makes the point that the Father will not forgive those who do not forgive; it is paralleled in Matt 6:15. The verse is present in A C D , but is absent in the key witnesses B L W.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The judgment miracle of the withered fig tree is the last miracle in Mark. The unfruitful tree is cast aside. Most commentators see this as a sign that Israel would be judged because they were not ready for Jesus' coming (e.g. Hooker, 1991:261). Evans (2001:158) argues that nothing in Mark points in this direction. Rather, because of its juxtaposition with the following scene, he sees this as a picture of the destruction of the Temple. As such, it is another case of Mark sandwiching episodes together so that one helps explain another. As the fig tree was dead, so was Israel and her Temple worship. The scene ends with Jesus' comment to the disciples. The fig tree will reemerge for attention in 11:20. The fact that the scene of Jesus clearing the Temple is embedded in that of the cursing of the fig tree is important, because the Temple scene helps to explain why the fig tree was cursed. The question is whether the imagery points to the Temple or to those who were in charge of it at that time.
As for the Temple clearing, Jesus was not opposed to the selling of sacrifices per se. The Temple worshippers needed sacrifices, but the way in which these sales were taking place was desecrating the sacred space (see note on 11:15). More important was the authority this symbolic act presupposed. Evans (2001:166) calls the action a "demonstration" in the Temple precincts—a prophetic protest, not a takeover. The act declared that Jesus had the right to assess the way the Temple was being operated, apart from the opinions of the Temple leadership; thus the act was a direct attack on the validity of the Temple's Jewish leaders.
Jesus made the bold declaration, "My Temple will be called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have turned it into a den of thieves" (11:17). In so doing, he cited Isaiah 56:7 and Jeremiah 7:11, contrasting what the Temple should be (a house of prayer for the nations) with what it had become (a den of thieves). Jeremiah 7 is a particularly significant critique of the Temple; it did not guarantee the protection of Jerusalem because its worship was corrupt (Evans 2001:173-179 has a full discussion). If its worship was a sham, there is a sense in which the people were "brigands," robbing God and the Temple of its honor by their insincere worship (Hooker 1991:264). This was open and public robbery (NIDNTT 3.377-379; John 12:6; Luke 10:30). There is also a potential parallel to 1 Kings 8:41-43, in which Solomon looked to the day when all nations would worship at the Temple. Jesus portrayed himself as understanding God's will and intentions for the Temple, and he stood up for the honor of God that the leaders had failed to uphold. He also defended the Temple as a place for Gentiles, something that Caiaphas had undercut in allowing the sales to take place there. Mark's emphasis, however, is on the compromise of the whole Temple as a sacred site.
Jesus could not have challenged the Jews' leadership more directly, and he did this in the most sacred, public locale possible. Jesus was not alone in his criticism of the Jewish leaders, as Qumran and other texts show (1QpHab 1:13; 8:9; 9:9; 11:4; _Testament of Moses_ 7:6-10; _Antiquities_ 20.179-81, 207; _2 Baruch_ 10:18; Evans 2001:168). What may have been unique was that he made his protest about the Temple on the sacred site (for other Temple-related protests in Judaism that were not about the Temple per se but which met with strong official reaction, see Evans 2001:170; Josephus _Antiquities_ 13.292, 13.372-373, 17.149-167). The chief priests and scribes decided that Jesus had to be stopped. His challenge to them through his actions in the sacred holy place would spell his demise, but they were afraid of him because the people were so amazed at Jesus' teaching. Jesus' popularity was the major obstacle to their murderous plan. They had to figure out how to arrest Jesus without inciting the crowd.
In summary, the Temple cleansing and the cursing of the fig tree are key events in Mark. They show Jesus as exercising authority at the sacred center of Judaism. Whether his actions predicted the destruction of the Temple or were a call to reform it, Jesus made an important claim to speak for God about the most holy location in Judaism. It was probably an act of reform, as he proclaimed that the Temple should be a "house of prayer for all nations." However, his use of Jeremiah with its exilic context may imply that the Temple was subject to judgment.
Did Jesus act as a prophet or as a messianic figure? At the least, his actions were prophetic, but in his entry into Jerusalem, the people invoked the Davidic hope by hailing him as a king. They expected, as seen in the fourteenth blessing of the Eighteen Benedictions, that the coming of the king and the purging of Jerusalem would come at the end. (Bock 2002b:373 discusses this specific benediction, which prays for Jerusalem's restoration, the building of a Temple and the raising up of David's throne; also Schürer 1979:2.458 discusses the entire prayer.) Jesus' actions in the Temple were regal.
Jesus actions' also directly challenged the leaders' authority and reinforced their commitment to stopping him so that they could remain in control. This set up the backdrop for the cursing of the fig tree, which most likely alluded to Israel's status as the people of God. Jesus cursed the tree as a picture of imminent judgment, because the nation was about to reject him.
Jesus' act of judgment through a miraculous declaration got the disciples' attention. Jesus turned this into a call to believe in God. He was at work, even in unusual ways; therefore, the possibility that God will continue to work in surprising and seemingly impossible ways continues for those who believe that God can do this. Jesus issued a call to pray with faith: "You can pray for anything, and if you believe that you've received it, it will be yours" (11:24). God can and will do great things, if they are requested in faith. This remark is stated in absolute and unqualified terms, probably for rhetorical impact. Jesus was not giving a blank check, promising that anything we want that we believe God can supply will be ours. Rather, he was calling for prayer of faith. In the end, God determines how prayers are answered.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Question about the source of Jesus' authority (11:27-33; cf. Matt 21:23-32; Luke 20:1-8)
27 Again they entered Jerusalem. As Jesus was walking through the Temple area, the leading priests, the teachers of religious law, and the elders came up to him. 28 They demanded, "By what authority are you doing all these things? Who gave you the right to do them?"
29 "I'll tell you by what authority I do these things if you answer one question," Jesus replied. 30 "Did John's authority to baptize come from heaven, or was it merely human? Answer me!"
31 They talked it over among themselves. "If we say it was from heaven, he will ask why we didn't believe John. 32 But do we dare say it was merely human?" For they were afraid of what the people would do, because everyone believed that John was a prophet. 33 So they finally replied, "We don't know."
And Jesus responded, "Then I won't tell you by what authority I do these things."
## NOTES
11:27 **the leading priests, the teachers of religious law, and the elders.** The chief priests, scribes, and elders plotted against Jesus (11:18; 12:12; 14:1, 10-11; 14:43, 53; 15:1). The elders were the lay members of the council (TDNT 6.658-59; Josephus _Life_ 194).
11:28 **They demanded.** The NLT's translation assumes a tone of challenge in the question, as the Gr. simply has, "they said to him." The question was raised in a context in which Jesus' action left them displeased, so the NLT's sense is not unlikely.
11:29 **if you answer one question.** Responding to a question with a question was common in rabbinic debate (Lane 1974:413; Mark 10:2-3).
11:30 **Did John's authority to baptize come from heaven, or was it merely human?** Jesus set up an analogy between John's work (and the source of the Baptist's authority) and his own. The parallel is that John's ministry was not authorized by the leaders, but if it came from God, then it should have been heeded. The same was true of Jesus' ministry.
11:31 **If we say it was from heaven, he will ask why we didn't believe John.** The Gr. grammatical structure here is a third class condition, so the "if" premise is simply set forth without indicating whether it was accepted or not. It is a simple hypothetical.
11:32 **But do we dare say it was merely human?** This rendering reflects a deliberative sense in the Gr.: "should we say it was human?" The NLT renders the fear expressed later in Gr. as "dare say." The leaders stopped considering this reply before completing the thought, for it was obvious that the public would not swallow such an answer (France 2002:455 says they stopped expressing what would be seen as a "diplomatic gaffe").
**because everyone believed that John was a prophet.** The leaders feared the crowd because the people regarded John as one truly sent from God.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This is the first of several controversies during Jesus' final week. The major Jewish leaders raised a question about Jesus' religious authority, since his actions in the Temple directly challenged their authority. The text introduces the chief priests, scribes, and elders as the ones who plotted against Jesus. They asked him, "By what authority are you doing all these things? Who gave you the right to do them?" These questions set the tone for what would remain an issue throughout the final section of Mark. Who was speaking for God—the Jewish leaders, or Jesus? Their question implied that Jesus had no authority since he did not get it from them.
Jesus replied with a question of his own, raising the possibility that God might act through someone they had not authorized. By asking his question about John the Baptist, Jesus effectively gave his answer. Just as God blessed John without the leaders' approval, so God blessed Jesus. If John's ministry was from heaven, then the leaders should have responded to it, but they did not. They knew that Jesus would ask them why they had not listened to John if they answered that his ministry came from heaven. The leaders also knew that if they said John's ministry was from earth ("merely human"), the people would not respect them, because the people believed that John was a true prophet.
The leaders contemplated the options in terms of how they would play out publicly. Popular opinion prevented them from expressing their own thoughts, so they refused to give Jesus a straight answer, saying, "We don't know." It is not to their credit that those leaders who should have been able to recognize God's work in John "did not know" what God was doing. The leaders were blind and disingenuous in failing to answer the question.
Consequently, Jesus responded, "Then I won't tell you by what authority I do these things." Jesus refused to explain the source of his authority, although anyone reading Mark knows the answer. He also was not only saying that he was a prophet like John. His ride into Jerusalem on the donkey made it clear that he saw himself in other, greater terms. He was the Messiah-King who had come to deliver Jerusalem, but the leaders of Israel rejected him as such.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. Parable of the evil tenants (12:1-12; cf. Matt 21:33-46; Luke 20:9-19)
1 Then Jesus began teaching them with stories: "A man planted a vineyard. He built a wall around it, dug a pit for pressing out the grape juice, and built a lookout tower. Then he leased the vineyard to tenant farmers and moved to another country. 2 At the time of the grape harvest, he sent one of his servants to collect his share of the crop. 3 But the farmers grabbed the servant, beat him up, and sent him back empty-handed. 4 The owner then sent another servant, but they insulted him and beat him over the head. 5 The next servant he sent was killed. Others he sent were either beaten or killed, 6 until there was only one left—his son whom he loved dearly. The owner finally sent him, thinking, 'Surely they will respect my son.'
7 "But the tenant farmers said to one another, 'Here comes the heir to this estate. Let's kill him and get the estate for ourselves!' 8 So they grabbed him and murdered him and threw his body out of the vineyard.
9 "What do you suppose the owner of the vineyard will do?" Jesus asked. "I'll tell you—he will come and kill those farmers and lease the vineyard to others. 10 Didn't you ever read this in the Scriptures?
'The stone that the builders rejected
has now become the cornerstone.
11 This is the LORD's doing,
and it is wonderful to see.'[*]"
12 The religious leaders[*] wanted to arrest Jesus because they realized he was telling the story against them—they were the wicked farmers. But they were afraid of the crowd, so they left him and went away.
## NOTES
12:1 **vineyard.** This is a traditional way to refer to Israel, as Isa 5:1-7 makes clear. The vineyard wall provided protection, and the tower made it possible to watch for danger. God planted this vineyard.
**tenant farmers.** These were the Jewish leaders (see 12:12). The backdrop is the common first-century Galilean and Judean pattern of an owner's renting out a farm to tenant farmers (Hurtado 1989:197). France (2002:459) notes that perhaps the leaders in Jerusalem were themselves land owners, thereby creating an ironic contrast.
12:2 **sent one of his servants to collect his share of the crop.** The image now shifts to a portrayal of the prophets who sought spiritual fruit in Israel. Prophets were often called servants in the OT (Jer 7:25; Amos 3:7; Zech 1:6).
12:3 **beat him up.** The prophets were persecuted and rejected. No fruit was given over to God, and his messenger was rejected.
12:4 **they insulted him and beat him over the head.** This rejection of a prophet was not an isolated incident. Other prophets had been sent and rejected. This fits the teaching of the OT (2 Sam 10:2-5 speaks of David's servants being treated in a similar way; 2 Kgs 17:7-20; 2 Chr 24:20-22; 36:15-16; Jer 25:3-7; 26:20-23; cf. France 2002:460). The next servants were beaten or killed. The treatment experienced by John the Baptist and what the leaders were about to do to Jesus had been going on for a long time; the resistance had grown stronger with time.
12:6 **his son whom he loved dearly.** Finally, the owner sent his beloved son ( _agapētos_ [TG27, ZG28]) as his last and most important representative. This represents Jesus and recalls how God addressed him at his baptism and transfiguration (Mark 1:11; 9:7).
12:10 **The stone that the builders rejected has now become the cornerstone.** There is debate as to whether a cornerstone or a capstone is intended, but a cornerstone is likely, especially given the application of the image in Eph 2:20-22 and 1 Pet 2:6-7, and the fact that it is linked with Isa 28:16 and the idea that one can stumble over the stone, as Luke 20:18 suggests (so the NLT rendering and NIDNTT 3.388-390). See Evans 2001:238 for the view that a capstone is meant. The psalm also appears in Acts 4:11; 1 Pet 2:4, 7; Rom 9:32-33.
12:12 **The religious leaders wanted to arrest Jesus.** They were seeking to arrest him; the Gr. uses an imperfect tense, so their effort to apprehend Jesus was ongoing.
**they realized he was telling the story against them.** The Gr. is slightly more ambiguous as to who knew that the parable was told against the leaders (either the leaders or the crowd are "they"), but it is likely that the leaders were intended, since the verse then gives their reactions (France 2002:464).
**But they were afraid of the crowd.** For the second time in just a few verses, their fear of the crowd is noted (11:31). If they grabbed him, a riot might result, so they waited.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus' parable makes it clear that the Judean leaders were part of the historical pattern of the nation. God had long sought fruit from them without finding it. The prophets he sent were consistently abused and persecuted. One servant after another was mistreated. The rejection remained intense and repetitive, so God finally sent his Son. Logic suggests that the son would meet with respect, not abuse, and the owner sent his son with the expectation that they would identify him and treat him accordingly.
But the land tenants said, "Here comes the heir. . . . Let's kill him and get the estate for ourselves!" The statement is revealing. The tenants identified the Son but decided to remove him, expecting that they would then get the farm since they had worked it. The premise was that if owned land lacked an heir, those who worked the land would get it (Lane 1974:416-419). This, of course, presupposes that the lack of an heir is not due to the murderous actions of the tenants! The lack of logic shows the blindness of sin. Their action shows no respect for the Father or the Son. They did not respect God's messenger, so they did not respect God.
The text says, "They grabbed him and murdered him and threw his body out of the vineyard" (12:8). Thus, the parable anticipates Jesus' rejection and execution by the leaders. The Son's being cast outside looks to Jesus' suffering "outside the city gates" (Heb 13:12). In the story, the Son was even dishonored by being left unburied. Of course, from the way that the story is told, a listener would wonder how anyone could do all that to the son. Jesus' point was that the leaders would do this to him.
But God, the Lord and master, would judge the tenant farmers for their wickedness. The owner of the vineyard is called the Lord ( _kurios_ [TG2962, ZG3261]), a common title for God. As 12:9 says, "he will come and kill those farmers and lease the vineyard to others." As Jesus predicted, the farmers would be destroyed and others would thereby have a chance to make the vineyard fruitful. In context, the remarks mean that the Jewish leaders would be judged, and the community led by the Twelve and Jesus' other disciples would be given the opportunity to bring forth fruit.
After telling the story, Jesus cited Psalm 118:22, which describes builders who rejected a stone that would become the key to what God was constructing. In the original Psalm, the stone, the king and leader of the nation, was rejected by others. The Jewish leaders would have seen themselves as supporting such a king, but Jesus' reading subverted their understanding, showing them to be enemies of the king because they did not recognize the one God had sent. By focusing on the tenants as enemies, Jesus made it clear that his complaint was not about Israel as a whole, but about the Jewish leaders. This part of the story stands in contrast to Isaiah 5:5-6.
Jesus then quoted Psalm 118:23 "This is the Lord's doing, and it is wonderful to see." This declaration about God's will emphasizes that although rejection was part of the situation, this had not caught God by surprise. Rather, it was part of God's amazing design.
Ironically, the leaders who heard the parable and knew that it was about them determined to arrest Jesus and kill him, thereby fulfilling the parable. Their question about Jesus' authority from the previous passage was not turned against them. The leaders had abused their authority, and God would take it from them. The dominant question of who was speaking for God continues in scene after scene of this chapter.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Question concerning paying taxes to Caesar (12:13-17; cf. Matt 22:15-22; Luke 20:20-26)
13 Later the leaders sent some Pharisees and supporters of Herod to trap Jesus into saying something for which he could be arrested. 14 "Teacher," they said, "we know how honest you are. You are impartial and don't play favorites. You teach the way of God truthfully. Now tell us—is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay them, or shouldn't we?"
Jesus saw through their hypocrisy and said, "Why are you trying to trap me? Show me a Roman coin,[*] and I'll tell you." 16 When they handed it to him, he asked, "Whose picture and title are stamped on it?"
"Caesar's," they replied.
17 "Well, then," Jesus said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God."
His reply completely amazed them.
## NOTES
12:13 **to trap Jesus.** The Gr. word for "trap" ( _agreuō_ [TG64, ZG65]) means to snare, as one does an animal or an unsuspecting person (Job 10:16, LXX; Prov 5:22; 6:25; BDAG 15).
12:14 **we know how honest you are. You are impartial. . . . You teach the way of God truthfully.** The way that the passage is introduced makes it clear that this three-fold compliment was less than honest in intention, despite its being true. The impartiality referred to is of not being a "respecter of faces" (TDNT 6:779-780).
**is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?** The political question was whether Jews had an obligation to pay the poll tax of the foreign power that occupied their land. Judas the Galilean had led a revolt against such a tax in AD 6 (Hurtado 1989:198; Josephus _War_ 2.118; _Antiquities_ 17.308; 18.1-10; 20.102). The poll tax was a second tax for Jews, since they also supported the Temple; the Roman tax was especially disliked because it imposed this burden on the people in addition to indicating their subservience to Rome.
12:15 **saw through their hypocrisy.** Jesus was well aware of why the question had been asked, and he explicitly noted his awareness: "Why are you trying to trap me?"
12:17 **give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.** The verb used here is often used of paying a debt ( _apodidōmi_ [TG591, ZG625]; Matt 5:26; 18:25-26, 28-30, 34; Luke 7:42; 12:59).
**His reply completely amazed them.** Their amazement means that they were processing the answer, even though they recognized that Jesus had eluded their trap.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The introductory verse in this scene makes it clear that the leaders' question ("Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?") was not asked innocently but with the intention of obtaining a political charge against Jesus that they could take to the Roman officials. If the Romans would deal with Jesus, then the leaders would not be responsible for his demise. They might accomplish this by a question that could coax a statement against paying taxes to Rome. However, if Jesus said that Jews should pay taxes to Rome, then the Jews who longed for a messianic challenge to Rome would be discouraged from identifying with Jesus' mission. It was no surprise to find Pharisees and allies of Herod asking the question. The Herodians would be interested to see if Jesus would challenge their leader.
The political question was whether or not Jews were obligated to pay the poll tax of the foreign power that occupied their country. Because it underscored Israel's subjection to pagan Rome, the tax was unpopular. Jesus knew that they were trying to trap him, so he asked them to show him a Roman coin. Jesus was specifically asking for a denarius, the basic Roman coin, and his approach was to show that the Jewish leaders already participated in the Roman economy. They used Roman coins in their daily lives. So he asked them to show him a coin stamped with Caesar's name and image.
So Jesus asked the obvious: "Whose picture and title are stamped on it?" Caesar distributed these coins and they were marked accordingly, as his questioners acknowledged. The inscription on some Roman coins described Tiberius as "Son of the Divine Augustus," which pious Jews regarded as blasphemous. However, the leaders did not object so much that they refused to use the coins to meet their daily expenses.
Then Jesus answered, "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God." Jesus' reply recognized that Caesar had a sphere of responsibility and that God had one as well. Those coins belonged to Caesar and ran the economy he oversaw, so they should give him his due. However, they should also be sure that God was given what was owed to him. The previous parable (12:1-12) had already warned that the leaders failed to do exactly that.
In conclusion, the Jewish leaders tried to construe Jesus as a political revolutionary, but they failed to catch him speaking against Rome. All modern readings that make Jesus into a political figure fail to note that Jesus passed up the opportunity to feature this in his teaching. This passage is also often used to speak of two spheres of authority to justify the separation of the state from God. That is not the point of this text, which simply says that the state has its responsibility in running society and that people also have to give God the loyalty due to him (see Rom 13:7; 1 Pet 2:13-14).
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Question about resurrection (12:18-27; cf. Matt 22:23-33; Luke 20:27-40)
18 Then Jesus was approached by some Sadducees—religious leaders who say there is no resurrection from the dead. They posed this question: 19 "Teacher, Moses gave us a law that if a man dies, leaving a wife without children, his brother should marry the widow and have a child who will carry on the brother's name.[*] 20 Well, suppose there were seven brothers. The oldest one married and then died without children. 21 So the second brother married the widow, but he also died without children. Then the third brother married her. 22 This continued with all seven of them, and still there were no children. Last of all, the woman also died. 23 So tell us, whose wife will she be in the resurrection? For all seven were married to her."
24 Jesus replied, "Your mistake is that you don't know the Scriptures, and you don't know the power of God. 25 For when the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage. In this respect they will be like the angels in heaven.
26 "But now, as to whether the dead will be raised—haven't you ever read about this in the writings of Moses, in the story of the burning bush? Long after Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died, God said to Moses,[*] 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.'[*] 27 So he is the God of the living, not the dead. You have made a serious error."
## NOTES
12:18 **Sadducees.** This group held the bulk of political power in Israel because they came from the upper classes that had compromised with Rome in order to share power (Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.16-17; _War_ 2.164-166). France (2002:470) and Lane (1974:426) describe them as an aristocratic body. Their name probably derives from the name Zadok, high priest from the time of David (2 Sam 8:17; 19:11). This is the only place Mark mentions them. They also have a prominent role in the book of Acts (Acts 4:1-4; 5:17-18). As philosophical naturalists, they rejected the idea of a resurrection, much like many Greeks did.
12:19 **Moses gave us a law.** The Sadducees cited the levirate law that required a brother to marry the widow of another brother if the couple were childless (Deut 25:5-10 and the mishnaic tractate of _m. Yevamot_ ; Gen 38:8 is an example; see also Josephus _Antiquities_ 4.254-255). The purpose of the law was to preserve the name and property of the dead brother.
12:20-23 **seven brothers . . . married and then died without children . . . This continued with all seven of them . . . Last of all, the woman also died. . . . whose wife will she be in the resurrection?** The scenario is of a woman who goes into the afterlife having had seven husbands and no children. Tobit 3–7 tells a story of a woman with seven husbands who had no children, but the book does not raise this problem (though Levirate marriage is noted in Tobit 4:12; 6:9-12; 7:11; Lane 1974:427).
12:24 **Your mistake is that you don't know the Scriptures.** In a rhetorical question that expects a positive reply, he asked, "Is this not why you err?" The NLT is correct in rendering this as "your mistake is that . . ." The imagery of the verb for err ( _planaomai_ [TG4105A, ZG4414]) is of leading someone astray by taking them off the right path (Deut 22:1; Ps 119:176 [118:176 LXX]; Isa 53:6; Ezek 34:4, 16; Matt 18:12-13; Mark 13:5-6; 2 Tim 3:13; 1 Pet 2:25; 1 John 2:26).
12:26 **I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.** The point of the explanation is not the grammar or the present tense of the supplied verbs for Exod 3 but the theology of God's still being addressed as the God of the patriarchs (see Commentary).
12:27 **he is the God of the living, not the dead.** The Jews had a group of prayers called the _'Amidah_ (also known as the Eighteen Benedictions), a portion of which read, "You quicken the dead with great mercy . . . and keep your faith with those who sleep in the dust" (Lane 1974:428).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, as the opening verse (12:18) notes; they also doubted the existence of angels and focused on the Torah at the expense of the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures. They intended to show that the resurrection was ludicrous by posing a situation in which a woman shared seven husbands (who were also brothers) after the resurrection. If the woman was married to seven men, how could she possibly take care of them all? The Sadducees assumed that this was an affront to monogamy, and that the afterlife is like this life.
Jesus began his reply to them by pointing out a double error in their question. They did not know what Scripture teaches, and they underestimated the power of God. Jesus did not play Scripture against an understanding of God here, but suggested that Scripture points to God, who in turn has the power to accomplish what Scripture declares about him. These points about Scripture and God's character are important, because people sometimes suggest that Scripture teaches cold abstract doctrine at the expense of a relationship with God. Jesus used Scripture as a lens that gives a focused glimpse of who God is and of what his power can accomplish. The doctrine of resurrection shows that Scripture points to God's character and activity, for in order for there to be a resurrection, God must exercise his creative power.
As Jesus continued his response, he dealt with the Sadducees' theology. It was wrong of them to assume that the afterlife is like this life. Jesus said, "they will neither marry nor be given in marriage . . . they will be like the angels in heaven" (12:25). Life in eternity will not involve marriage; it will be the kind of existence that the angels presently enjoy, of being in direct fellowship with God (1 Enoch 15:5-7 indicates that there is no need for angels to marry and give birth because they are immortal, spiritual beings). Thus Jesus took care of the "polygamy problem."
He then asked the Sadducees, "Haven't you ever read about this in the writings of Moses . . . 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?" Jesus was citing the Torah, the part of the Hebrew Scripture that the Sadducees respected most. From Exodus 3:6, he noted that after the death of the patriarchs, God was still addressed as their God. Many Jews also believed this (see 4 Macc 7:19 and 16:25, where the patriarchs are said not to have died, but to live unto God; see Evans 2001:257). The assumption was that they are still alive, and that God was still their God after their death. God is also still keeping promises that he made to them. A great liturgical phrase of Judaism refers to God as "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." This is a way of saying that God is the God of promise. God is still their God, as explained in the next statement, "So he is the God of the living, not the dead."
God is a God of the living, not of those who have perished. For God to be called the God of Abraham after Abraham has died means that Abraham is still alive, which presupposes resurrection. Failure to see this was a major error. In the end, Jesus agreed with the Pharisees that the Scripture teaches resurrection.
Resurrection is at the heart of our future hope. Its reality means ultimate accountability to God, whereas its denial reduces religious faith to this life, to a materialistic view of salvation with no future or heavenly kingdom. With no heavenly hope, justice would also function only in the context of this life, and religion would be reduced to mere ethics. For Jesus, religious faith was more than that; it was a belief in God's restorative work and in his rule over creation. For these reasons, Jesus said that a doctrine denying resurrection was a serious error that cut off the hope God gives us for the restoration of creation. Jesus defended resurrection, while emphasizing that the afterlife is different from this life.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. The most important commandment (12:28-34; cf. Matt 22:34-40)
28 One of the teachers of religious law was standing there listening to the debate. He realized that Jesus had answered well, so he asked, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"
29 Jesus replied, "The most important commandment is this: 'Listen, O Israel! The LORD our God is the one and only LORD. 30 And you must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.'[*] 31 The second is equally important: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[*] No other commandment is greater than these."
32 The teacher of religious law replied, "Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth by saying that there is only one God and no other. 33 And I know it is important to love him with all my heart and all my understanding and all my strength, and to love my neighbor as myself. This is more important than to offer all of the burnt offerings and sacrifices required in the law."
34 Realizing how much the man understood, Jesus said to him, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God." And after that, no one dared to ask him any more questions.
## NOTES
12:28 **Of all the commandments, which is the most important?** This text introduces the significant theological issue of whether the commandments can be prioritized. This was often discussed among the rabbis (Hooker 1991:287).
12:31 **The second . . . 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' No other commandment is greater than these.** Judaism also taught this (Akiba in _Sifra_ 89a [on Lev 19:15-20]; Hillel in _b. Shabbat_ 31a says that "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor" is the whole of the law; _Testament of Issachar_ 5:2; Philo _Decalogue_ 109-110; Hooker 1991:288; also Rom 13:8; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8). Other Jewish texts take another direction. Simeon the Just (c. 200 BC) taught, "The world rests on three things: the Law, the sacrificial worship, and expressions of love" ( _m. Avot_ 1.2; Lane 1974:434).
12:32 **You have spoken the truth by saying that there is only one God and no other.** The scribe commended Jesus' reply, and especially his focus on the one God.
12:33 **This is more important than to offer all of the burnt offerings and sacrifices required in the law.** After reaffirming the two commands, the scribe added his own commentary of prioritization. He noted that the two foci on love are more important than any liturgical requirements calling for offerings or sacrifices. The NLT renders as "more important" a phrase that in the Gr. simply states that love is "much more" than offerings and sacrifices. The NLT makes the force of the remark clear. In a sense, these priorities were already implied by the argument that the commandments to love were the greatest commandments. The scribe's remark made this explicit.
12:34 **Realizing how much the man understood.** The NLT renders well the sense of the Gr., which says that "Jesus saw that the man answered wisely."
**no one dared to ask him any more questions.** Jesus' answers in these controversies were so effective that the questions stopped. Jesus had demonstated his competency.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This passage is significant because it brings the controversies to an end while revealing how Jesus prioritized the law. In saying, "Listen, O Israel! The LORD our God is the one and only LORD," Jesus was quoting the _Shema'_ , a Scripture beginning in Deuteronomy 6:4 that Jews recited twice daily to declare the uniqueness of the LORD God in a world of many gods. (The word _shema'_ [TH8085, ZH9048], "to hear," is the first word in the Hebrew text of Deut 6:4—a call for Israel to listen.) Jesus used the unique character of God to launch a discussion of the great commandments (so also Josephus _Against Apion_ 2.190, who says that the first commandment concerns God). God's personal nature and his desire for relationship are underscored by the declaration that he is "our" God; he is also the Lord who rules the universe. Jesus continued by saying, "You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength." God's existence as the Lord who is our God carries a corollary: our love for him must involve the entire person. Everything we do radiates from this theological core. Life and theology begin at the same place, from a love relationship with the living God to whom we submit as to the one and only Lord. Thus, this is the first commandment in priority.
Jesus then cited Leviticus 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself"), thereby completing his focus on relational commands about love as the greatest commandments. Being properly related to God entails being properly related to others. The scribe appreciated Jesus' answer and said that expressing love far outweighs offering sacrifices. Other Old Testament texts say that God desires mercy, not sacrifice (1 Sam 15:22; Isa 1:11; Hos 6:6; Jer 6:20; 7:22-23; Mic 6:6-8; Evans 2001:265-266).
Jesus told the scribe, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God" (12:34). The Kingdom concerns more than a love ethic, but love is fundamental to the Kingdom. Jesus affirmed this man's insight here in the one scene in Mark in which Jesus and a Jewish questioner agree. All the man needed for access to God's promise was allegiance to Jesus, God's sent One.
In summary, the two foremost commands are to love God completely and to love one's neighbor as oneself. Jesus affirmed that these commandments were of greater importance than offerings and sacrifices. However, the text also makes it clear that although an ethical orientation toward God and others is central, it does not bring one into the Kingdom. When Jesus addresses the Messiah's status in the next passage, he puts the last piece of the puzzle in place. Participation in the Kingdom is not possible without understanding who the Messiah is. To love God is to love the One sent to bring God's promise.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. Question about the Messiah (12:35-37; cf. Matt 22:41-46; Luke 20:41-44)
35 Later, as Jesus was teaching the people in the Temple, he asked, "Why do the teachers of religious law claim that the Messiah is the son of David? 36 For David himself, speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, said,
'The LORD said to my Lord,
Sit in the place of honor at my right hand
until I humble your enemies beneath your feet.'[*]
37 Since David himself called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?" The large crowd listened to him with great delight.
## NOTES
12:35 **Jesus was teaching the people in the Temple.** In Mark's account, Jesus is often depicted as teaching near the end of his ministry (11:15-16, 27; 13:1; 14:49; cf. Luke 21:37).
**the Messiah is the son of David.** The roots of this understanding extend back to texts such as 2 Sam 7:12-16; Isa 9:2-7; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6, 33:15; Zech 3:8; 6:12; Amos 9:11. The _Psalms of Solomon_ 17–18 also give this presentation of the Messiah. The NT acknowledges this relationship of David to Jesus (Rom 1:2-4; 2 Tim 2:8; Matt 1:20; Luke 1:27, 32, 69; 2:4, 11; Rev 5:5; 22:16).
12:36 **the Lord said to my Lord.** This citation from Psalm 110:1 introduces perhaps the most important Old Testament text used in the NT to explain Jesus. It declares three key points: (1) that the one who God addresses is a descendant of David who also is his Lord despite being younger, a reversal of form that points to the uniqueness of the figure; (2) It stresses and explains where Jesus will go on his resurrection, at the side of the Father sharing authority from his right hand, and (3) that total victory will come one day to this figure as all will be set at his feet.
12:37 **with great delight.** Jesus' remarks pleased the crowd because he had bested "the experts" in ways that led people to ponder. The term for delight ( _hēdeōs_ [TG2234, ZG2452]) means that they enjoyed what took place (BDAG 434; Mark 6:20).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus again took the initiative, as he did with the parable of the tenants. Jesus' remark here deals with a central expectation about the Messiah, that he would be a royal descendant of David (see note on 12:35). Jesus adjusted this understanding with his interpretation of Psalm 110:1, in which David addressed the issue of the Messiah under the inspiration of the Spirit. It was common knowledge in Judaism that David was an inspired writer (2 Sam 23:2; 11QPsa 27:2-4, 11; Evans 2001:273). Jesus then focused on David's words, "the LORD said to my Lord." David addressed the Messiah to come as one to whom God (the LORD, Yahweh) spoke directly and as being David's Lord ( _'adonay_ [TH136, ZH151], "my Lord"). Since David the king had as high a rank as was humanly possible, how could David have a Lord beyond the LORD?
The psalm continues, "Sit in the place of honor at my right hand until I humble your enemies beneath your feet," which underscores the authority God gave to the Messiah by giving him a seat at his right hand. This text answers the question of authority raised in Mark 11:28 by saying that the one that David called his LORD had a seat at God's side and that God would give him victory over his enemies. Jesus did not elaborate on this point by connecting it to his exaltation, or by saying that he was this figure. Mark's readers, remembering 8:29, should know that this discussion is about Jesus. The key to understanding the Messiah is not that he is David's son, but that he is the exalted "Lord." This One was authorized to sit at God's side.
Jesus' final question is poignant. "Since David himself called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?" (12:37). Jesus' question did not deny that the Messiah was David's son. Rather, the question was like a rabbinic antinomy, in which two points of unequal significance are juxtaposed. Jesus' point was that his being Lord to a grand figure like David was more important than his being David's son. In this patriarchal culture, an ancestor had the higher rank. Reversing this for a king's descendant so that a child ranked higher than the greatest king suggested the Messiah's unique status. This understanding would deepen when Jesus was exalted after his resurrection. Then it would become even clearer that Jesus meant that "Lord" was his key title, showing the sovereign position he had at God's side. France (2002:488) prefers to point to a title such as "Son of God" in contrast to "son of David" and in light of Mark's focus on the title from Mark 1:1, but this works only if one already appreciates that "Son of God" is enhanced beyond its normal Jewish usage. The position and function of Jesus' sovereign role are key here; the idea of "Lord" works fine by itself, if not as an appeal to the exalted "Son of Man," then as a title Jesus used of himself.
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. Contrasting the scribes and a widow (12:38-44; cf. Matt 23:1-12; Luke 20:45-47)
38 Jesus also taught: "Beware of these teachers of religious law! For they like to parade around in flowing robes and receive respectful greetings as they walk in the marketplaces. 39 And how they love the seats of honor in the synagogues and the head table at banquets. 40 Yet they shamelessly cheat widows out of their property and then pretend to be pious by making long prayers in public. Because of this, they will be more severely punished."
41 Jesus sat down near the collection box in the Temple and watched as the crowds dropped in their money. Many rich people put in large amounts. 42 Then a poor widow came and dropped in two small coins.[*]
43 Jesus called his disciples to him and said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has given more than all the others who are making contributions. 44 For they gave a tiny part of their surplus, but she, poor as she is, has given everything she had to live on."
## NOTES
12:38 **Beware of these teachers of religious law!** Jesus warned the crowd about people whose authority was misdirected. These drew attention to themselves and not to God. The tense of the verb means that the people were to be on constant watch to avoid following the example of such people (see Mark 8:15).
**respectful greetings.** In Judaism, religious authorities were to be given a special greeting in the market place (Matt 23:7). Jesus condemned this type of self-directed attention, along with the "flowing robes" that also drew attention to their status. These leaders also had attention-getting cloaks known as _tallith_. The _stolē_ [TG4749, ZG5124] refers to such a ceremonial robe (Esth 6:8; Josephus _Antiquities_ 3.151; 11.80).
12:39 **seats of honor.** These seats, whether at the synagogue or at banquets, also show how these religious figures loved to draw attention to themselves (Josephus _Antiquities_ 15.21; according to _t. Megillah_ 3.21, the leaders sat facing the people with their backs to the sanctuary; Evans 2001:278).
12:40 **they shamelessly cheat widows.** The NLT renders the Gr. figure of those who "devour widow's houses" more concretely here ( _Testament of Moses_ 7:6-10). What is specifically meant is not clear. The range of options runs from cheating widows out of their estates for services rendered, to taking houses as pledges for debt they could not repay, to charging for intercessory prayer. Evans (2001:279) notes six options.
**pretend to be pious by making long prayers.** The next complaint is that their piety had nothing to do with sincerity before God. It was a public show, even when prayers were made. The term _prophasis_ [TG4392, ZG4733] means to do something by pretext or for mere appearance (BDAG 889; Matt 6:5; Phil 1:18). Matthew has a much longer condemnation at this point in his gospel (Matt 23).
12:41 **the collection box.** The location of this box is uncertain. The temple had thirteen receptacles for such contributions; they were designed like trumpets and were located on the wall in the Court of Women ( _m. Sheqalim_ 6.5). Another possibility is the treasury itself, which would have had a place for gifts. However, given the presence of the widow, one of the thirteen receptacles is more likely.
12:42 **two small coins.** In Gr., this phrase refers to two lepta or quadrans, as Mark explains (BDAG 550). These were the smallest coins in the currency, and a lepton was only worth 1/128 of a denarius. That worked out to about six minutes' wage at a basic worker's daily pay level. In other words, it was next to nothing in contrast to the large amounts that the wealthy put in.
12:43 **this poor widow has given more than all the others.** Jesus commended the widow's contribution as greater than those of the rich. Jesus may have known that the woman was a widow by the way she was dressed. The next verse will explain the point.
12:44 **For . . . she . . . has given everything she had to live on.** In contrast to others who contributed out of their abundance, this widow gave "out of her want . . . the whole of her life." The Gr. makes the point in two distinct phrases, making it very clear that her gift was of the resources she applied to the basic necessities of life. The NLT has combined these into a single expression.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The narcissistic and ostentatious religious leaders took advantage of widows, the most vulnerable members of ancient Middle Eastern society. Jesus condemned this lack of love for people in need, which led right into another contrast between the religious leaders and a widow. The widow was extolled and some of Jesus' most fundamental values were promoted. Sacrificial giving is something that deeply delights God in general, as it does in the case of this widow. He does not look at the size of the gift but at the dimensions of the sacrifice behind it (cf. 1 Sam 16:7; God looks on the heart of the giver). Some have greater resources than others, and some who give next to nothing, give all. The widow is contrasted with the rich and even more so with the religious leaders whose example was altogether to be avoided, for they did not give. Rather, they took advantage of others and sought praise to their own glory. Jesus warned that they would "be more severely punished" (12:40). Their misleading behavior made them more culpable before God.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. The destruction of the Temple and return of the Son of Man (13:1-37; cf. Matt 24:1-36; Luke 21:5-36)
1 As Jesus was leaving the Temple that day, one of his disciples said, "Teacher, look at these magnificent buildings! Look at the impressive stones in the walls."
2 Jesus replied, "Yes, look at these great buildings. But they will be completely demolished. Not one stone will be left on top of another!"
3 Later, Jesus sat on the Mount of Olives across the valley from the Temple. Peter, James, John, and Andrew came to him privately and asked him, 4 "Tell us, when will all this happen? What sign will show us that these things are about to be fulfilled?"
5 Jesus replied, "Don't let anyone mislead you, 6 for many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Messiah.'[*] They will deceive many. 7 And you will hear of wars and threats of wars, but don't panic. Yes, these things must take place, but the end won't follow immediately. 8 Nation will go to war against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in many parts of the world, as well as famines. But this is only the first of the birth pains, with more to come.
9 "When these things begin to happen, watch out! You will be handed over to the local councils and beaten in the synagogues. You will stand trial before governors and kings because you are my followers. But this will be your opportunity to tell them about me.[*] 10 For the Good News must first be preached to all nations.[*] 11 But when you are arrested and stand trial, don't worry in advance about what to say. Just say what God tells you at that time, for it is not you who will be speaking, but the Holy Spirit.
12 "A brother will betray his brother to death, a father will betray his own child, and children will rebel against their parents and cause them to be killed. 13 And everyone will hate you because you are my followers.[*] But the one who endures to the end will be saved.
14 "The day is coming when you will see the sacrilegious object that causes desecration[*] standing where he[*] should not be." (Reader, pay attention!) "Then those in Judea must flee to the hills. 15 A person out on the deck of a roof must not go down into the house to pack. 16 A person out in the field must not return even to get a coat. 17 How terrible it will be for pregnant women and for nursing mothers in those days. 18 And pray that your flight will not be in winter. 19 For there will be greater anguish in those days than at any time since God created the world. And it will never be so great again. 20 In fact, unless the Lord shortens that time of calamity, not a single person will survive. But for the sake of his chosen ones he has shortened those days.
21 "Then if anyone tells you, 'Look, here is the Messiah,' or 'There he is,' don't believe it. 22 For false messiahs and false prophets will rise up and perform signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even God's chosen ones. 23 Watch out! I have warned you about this ahead of time!
24 "At that time, after the anguish of those days,
the sun will be darkened,
the moon will give no light,
25 the stars will fall from the sky,
and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.[*]
26 Then everyone will see the Son of Man[*] coming on the clouds with great power and glory.[*] 27 And he will send out his angels to gather his chosen ones from all over the world[*]—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven.
28 "Now learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branches bud and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near. 29 In the same way, when you see all these things taking place, you can know that his return is very near, right at the door. 30 I tell you the truth, this generation[*] will not pass from the scene before all these things take place. 31 Heaven and earth will disappear, but my words will never disappear.
32 "However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows. 33 And since you don't know when that time will come, be on guard! Stay alert[*]!
34 "The coming of the Son of Man can be illustrated by the story of a man going on a long trip. When he left home, he gave each of his slaves instructions about the work they were to do, and he told the gatekeeper to watch for his return. 35 You, too, must keep watch! For you don't know when the master of the household will return—in the evening, at midnight, before dawn, or at daybreak. 36 Don't let him find you sleeping when he arrives without warning. 37 I say to you what I say to everyone: Watch for him!"
## NOTES
13:1 **look at these magnificent buildings!** The Temple, which was being enhanced by Herod, was impressive. Josephus said that it looked like a snow-capped mountain rising up in the midst of Jerusalem (Josephus _War_ 5.184-226, esp. 222-223). Stones found there are fifteen meters long and two and a half meters wide; they weighed 420 to 600 tons (Evans 2001:299). It is the temple and its future that triggers the discourse. The temple was destroyed in AD 70, which has led to interpretive debates about what Jesus meant in the whole of the discourse (for this debate and views, see the discussion in the commentary below).
13:2 **they will be completely demolished. Not one stone will be left on top of another!** The NLT clearly brings out Jesus' imagery in referring to the building's being completely demolished. The Gr. reads, "There will not be one stone left on another that will not be thrown down."
13:3 **Mount of Olives.** This was often the setting for discussing judgment (Ezek 11:23; 43:2; Zech 14:3-4; Evans 2001:304).
**Peter, James, John, and Andrew.** Four "inner circle" disciples were part of this discussion, not the usual three (Peter, James, John). The difference gives evidence of careful historical detail and recollection. In Mark, the discussion known as the Olivet discourse is triggered by a private question of some of the key disciples.
13:4 **when will all this happen? What sign will show us that these things are about to be fulfilled?** The questions recognize that Jesus had predicted an event of great significance for Jerusalem. The Temple would not be destroyed unless God was engaged in a serious work. So they asked about the timing and about whether there would be any special indicator or warning signal, a sign ( _sēmeion_ [TG4592, ZG4956]) that these things were about to happen (on this concept, see Exod 3:12; Isa 7:11; _4 Ezra_ 4:52; Evans 2001:305). In Gr., the questions center twice around "these things" ( _tauta_ [TG3778A, ZG4047]; note the plural) happening. Jesus' reply confirms that his remarks dealt with more than the Temple.
13:5 **Don't let anyone mislead you.** The verb _planaō_ [TG4105, ZG4414] means not being deceived or led into error (12:24; Gal 6:7; Rev 2:20). The NLT obscures the verbal idea of "taking heed" ( _blepete_ [TG991, ZG1063]). This idea and variations on it also appear in 13:9, 23, 33, 35, and 37.
13:6 **claiming, 'I am the Messiah.' They will deceive many.** The error to avoid is the idea that anyone else could be the Christ. Taylor (1966:503-504) argues that the meaning here is a messianic or quasi-messianic claim.
13:7 **you will hear of wars and threats of wars.** Another feature of the period will be rampant rumors of war. This is seen in Jewish texts on the end times ( _1 Enoch_ 99:4; _2 Baruch_ 27:5; _4 Ezra_ 13:31; 15:15; note also Isa 8:21; 13:13; 14:30; 19:2; Jer 23:19; 51:46; Ezek 5:12; Hag 2:6; Zech 14:4; Taylor 1966:505). In other words, this is a prophetic theme. The Temple will be destroyed in a period of chaos.
**but the end won't follow immediately.** Jesus said that such chaos would still not indicate the end. This is Mark's first direct mention of "the end." The Temple's destruction suggests that the end was also related to its demise. How that relationship was to work was not yet detailed, except that the events that pointed to the Temple's destruction would not indicate the end. This remark made it clear that there were many events to come before the return of the Son of Man, which was Jesus' indirect way to refer to himself.
13:8 **will go to war . . . earthquakes . . . famines.** Jesus continued to describe a period of intense political and natural chaos.
**first of the birth pains, with more to come.** Picturing the end as the travail of a woman giving birth (also an OT theme; see Isa 26:17; Jer 4:31; 6:24; 22:23; Hos 13:13; Mic 4:9-10, sometimes about the nations and other times about Israel), Jesus said that these events were but the first part of the delivery of the end times.
13:12 **will betray . . . will rebel.** Alluding to Mic 7:6, Jesus made it clear that the persecution and division would touch families, as brothers betrayed brothers, fathers turned against children, and children turned against parents. The pain would be great because the conflict would involve those so near. Matthew 10:21 is similar in force. This idea also has parallels in Judaism ( _1 Enoch_ 100:1-2; _Jubilees_ 23:19; _4 Ezra_ 6:24; _3 Baruch_ 4:17; Evans 2001:312).
13:13 **And everyone will hate you because you are my followers.** The NLT speaks of allegiance to Jesus; the Gr. says "on account of my name." The rendering is a good one, as the point is that their association with Jesus will bring their arrest and persecution.
**But the one who endures to the end will be saved.** This reference to "the end" is not to the final point on the eschatological calendar; it refers to the end of an individual's journey.
13:14 **the sacrilegious object that causes desecration standing where he should not be.** This is a very explanatory rendering of the Greek: "the abomination of desolation set up where it [the abomination] ought not be." The language comes from Dan 12:11, and the historical example at the root of the image is Daniel's prophetic prediction of Antiochus Epiphanes and his desecration of the Temple in 167 BC (see 1 Macc 1:54; 2 Macc 6:2; other passages in Daniel note the theme; Dan 8:13; 9:27; 11:31). What is described is the desecration of the Holy of Holies.
**Reader, pay attention!** This parenthetical remark calls the reader to appreciate the significance of what is taking place.
**Then those in Judea must flee to the hills.** The call is to appreciate the danger of this time, when no one should remain in Jerusalem or its environs. All of Judea will be at risk in this time of severe judgment. Hills were regarded as a refuge in the OT (Gen 14:10; Jer 16:16; Ezek 7:16).
13:15 **must not go down into the house to pack.** The tribulation will be so intense that there will be no time to gather things in an organized withdrawal. The quicker one can get away, the better.
13:16 **A person out in the field must not return even to get a coat.** Again, the intensity and suddenness of the judgment means there will be no time even to gather a small item.
13:17 **How terrible it will be for pregnant women.** The tribulation will be so severe that it will be a dreadful time for pregnant women and for mothers with nursing children. What normally is a blessing will become a bad situation. This is noted in Jewish texts ( _4 Ezra_ 16:40-46) and in the OT as a problem at times of judgment (Jer 44:7; Lam 2:11; 4:4). The expression "how terrible" renders the force of the Gr. idea of "woe" that Jesus pronounces here for those who are pregnant at this time. It is a lament over their suffering.
13:18 **And pray that your flight will not be in winter.** If the time to flee comes in winter, then the escape will be even more difficult. Everything that Jesus said here pointed to the terribly difficult nature of the time. In winter, streams would swell from the rain, making movement next to impossible (Lane 1974:470).
13:19 **For there will be greater anguish in those days than at any time since God created the world. And it will never be so great again.** The "tribulation" of these days will be unprecedented. It will be necessary to flee, but this may be difficult. There has never been a time like it nor will there be in the future. The key term is _thlipsis_ [TG2347, ZG2568], referring to a time of disturbance (Rev 1:9; 7:14). The description points to the decisive time of world rebellion described in Dan 12:1. As such, it appears to speak to events at the very end of the speech's timeframe.
13:20 **unless the Lord shortens that time of calamity, not a single person will survive. But for the sake of his chosen ones he has shortened those days.** This period of unprecedented tribulation will be so intense that were it not cut short for the sake of believers, no one would survive (an idea expressed in Jewish discussion of the end to show its severity, Dan 12:7; _1 Enoch_ 80:2, 4; _4 Ezra_ 4:26; _3 Baruch_ 9; 4Q385 3:3-5 [a.k.a. _Pseudo-Ezekiel_ ]; Evans 2001:323 suggests the influence of Isa 60:21-22).
13:24 **after the anguish of those days.** The NLT renders the Gr., "after that tribulation," with this phrase.
**the sun will be darkened, the moon will give no light.** One reason why no one will need to look for the return of the Son of Man and the vindication he brings is that there will be cosmic signs to signal his arrival. The picture is of a creation in alteration; the language is from Isa 13:10 (see also Ezek 32:7; Joel 2:10; 2:31; 3:15; Amos 8:9; Lane 1974:475).
13:25 **the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.** Isaiah 34:4 is cited here. This OT theme carried over into Judaism (Judg 5:5; Ps 18:7; 114:7; Amos 9:5; Mic 1:4; Nah 1:5; Hab 3:6; _Testament of Moses_ 10:1-5; _1 Enoch_ 57:2; Evans 2001:328). As with the entire speech, these themes were common in texts about the coming judgment.
13:27 **he will send out his angels to gather his chosen ones from all over the world.** The major point of his coming, his parousia, will be to vindicate the elect. Angels will gather believers from all the corners of the earth (Deut 30:3-4; Ps 50:3-5; Isa 43:6; 66:8; Jer 32:37; Zech 2:6, 10; Tob 14:10; _1 Enoch_ 62:13-14; _Psalms of Solomon_ 8:28; 11:1-4; 17:28). With this note of gathering those present at his return, Jesus ended the discussion of the signs and began to summarize.
13:28 **learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branches bud and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near.** Jesus used the picture of a budding plant to illustrate how one can sense the approaching judgment. Since these events occurred at the time of Passover, the trees were in the very condition Jesus was describing. Jesus said that when one saw the things he had been describing beginning to happen, it would be evident that the end was approaching, just as budding figs in March/April presage the fully blooming trees of May/June (see the commentary for the significance of the metaphor).
13:30 **this generation will not pass from the scene before all these things take place.** The note in the NLT mg indicates the difficulty with the verse; see the commentary for the various views.
13:31 **Heaven and earth will disappear, but my words will never disappear.** Jesus emphatically states that what he has prophetically declared will come to pass. His word is more permanent than the creation (Isa 40:7-8).
13:32 **However, no one knows the day or hour . . . not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.** Jesus declared that the timing was strictly limited to the Father's knowledge. This remark of Jesus is so unusual in claiming ignorance on this important point that it apparently caused a measure of controversy in the early church. There is evidence that it was so controversial that a few later copyists of the text omitted it. Jesus knew that these things would certainly happen, but that only the Father knows the timing. France (2002:544) discusses the theological perspective of the remark in terms of Jesus' use of his divine attributes or, better, his lack of reliance upon them during his incarnation. Lane (1974:482) speaks of God not delegating this knowledge to the Son. Mark 13:33 and 35 reinforce the point that the time is unknown except to God.
13:33 **be on guard! Stay alert!** Once again Jesus told the disciples to watch and be observant (see 13:9). The double command with these synonyms is emphatic. The first verb was also used in 13:9; the second is a term from wisdom literature (Job 21:32; Prov 8:34; Wis 6:15; Sir 36:16). This theme of watching runs through the entire speech. The point is not to try and figure out all of the timing, for Jesus has just said it cannot be known. However, one can keep an eye on these things as they are unfolding, like watching the fig tree bud. That is what Jesus urges here.
13:34 **The coming of the Son of Man can be illustrated by the story of a man going on a long trip. . . . he told the gatekeeper to watch for his return.** A parable concludes the discourse. Disciples are like servants looking for their master to return home from a trip. They are to watch (see the next verse) and be ready for him to return at any hour.
13:35 **You, too, must keep watch! For you don't know when the master of the household will return.** This verb for watching ( _grēgoreō_ [TG1127, ZG1213]) means to stay awake or alert (BDAG 207-208). It appears in 13:34, 35, and 37. Jesus' call is to pay attention, since the exact time of the return is not known. The timing is expressed in terms of the usual four Roman watches: evening, midnight, dawn (Gr., "at cock's crow"), daybreak. He could come at any time.
13:36 **Don't let him find you sleeping when he arrives without warning.** The warning is to be awake when he suddenly returns (NLT, "without warning"). Disciples should be walking with God and alert to his return. Until then, they should be faithful stewards; there should be no dereliction of duty (Evans 2001:341).
13:37 **I say to you what I say to everyone: Watch for him!** The NLT expands on the command to watch and makes it specific by making clear who is anticipated. The discourse closes with an exhortation to everyone, not just to the four disciples present (13:3).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The passage begins with the disciples admiring the Temple's excellent workmanship. Their remark implied that this glorious building would be around for a long time. Perhaps they were also looking forward to taking it over as Jesus' assistants. As great and massive and magnificent as the Temple was, however, it was doomed to destruction (Josephus describes the Temple's destruction and the fire that accompanied it in _War_ 6.249-266; 7.1-3). Jesus' remark about the Temple's destruction also presupposed a terrible catastrophe for Jerusalem (Jer 7:11; 26:17-19; Amos 9:1; Mic 3:12). Later, the disciples asked about this.
Jesus' first warning, "Don't let anyone mislead you," deals with claims of messianic presence. Given Jesus' suffering, others might come along claiming to be the real and powerful Messiah. Jesus told the disciples not to be fooled. When such claims occurred, they would deceive many. Josephus notes some of these troublesome figures in Jewish history: (1) Simon of Perea, who assumed the diadem and plundered royal palaces ( _Antiquities_ 17.10.6.273-276); (2) Athronges, the shepherd of Judea, who wore a diadem ( _Antiquities_ 17.10.7.278-284); (3) Theudas ( _Antiquities_ 20.5.1.97-99); (4) sons of Judas of Galilee ( _Antiquities_ 20.5.2.102); (5) the Egyptian ( _Antiquities_ 20.8.6.169-172); (6) an imposter ( _Antiquities_ 20.8.10.188); (7) Sicarii ( _War_ 2.13.3.254); (8) Judas the Galilean ( _War_ 2.8.1.118); (9) Simon bar-Giora ( _War_ 4.9.3-8.503-544); (10) a false prophet ( _War_ 6.5.2.285); (11) Eleazar of the Sicarii, who fought at Masada ( _War_ 7.8.1.253; 7.8.2.275). Although Josephus never said that they made messianic claims, France (2002:510-511) and Evans (2001:306) regard some mentioned by Josephus as regal claimants. The explicit claim to be the Messiah did not appear until Bar Kochba made it around AD 132.
Jesus then told the disciples that certain signs would mark the onset of the end times (see notes on 13:7-8). He explicitly told them that "when these things begin to happen, watch out! You will be handed over to the local councils. . . . You will stand trial before governors and kings because you are my followers" (13:9). Disciples should pay attention to such signs; they indicate that persecution will come for those who follow Jesus. Disciples appear before Jewish councils in Acts 4, while others testify before governors in Acts 23–24. Jesus told them that this persecution would lead to witness that could sometimes make a big impression, as in the example of Stephen's effect on Paul (cf. Acts 7 with Acts 22:4-5, 20-21). Jesus indicated that the gospel would get out into the world as a result of such persecution, a point made in Acts, Romans (1:5, 8; 10:18; 15:18-24), and Colossians (1:5-6, 23).
With respect to their witness and gospel preaching, Jesus said, "Don't worry in advance about what to say. Just say what God tells you at that time, for it is not you who will be speaking, but the Holy Spirit" (13:11). Jesus therein made a promise. The Spirit would enable disciples who were persecuted to speak about their faith. They need have no anxiety because God would be with them through the Spirit. The Spirit is poured out in the messianic age (Isa 11:1-2; Joel 2:28-29), and one of the Spirit's roles is to testify for God through his disciples. As God did through Moses, he will enable his servants to speak (Exod 4:10-17). The book of Acts shows how this was realized.
The first section of this speech ends with a call to persevere: "The one who endures to the end will be saved." Salvation stands at the end of a hard road. This call is equivalent to Revelation's "one who overcomes." God will see and honor such faithfulness.
Jesus' speech then shifts to a specific event that will trigger the end times. He told the disciples they would see "the abomination of desolation set up where it ought not be" (13:14, Gr.). The language comes from Daniel 12:11 and the historical example behind the image is Antiochus Epiphanes and his desecration of the Temple in 167 BC (1 Macc 1:54; 2 Macc 6:2; other passages in Daniel note the theme: Dan 11:31; cf. Dan 8:13; 9:27). The term "abomination" concerns shameful acts associated with a place of sacrifice or idolatry (Deut 7:25-26; 1 Kgs 14:24; 2 Kgs 23:13; 2 Chr 15:8; Jer 16:18; Ezek 5:11; TDNT 1:598-600). Jesus indicated that when the Temple was invaded and a Gentile stood in the holy place, the prediction about the Temple was about to occur (2 Thess 2:3-4 also appears to refer to this, in relation to the end time event of the Antichrist). Though some raise the issue of events in Judea in Jesus' time as being fulfilled here (Lane 1974:467-469), it is more likely that those events picture what the decisive desecration will be like in the end times, given that this discourse ends with the return of the Son of Man. Among the early precedents are zealot victories that led to Roman occupation (Josephus _War_ 2.20.1; 4.3.7; 4.3.10), Caligula's effort to place images in the Temple (Philo _Legatio ad Gaium_ ; Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.8.2-9), Pilate's attempt to place standards in the city (Josephus _Antiquities_ 18.3.1), and Titus's entry into Jerusalem and the Temple (Josephus _War_ 6.4.7). Evans (2001:318-319) discusses these four first-century options but notes that none of them is a good fit. Pilate and Caligula never carried out their plan and the Zealots do not fit the description. Titus visited the Temple after it was destroyed, so there was no altar to desecrate.
The abomination that causes desolation will bring about great tribulation. Mark 13:14-27 points to the decisive time of world rebellion described in Daniel 12:1. This unprecedented period is also called the "great tribulation" because it is uniquely disruptive. Other Old Testament and Jewish texts also make claims to unprecedented calamity (Exod 10:14; 11:6; Joel 2:2; Jer 30:7; Bar 2:2; 1 Macc 9:27; 1QM 1.11-12; _Testament of Moses_ 8:1), but the context in relation to the Son of Man's return means that this time is decisively tied to the vindication of the saints. Yet the remark in 13:19 that this tribulation is unique to any that precedes or succeeds it suggests that this event will not occur at the very end of history, but sometime before then.
During this period, some will claim to know where the Messiah is, but such declarations are not to be believed. As 13:24-27 makes clear, when the Son of Man returns, it will be obvious. Jesus said, "false messiahs . . . will rise up and perform signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even God's chosen ones" (13:22). Such claims might be persuasive and capable of deceiving even believers because miraculous activity will accompany the claims (2 Thess 2:9). Thus, Jesus told his disciples, "Watch out! I have warned you!" (13:23). Nothing should catch them by surprise because they had been warned about the false claimants and the other difficulties that lay ahead.
After these difficult days, worse things will come: "The sun will be darkened, the moon will give no light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken" (13:24-25). The language shows that the "lights are going out" on the current world order. However, in reading the text this way, one should be careful not to reduce the imagery strictly to metaphor, because the return of the Son of Man will bring about a change in the world order even at its most basic, physical level.
Following these cosmic catastrophes, "everyone will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds with great power and glory" (13:26). Jesus used imagery from Daniel 7:13 to describe the coming of the Son of Man. In that passage, one "like a son of man" receives the authority to judge from the Ancient One and rides the clouds, a figure reserved for God or the gods in the Old Testament. Daniel 7 pictures the Son of Man receiving authority from God to execute judgment; in this passage, he is coming to earth to exercise that power. France (2002:535-536) argues that the language is not about a physical return but depicts Jesus and the church as being given heavenly power and authority. For France, the gathering of the chosen ones (13:27) is not an event in which the saints are gathered, but a realization that the nations are included in the people of God. But in this interpretation, it is not clear how the gathering at the Son of Man's coming constitutes the kind of vindication anticipated in the Old Testament. The view is also undercut by the idea that this event follows a period of unprecedented tribulation (see the remarks by Evans 2001:328-329).
Following his discussion of the end times, Jesus said, "Learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branches bud and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near" (13:28). Jesus used the picture of a budding plant to declare that one can sense when judgment comes. These events occurred at the time of Passover, when the trees were in the very condition Jesus described. At the end of this speech, Jesus was not discussing the destruction of the Temple, but the return of the Son of Man to vindicate the saints. Thus there is a suggestion that the return is separate from the destruction of the Temple. This interpretation counters that of France (2002:501-502, 530-533), who argues that almost everything in the passage before 13:32 is about AD 70. However, there was no gathering of the saints in AD 70, so his interpretation fails. Jesus' statement about the budding fig tree uses a theme commonly associated with judgment when the Day of the Lord is discussed in the Old Testament. A judgment that will happen soon (in this case the destruction of the Temple) is like the decisive judgment (the return of the Son of Man), so that one event anticipates the other. This kind of "pattern" prophecy is what we observe here, even though that pattern was not clear to the listeners. So Jesus said that when these things begin to happen (as with budding figs in March/April), the end is approaching (just as the tree fully blooms in May/June).
Jesus then said, "When you see all these things taking place, you can know that his return is very near, right at the door" (13:29). Jesus thus completed the comparison. It is less than clear whether "these things" refer to the beginning of the discourse and the false claimants or to the things that complete it, such as the abomination and especially the cosmic signs. Probably the latter events are included, which also explains why the NLT has added the reference to "all" these things. The rationale for this choice is that the appearing of the Son of Man at the end is portrayed as obvious, as signaled by cosmic indicators. In addition, the emphasis is on the signs that let one know the end is near, not on the timing of the end. So the nearness is related especially to those events coming before the end. The NLT also renders "it" as a reference to the return. Possibly "it" means "he" and refers to the Son of Man, but this does not really change the basic meaning of the passage.
Following this, Jesus made the bold assertion that "this generation will not pass from the scene before all these things take place." The Greek term for "generation" ( _genea_ [TG1074, ZG1155]) can refer to (1) a given generation, which might extend forty years or so, (2) a given age, speaking of a broader period, or (3) a given group of people (ethnic or ethical) such as a nation or a righteous or wicked generation (see BDAG 191-192, where the "wicked" generation is discussed in point 2). If the term is temporal and refers to the generation Jesus addressed, then the return did not happen for that group (unless one reads the verse as heavily symbolic of the destruction of Jerusalem as France 2002:501-502 and Lane 1974:480 do). Other suggestions are also made: (1) The generation referred to is the one that sees the abomination of desolation. Once that event occurs, things happen very quickly. "Generation" does not refer to a given temporal group or to the generation of the disciples addressed, but it is the group that sees the "great tribulation" events that are just before the end. (2) The generation may be a positive ethical reference, so that it is the "righteous" generation that will not pass away before all this takes place. In this case, the point is that the righteous will ultimately be vindicated. The problem with this option is that this is a very rare use of the term. (3) The term could refer to the "wicked" generation, in which case the point is that wickedness will remain until the judgment comes. This is the more common ethical use of the term, but it seems to state the obvious (Evans 2001:335 apparently takes this view). (4) A few take the term as referring to a race and to Israel on the basis of usage such as that in Luke 16:8. However, this ethnic use of the term for Israel is not common. (5) "All these things" refers to the signs Jesus has listed that point to the end rather than the events of the end. Thus, the current generation would see all the signs pointing to the end (the events of AD 70) as a guarantee that the events of the end will occur as Jesus predicts, though the end itself would come after the current generation.
Of these five readings, the first three and the last are all possible, with the first being slightly more likely than the second or third, since this temporal use of the term is more common and fits contextually with the call to understand when the abomination occurs. The fifth view underscores the logic of why Jesus would point to "all these things," not to describe end time events, but to reveal how quickly the signs pointing to the end would come. I think that views one and five are the most likely, and it is hard to choose between them. According to view one, once the abomination (such as that done by Antiochus, not the Temple's destruction in AD 70) takes place, the vindication of the saints in the return of the Son of Man to earth is not far away. In view five, the events point to the end as signs; they connect with the Temple's destruction in AD 70 and therefore take place within a generation.
In summary, this discourse indicates that Israel will be judged; it will be a hard time for those present because of persecution, and the Temple will be destroyed. But this discourse, subject to so much discussion, does not merely deal with the destruction of the Temple. It also pictures a time when the Temple will be desecrated by one standing in the Holy Place; there will be a period of unprecedented persecution, and then the Son of Man will return to judge the world. Because of its typological or pattern-acts structure, it can be hard to tell if the nearer destruction or the more distant return is in view. Various scenarios have been considered as possible chronologies for the events. Some argue that the passage only treats AD 70, or at least substantially so. However, this does not address the Son of Man's return, and to argue that only 13:32-37 deal with that future theme makes the discourse too disjointed. It is better to recognize the "pattern" in the discourse. "Pattern prophecy" is typical of Old Testament discussions of the Day of the Lord (more clearly seen now than when originally given). In this type of utterance, a judgment in the short term pictures or patterns a greater judgment to come at the end. The way that things happen in AD 70 anticipates how they will happen at the end. So to talk about one period is to also mirror or pattern the other. Jesus wove the two together here because their nature will be similar. (Matthew's version of the speech makes this somewhat clearer by separating the question of the Temple's destruction from that of the Lord's return. Luke does the same. What is clear in Matthew and Luke is that the events covered by the entire speech stretch from the time of Jesus' disciples through the destruction of the Temple until the return. It is not a discourse strictly about the period just before Jesus' return.) In this context, the unprecedented level of persecution and the return to gather the elect make sense because the passage ultimately looks at the vindication of the elect and at God's promise to judge the earth, predictions whose promises go back into the Old Testament (which is why I have noted the numerous thematic connections to OT and Jewish expression).
Jesus portrayed the events of the end as completing the hopes of the law and the prophets. Some call this period the "great tribulation," which reflects the unprecedented chaos of the period. Some connect this period to Daniel's seventieth week, making the most intense period seven years long. This is likely, though less certain. Other interpreters simply speak of an unprecedented time of chaos ending in Jesus' return. Either way, the point is the decisive vindication of the elect that emerges at the return. The key point of the text is that disciples need to remain faithful until Jesus' return, keeping watch for indications that the Son of Man is coming.
## TEXT [Commentary]
C. King of the Jews Executed for Blasphemy, Confessed as God's Son, and Vindicated by God (14:1–16:8)
1. The plot to arrest Jesus (14:1-2; cf. Matt 26:1-5; Luke 21:37–22:1-2)
1 It was now two days before Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread. The leading priests and the teachers of religious law were still looking for an opportunity to capture Jesus secretly and kill him. 2 "But not during the Passover celebration," they agreed, "or the people may riot."
## NOTES
14:1 **two days before Passover.** The 12th or 13th of Nisan (depending on whether Mark is including Passover day in his count or not), which fell in April/May of the Roman calendar. Passover and Unleavened Bread occurred together (Nisan 14–21; for Passover, see Exod 12:1-14, 21-51; Lev 23:4-5; Num 9:1-14; 28:16; Deut 16:1-7; for Unleavened Bread, see Exod 12:15-20; 13:6-10; 34:18; Lev 23:6-8; Num 28:16-25; Deut 16:3-4, 8).
**were still looking for an opportunity to capture Jesus secretly and kill him.** Jesus' remarks and actions in Jerusalem had led to the leadership's decision to stop Jesus (on the leadership's role, see 8:31; 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:43, 53; 15:1). The only question was how and when, given how many people were in the city. They hoped to get him by stealth ( _dolō_ [TG1388, ZG1515]), and Passover was a difficult time to do this.
14:2 **the people may riot.** This riot could have been like the one Josephus notes in _Antiquities_ 17.213-215 in 4 BC, or like the scene in Acts 21:34, which is also called by the term Mark uses here, _thorubos_ [TG2351, ZG2573].
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The timing of these events is given specifically. We are in the middle of the last week of Jesus' life, very shortly before Passover (see note on 14:1). These holidays celebrated the deliverance of the nation. According to some estimates, the population of Jerusalem quadrupled during this time. France suggests some 180,000 present, but for others the likely number is 125,000 (France 2002:548; Lane 1974:490 speaks of 50,000–250,000). The religious leaders decided that they could not arrest Jesus during the Passover. Jesus was too popular with the people and a riot might bring in the Romans and make the situation too volatile.
These two short verses set the stage for the passion events. They show the leaders as plotting but still at a loss. They thought that the Passover was not the right time to arrest Jesus. However, soon Judas would cause them to think differently and act quickly.
Here we again observe Mark structuring another sandwiched sequence, with the anointing placed between the two halves of Judas's betrayal to contrast the two. The anointing by the woman shows Jesus being honored in the midst of a move to reject Jesus.
## TEXT [Commentary]
2. The anointing at Bethany (14:3-9; cf. Matt 26:6-13; John 12:2-11)
3 Meanwhile, Jesus was in Bethany at the home of Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy. While he was eating,[*] a woman came in with a beautiful alabaster jar of expensive perfume made from essence of nard. She broke open the jar and poured the perfume over his head.
4 Some of those at the table were indignant. "Why waste such expensive perfume?" they asked. 5 "It could have been sold for a year's wages[*] and the money given to the poor!" So they scolded her harshly.
6 But Jesus replied, "Leave her alone. Why criticize her for doing such a good thing to me? 7 You will always have the poor among you, and you can help them whenever you want to. But you will not always have me. 8 She has done what she could and has anointed my body for burial ahead of time. 9 I tell you the truth, wherever the Good News is preached throughout the world, this woman's deed will be remembered and discussed."
## NOTES
14:3 **Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy.** This detail makes this event distinct from Luke 7:36-50, where Pharisees were present. They would never have been with a leper and would have been slow to associate with one whose main association had been with leprosy (on a lack of clarity as to Simon the leper's state at the time of this meal, see Gundry 1993:812). It is possible the home was associated with him and yet he was not present at the meal. If so, Pharisees would not seek out a home where leprosy was or perhaps had been recently present. The NLT rendering assumes a cure has already taken place, which also is possible. What is important to Mark is the association of the locale with one known as a leper. The detail shows that Jesus continued to socialize with those on the fringes of society.
14:5 **"sold for a year's wages . . . given to the poor!" So they scolded her harshly.** The Gr. refers to "three hundred denarii," which was about a year's wage. The poor were especially remembered at Passover time (John 13:27-29; Lane 1974:493). Those complaining did not appreciate the woman's action and told her so.
14:6 **Leave her alone. Why criticize her for doing such a good thing to me?** Jesus came to her defense. He described her act as a good thing (Gr., "good work").
14:7 **You will always have the poor among you.** Jesus' remark on the poor comes from Deut 15:11 (Hurtado 1989:232).
14:8 **She has . . . anointed my body for burial ahead of time.** The verb for anointing here is _murizō_ [TG3462, ZG3690], its only use in the NT; it speaks of anointing a corpse according to Jewish custom ( _m. Shabbat_ 23:5; BDAG 661). This verb is related to the noun for myrrh and points to anointing with perfume.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This event seems to parallel John 12:1-8, although John places this event six days before Passover. It may be that Mark moved the event into the last week sequence because its outcome, Judas' betrayal, came in the time frame of the final few days.
While Jesus was eating, "a woman came in with a beautiful alabaster jar of expensive perfume" (14:3). The woman's alabaster jar and perfume, which Mark names as nard (Lane 1974:492), were worth a great deal of money, up to a year's wages (14:5). The woman poured it out on Jesus to anoint and honor him (2 Kgs 9:6 has an event like this involving Jehu). The reaction to this act tells us this was no common anointing. The woman broke the flask and emptied it—her offering was total, sparing nothing.
Some observers of this event were furious and said that the nard had been wasted, as it could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus responded, "You will always have the poor among you. . . . But you will not always have me." They could take care of the poor later, as the poor would always be around.
The woman was more sensitive than anyone around her, whether she intended this as an anointing for Jesus' death or whether Jesus assigned this significance to her act (Hurtado 1989:229-230). Jesus said, "This woman's deed will be remembered" and thereby memorialized it. He noted that her act would be recalled as an appropriate way to have honored Jesus by all who preach the gospel. It was appropriate to sacrifice this perfume worth a year's wage because Jesus was worthy of such honor.
## TEXT [Commentary]
3. Judas betrays Jesus (14:10-11; cf. Matt 26:14-16; Luke 22:3-6)
10 Then Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve disciples, went to the leading priests to arrange to betray Jesus to them. 11 They were delighted when they heard why he had come, and they promised to give him money. So he began looking for an opportunity to betray Jesus.
## NOTES
14:10 **to betray Jesus to them.** Judas decided to hand Jesus over to the leading priests. The Gr. verb for "betray" ( _paradidōmi_ [TG3860, ZG4140]) appears here and in 14:11, 18, 21, 41, 42, 44. Thus, betrayal is a major feature of the description of Judas' action. It is the same verb used by Jesus in his predictions (9:31; 10:33).
14:11 **they promised to give him money.** Matthew 26:15 notes that the reward was thirty pieces of silver.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The religious leaders who wanted to arrest Jesus had thought that they could not do it during Passover because the people might riot. Their plans changed when Judas entered the picture. They were delighted that Judas approached them, because they could claim that Jesus' activities had been exposed by one of his own. They could say, "We were just doing our duty." They also had a chance to seize him away from the crowd.
In all of this, Jesus is depicted as the righteous sufferer (Ps 41:9; Lane 1974:495), for his death is triggered by one of his own. The doors were now open for Jesus' arrest. Mark sets the Last Supper in the context of this betrayal. None of this caught Jesus by surprise, for he knew what was about to happen.
## TEXT [Commentary]
4. The Last Supper (14:12-26; cf. Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:7-20; John 13:21-30)
12 On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb is sacrificed, Jesus' disciples asked him, "Where do you want us to go to prepare the Passover meal for you?"
13 So Jesus sent two of them into Jerusalem with these instructions: "As you go into the city, a man carrying a pitcher of water will meet you. Follow him. 14 At the house he enters, say to the owner, 'The Teacher asks: Where is the guest room where I can eat the Passover meal with my disciples?' 15 He will take you upstairs to a large room that is already set up. That is where you should prepare our meal." 16 So the two disciples went into the city and found everything just as Jesus had said, and they prepared the Passover meal there.
17 In the evening Jesus arrived with the Twelve. 18 As they were at the table[*] eating, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, one of you eating with me here will betray me."
19 Greatly distressed, each one asked in turn, "Am I the one?"
20 He replied, "It is one of you twelve who is eating from this bowl with me. 21 For the Son of Man[*] must die, as the Scriptures declared long ago. But how terrible it will be for the one who betrays him. It would be far better for that man if he had never been born!"
22 As they were eating, Jesus took some bread and blessed it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying, "Take it, for this is my body."
23 And he took a cup of wine and gave thanks to God for it. He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24 And he said to them, "This is my blood, which confirms the covenant[*] between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice for many. 25 I tell you the truth, I will not drink wine again until the day I drink it new in the Kingdom of God."
26 Then they sang a hymn and went out to the Mount of Olives.
## NOTES
14:12 **Where do you want us to go to prepare the Passover meal?** Mark notes that this conversation took place on the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread. This description reflects the fact that Passover and Unleavened Bread (which followed it immediately) were treated as one holiday season (so Josephus _War_ 5.99). So the day is Passover night-day, when the Passover lamb was sacrificed. For the details of a Passover meal, see _m. Pesahim_ 10:1-7; other elements of procuring the sacrifice are in _m. Pesahim_ 1:1-3.
14:13 **a man carrying a pitcher of water will meet you.** This key instruction communicated Jesus' awareness of events. He knew where the meal would be held and how the disciples could meet the person who would arrange it.
14:14 **The Teacher asks.** The second key instruction was about the owner of the room. All that would be needed was to indicate that "the Teacher" had a need and the room would be provided. It was there that they would eat the Passover meal.
14:15 **to a large room.** Since this "large upper room" was already prepared for the meal, it appears that Jesus had already planned for the meal to be in this place.
14:16 **So the two disciples went . . . and found everything just as Jesus had said.** Jesus was very aware of what was taking place. The disciples prepared the meal in this room.
14:17 **In the evening.** Mark makes it clear that this was an evening meal like a Passover meal (Exod 12:8). Normal meals started earlier. If this was a Passover meal, it would have four courses/cups and last until almost midnight (see _m. Pesahim_ 10:1-6, 9; Lane 1974:501-502). The four cups occur (1) with the preliminary course to bless the Passover day, (2) after an explaination of Passover and the singing of some of the Hallel psalms [Pss 113–118], (3) following the meal of lamb, unleavened bread, and bitter herbs, and (4) following the concluding portion of the Hallel (Bock 1996:1722-1723). It is not clear which cup exactly is meant given that only one cup is mentioned in Matthew and Mark (while Luke mentions two). However, an early cup is likely with the bread being a part of the third course.
14:19 **Greatly distressed, each one asked in turn, "Am I the one?"** The disciples understood; in distress, each inquired if it might be he. A narrative gap that the reading urges us to fill is what it must have been like for Judas, as each one around the room asked the question. The question is asked in Gr. with an interrogative that expects a negative reply. Each of them was seeking assurance that he was not the one.
14:20 **It is one of you twelve who is eating from this bowl with me.** Jesus indicated that the candidate was one of those around him, sharing his bowl. The Passover meal had a common bowl, probably the one in which the sauce for the bitter herbs was placed (Cranfield 1959:424).
14:21 **For the Son of Man must die, as the Scriptures declared long ago. But how terrible it will be for the one who betrays him.** Divine design and human accountability come together here. The Gr. says that the Son of Man "goes as it is written of him," a theme introduced earlier in Mark (8:31; 9:12). The NLT's "how terrible" concretely conveys the meaning of the "woe" Jesus uttered about the fate of his betrayer (on "woe," see EDNT 540). The mention of Scripture in connection with Jesus' inevitable death echoes texts like Luke 24:43-47 and 1 Cor 15:1-3.
14:23 **he took a cup of wine.** It is not clear which cup of the meal this was, but the purpose of the third cup was to praise God for bringing salvation to his people, so it is a possible candidate according to Lane (1974:506). Others argue that it was an earlier cup, assuming that the bread was a part of the meal after the second cup. Both views assume that a Passover meal was being celebrated. It is hard to know which cup is meant. Luke indicates that Jesus had multiple cups but refused to drink after this cup was taken, leaving his final cup of the meal untouched. France (2002:569) sees this as possible.
14:24 **This is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice for many.** The NLT has a good explanatory rendering of the Gr., which reads, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for the many." "The many" are those who believe in Jesus. Evans (2001:386-387) suggests precedent for such thinking in Judaism from 4 Macc 1:11b; 17:21b-22; 18:3-4; 2 Macc 7:33, 37-38; _Testament of Moses_ 9:6b–10:1; _Liber antiquitatum biblicarum_ 18:5; and other Jewish texts. He also notes (2001:390-391) how the breaking of the bread could suggest the hope of the Messiah; a portion of the unleavened bread eaten at Passover was known as the _afikomen_ in reference to "the one who comes" (i.e. the Messiah). This symbolism, if it has such a background, would soften the image of eating the body and drinking the blood.
14:26 **they sang a hymn.** The Hallel psalms (Pss 113–118; Lane 1974:501-502) were sung at the Passover meal. As Jesus and his disciples proceeded to the Mount of Olives, they were singing these praises to God. Jesus' death would be painful, but God could be praised for what was about to occur.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
There is a problem of chronology between the Synoptic Gospels and John's Gospel. Mark is clear that this was a Passover meal, while John suggests that the Passover lambs were sacrificed the next afternoon when Jesus was crucified (John 13:1; 18:28; 19:14, 31, 42). Various solutions to the problem have been proposed. (1) It is possible that John was discussing the sacrifices of the Passover season that were offered during the week (so argues Lane 1974:497-498). If this is correct, then both Gospels are right but are referring to different sacrifices of that holiday season. (2) Evans (2001:370-372) favors Jesus eating a solemn meal that still had a Passover feel by its being proximate to the Passover, while opting for John's chronology. (3) France (2002:559-562) argues that Mark and John are both correct in that Jesus presented the meal as if it were a Passover meal and that Mark was calculating days in a sunset to sunset mode, so that the sacrifice was made after sunset on the same night it was consumed and on the same day as the bulk of sacrifices for the Passover from the next afternoon. It is hard to be sure which view is correct, although France's view may have the most merit.
As the meal begins, a powerful juxtaposition emerges. One of his own would betray Jesus, in an act of treachery designed to derail him. Jesus bluntly said, "One of you eating with me here will betray me" (14:18). Jesus knew what was taking place. The announcement adds a somber tone to the meal, making it clear to the disciples later that Jesus was not caught off guard and that he hadn't made any attempt to stop what was taking place. Thus Jesus said, "For the Son of Man must die, as the Scripture declared long ago. But how terrible it will be for the one who betrays him" (14:21). Divine design and human accountability come together here. There was a divine plan that the chosen judge must suffer first, but the one who betrayed him was responsible for his actions. Jesus said, "It would be far better for that man if he had never been born!" Here is a declaration of judgment. Judas had met the Lord, ministered at his side, and made a decision that Jesus was not who he claimed to be. To betray the Son of Man to whom God gives authority is the most calamitous error.
The scene then shifts to what is known as the "Last Supper." "Jesus took some bread and blessed it . . . broke it . . . and gave it to the disciples, saying, 'Take it, for this is my body' " (14:22). Jesus made the meal into something about himself, which shows his personal authority. Especially if this is the Passover meal, it shows that Jesus could associate himself with the most sacred liturgical parts of Judaism and transform them. Even if the meal only evoked the Passover, the same point is implied (Hooker 1991:341). In the Passover meal, this would be the bread of affliction (Hooker 1991:340; but see discussion of 14:24 for another possible option for Passover background). Placed in a Passover context, this imagery would be very explicit. Jesus pointed to another time of suffering.
Jesus took the unleavened bread and symbolically associated it with his body. What had referred to the deliverance from Egypt now referred to a new deliverance ( _m. Pesahim_ 10:5). Their partaking of the bread identified them with Jesus and with what Jesus was about to do for them in his death. The idea here is not very different from John's image of Jesus as the "bread of life" (John 6:16-59).
Then Jesus "took a cup of wine . . . gave thanks . . . gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And he said to them, 'This is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice for many' " (14:23-24). Drinking the cup signified this relationship and associated it with the "pouring out" of Jesus' very life as a sacrifice that established fresh covenantal grounds for relationship to God. The symbolic drinking of blood was a shocking image that indicated the unusual nature of the sacrifice. The "blood of the covenant" evokes Exodus 24:6 in a fresh way. The parallel in Luke 22:20 names this as the "new" covenant, with its provision of forgiveness and the law written "on their hearts," the inner work of God through the Spirit (Jer 31:31-33). "Many" indicates that the work is not applied to all, but only to those who associate themselves with Jesus' work by faith (evoking Isa 53:11-12; Mark 10:45).
At the end of the meal Jesus said, "I will not drink wine again until the day I drink it new in the Kingdom of God" (14:25). Here Jesus looked to the consummation that his death would provide. There would be a banquet celebration to recreate this meal in the Kingdom (Isa 25:6; Matt 8:11; Luke 14:15; Rev 19:9) and he looked forward to that day. The church's celebration at the Lord's Table also looks forward to that day, as we proclaim "the Lord's death until he comes again" (1 Cor 11:26). There will be a period of great celebration when Jesus' work is complete.
The Last Supper portrays the disciples' connection with Jesus' death. By partaking of bread and drinking the wine, the participants identified with Jesus' death to the core of their being. Passover yields to Calvary as deliverance comes again. Those who realize it are born again into a relationship of divine forgiveness and enablement though the gift of the Spirit to indwell and empower the person to righteousness. That is what Jesus saw in the meal. As the book of Hebrews later puts it, it was for the joy set before him that he endured the shame of the cross (Heb 12:2). The meal celebrates the pain he took to get to the joy.
The church has debated how the symbolism of this sacred meal works. Do the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus in a mysterious transformation, as Roman Catholicism teaches (known as transubstanitiation)? Or, is the presence of Jesus somehow all around the elements without physically changing them as Luther argued (consubstantiation)? Or is the meal merely a symbolic memorial, with the language and ritual intended to picture Jesus' work, as many other movements of the Reformation, such as that of Zwingli, argued (memorial view)? The text of this scene does not answer such questions but a view close to the second seems most likely: Both of the first two views argue that when Jesus said the bread and wine were his body and blood, he was using the language of liturgical mystery rather than mere symbolism, yet the idea of the elements becoming Christ seems too crass. It is clear that something makes this meal very sacred, yet the Old Testament prescribes acts that are rich in significant symbolism. What can be affirmed, regardless of the view taken, is that Jesus changed the liturgy of events tied to the Exodus and reimaged them to apply to himself. His presence at this sacred meal as the church regularly observes it is certain.
## TEXT [Commentary]
5. Peter's denials predicted (14:27-31; cf. Matt 26:31-35; Luke 22:31-38; John 13:31-38)
27 On the way, Jesus told them, "All of you will desert me. For the Scriptures say,
'God will strike[*] the Shepherd,
and the sheep will be scattered.'
28 But after I am raised from the dead, I will go ahead of you to Galilee and meet you there."
29 Peter said to him, "Even if everyone else deserts you, I never will."
30 Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, Peter—this very night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny three times that you even know me."
31 "No!" Peter declared emphatically. "Even if I have to die with you, I will never deny you!" And all the others vowed the same.
## NOTES
14:27 **All of you will desert me.** Jesus predicted that in his death he would go to the cross alone. The disciples stumbled by taking offense over him. The verb is _skandalizomai_ [TG4624A, ZG4997]. It was used of those who took offense or fell away (4:17; 9:42, 43, 45, 47; 14:29).
**For the Scriptures say, 'God will strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.'** Jesus cited Zech 13:7, which looks to Israel's apostasy; this is a strong condemnation. The NLT renders the Gr., "I will strike," with "God will strike," making the speaker clear (see NLT mg).
14:29 **Even if everyone else deserts you, I never will.** In this remark, Peter claimed that he would not run away out of fear. This showed that he did not know himself or the situation as well as Jesus did. This is the third time Peter has misspoken in Mark (8:31-33; 9:5-7).
14:30 **this very night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny three times that you even know me.** Jesus knew Peter well in general, and he was specifically aware of what he would do and when. Before the early morning cock crowing was complete, Peter would deny Jesus three times. The NLT explains the term correctly by noting that Peter would deny knowing Jesus (Evans 2001:402). It was the opposite of confessing someone (Luke 12:8-9). The entire scene shows that Jesus was quite aware of what was happening.
14:31 **Even if I have to die with you, I will never deny you!** Once again, Peter claimed that he would stand with Jesus even to the death. This time he said it more emphatically, using a double negative ( _ou mē_ [TG3364, ZG4024 + 3590]) to make the point. As he commonly did, Mark not only noted the remark, but also the emphatic manner in which it was given. The others joined in support of his claim.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This section begins with Jesus telling his disciples that he will die alone—bereft of their support. Citing Zechariah 13:7, Jesus predicted, "God will strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered." In the crucifixion, God chose to offer his son, the shepherd, for sacrifice. The Zechariah text focuses on the cleansing of God's people that results from the striking of the shepherd. At the moment that the Shepherd suffers, the sheep scatter, sensing that they are not protected. In fact, Jesus' death is the very protection that they need, as suggested by the mention of the resurrection in the next verse.
Jesus then promised them, "After I am raised from the dead, I will go ahead of you to Galilee and meet you there" (14:28). Jesus reassured the disciples that their scattering would be temporary. After his resurrection, he would meet them in Galilee, the very place where his ministry began. It is sometimes said that Mark has no resurrection appearances. However, in its prediction about Jesus, this text indicates that Mark was aware of such events even though his short ending does not narrate a specific appearance (see also 16:7).
When Jesus predicted that the disciples would desert him, Peter affirmed that he would never desert Jesus. Peter did not understand himself or what was coming. The other disciples also affirmed their loyalty, but Jesus knew what would happen, for he understood how weak people can be. Peter's bold assertions and subsequent failure make him look very weak and foolish. That this failure is recorded in the Gospels shows that this is authentic history; the early church would not make up such a story about its leaders.
## TEXT [Commentary]
6. Jesus at Gethsemane (14:32-42; cf. Matt 26:36-46; Luke 22:39-46)
32 They went to the olive grove called Gethsemane, and Jesus said, "Sit here while I go and pray." 33 He took Peter, James, and John with him, and he became deeply troubled and distressed. 34 He told them, "My soul is crushed with grief to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me."
35 He went on a little farther and fell to the ground. He prayed that, if it were possible, the awful hour awaiting him might pass him by. 36 "Abba, Father,"[*] he cried out, "everything is possible for you. Please take this cup of suffering away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine."
37 Then he returned and found the disciples asleep. He said to Peter, "Simon, are you asleep? Couldn't you watch with me even one hour? 38 Keep watch and pray, so that you will not give in to temptation. For the spirit is willing, but the body is weak."
39 Then Jesus left them again and prayed the same prayer as before. 40 When he returned to them again, he found them sleeping, for they couldn't keep their eyes open. And they didn't know what to say.
41 When he returned to them the third time, he said, "Go ahead and sleep. Have your rest. But no—the time has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 42 Up, let's be going. Look, my betrayer is here!"
## NOTES
14:32 **Gethsemane.** Gethsemane was located in an orchard of olive trees in the Kidron Valley outside the eastern wall of Jerusalem below the Mount of Olives. The name means "oil press."
**Sit here while I go and pray.** Mark often shows Jesus praying or teaching about prayer (1:35; 6:46; 9:29; 11:17; 11:24-25; 13:18).
14:33 **took Peter, James, and John.** This inner circle was included once again (5:37; 9:2; 13:3).
**deeply troubled and distressed.** Mark again notes Jesus' emotions. The two verbs are quite vivid; the first ( _ekthambeisthai_ [TG1568, ZG1701]) speaks of intense perplexity or excitement (BDAG 303), and only Mark uses the term (9:15; 16:5-6). The related, less intense verb _thambeō_ [TG2284, ZG2501] also appears only in Mark (1:27; 10:24, 32). The second verb in the verse ( _adēmoneō_ [TG85, ZG86]) refers to distress or anxiety (BDAG 19) and also appears rarely in the NT (Matt 26:37; Phil 2:26).
14:34 **My soul is crushed with grief.** The key term is _perilupos_ [TG4036, ZG4337], which refers to intense grief or sorrow (6:26; Luke 18:23; BDAG 802). Jesus acknowledged his emotion as he began to pray. Scripture is forthright about Jesus' human reactions to what he was about to face.
**to the point of death.** This conceptually alludes to Ps 42:5-6, 9, 11, which looks to a deliverance from God and calls for waiting on God (cf. Sir 37:2).
**keep watch with me.** Jesus asked the disciples to be alert, much as he had told them to be watchful about future events (13:37).
14:35 **He prayed that, if it were possible, the awful hour awaiting him might pass him by.** Jesus' initial request was that the upcoming "hour" might not take place but pass him by. The NLT adds an adjective describing the hour as an "awful" one, since a painful crucifixion and death awaited him.
14:36 **Abba, Father.** The opening of the prayer is intense, as indicated by the double reference to the Father, first in Aramaic and then in Gr. (Rom 8:15-16; Gal 4:6).
**everything is possible for you.** Jesus began by acknowledging God's sovereignty and power as the basis for his request.
**Please take this cup of suffering away from me.** Jesus requests that "this cup" be removed. The NLT defines it as a cup of suffering, since death was in view. However, the specific reference might have been to the judgment and wrath Jesus would experience on behalf of others, since a cup often represents God's judgment (10:38-39; Isa 51:17, 22; Ezek 23:32-34; Lam 4:21; Ps 11:6 [10:6 LXX]; _Martyrdom of the Ascension of Isaiah_ 5:13; _Martyrdom of Polycarp_ 14:2; TDNT 6:152-153).
14:39 **Jesus left them again and prayed the same prayer.** The Gr. says that Jesus "said the same word."
14:41 **But no—the time has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.** The verb for betrayal is the one Mark has used throughout ( _paradidōmi_ [TG3860, ZG4140]). The NLT phrase "but no" translates an enigmatic use of _apechei_ [TG566, ZG600]. Many translations render the term with "it is enough," according to one of its less common uses. This would express Jesus' sense that his time to pray and urge them to pray had run out. The verb more often refers to things that are settled, such as bank accounts, but even this use is rare (France 2002:589). Evans (2001:416-417) suggests an ambiguous "Is it far off?" with the referent left unclear (sleep, or more probably, betrayal). Regardless, the "hour" (so the Gr. _hōra_ [TG5610, ZG6052]) had come, and it was time for the betrayer to act.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
No passage shows the human side of Jesus more vividly than this text. He openly came to grips with death, asked to bypass it, and then expressed his submission to the Father's will. He first asked that the cup of suffering—even the cup of God's wrath—pass from him. Jesus knew that drinking the cup meant taking God's judgment and wrath upon himself on behalf of others (see note on 14:36). Knowing that he could not escape this, he told the Father, "I want your will to be done, not mine" (14:36). The spirit and example of this prayer express Jesus' submission to the Father's will. This attitude is reflected in the prayer Jesus gave to the disciples, "Your will be done on earth as in heaven."
As Jesus prayed to bring himself into submission to the Father's will, the disciples fell asleep. He came to them and asked, "Couldn't you watch with me even one hour?" (14:37). That Peter and the others failed to stay awake suggests their lack of preparation for what was to come. Jesus told them, "Keep watch and pray, so you will not give in to temptation" (14:38). The disciples needed to prepare for the important spiritual battle ahead, and even at this late point in the Gospel, the disciples still had much to learn. Temptation to sin must be met with prayer. Jesus told them, "The spirit is willing, but the body is weak" (14:38). This saying expresses well the status of Peter and the others. They may have desired to be faithful and stand with Jesus, but fear would overtake them as they sought to preserve their lives. Jesus came to the disciples three times, and all three times they had failed to stay awake. Peter will fail three more times with his three denials. Jesus stood alone at the time of trial. On behalf of others, Jesus would drink the cup of suffering and punishment that God would send his way. He was ready as the betrayer approached.
## TEXT [Commentary]
7. Jesus is betrayed and arrested (14:43-52; cf. Matt 26:47-56; Luke 22:47-53; John 18:2-12)
43 And immediately, even as Jesus said this, Judas, one of the twelve disciples, arrived with a crowd of men armed with swords and clubs. They had been sent by the leading priests, the teachers of religious law, and the elders. 44 The traitor, Judas, had given them a prearranged signal: "You will know which one to arrest when I greet him with a kiss. Then you can take him away under guard." 45 As soon as they arrived, Judas walked up to Jesus. "Rabbi!" he exclaimed, and gave him the kiss.
46 Then the others grabbed Jesus and arrested him. 47 But one of the men with Jesus pulled out his sword and struck the high priest's slave, slashing off his ear.
48 Jesus asked them, "Am I some dangerous revolutionary, that you come with swords and clubs to arrest me? 49 Why didn't you arrest me in the Temple? I was there among you teaching every day. But these things are happening to fulfill what the Scriptures say about me."
50 Then all his disciples deserted him and ran away. 51 One young man following behind was clothed only in a long linen shirt. When the mob tried to grab him, 52 he slipped out of his shirt and ran away naked.
## NOTES
14:43 **Judas, one of the twelve disciples, arrived with a crowd of men armed with swords and clubs. They had been sent by the leading priests, the teachers of religious law, and the elders.** In his betrayal, Judas was supported by a host of armed men sent by the Jewish leaders. Mark gives no specifics as to who they were, making them sound like rabble rousers (Hooker 1991:351; Taylor 1966:558 speaks of hired rabble, but Luke 22:52 and John 18:3, 12 make it clear that some law and order officials from the Temple and from the Romans were present). The temple guards were probably Levites, but they may have employed others who wished to help (Lane 1974:524 speaks of accompanying court attendants). Josephus notes that such a group appeared later to help the priests quell a disturbance ( _Antiquities_ 20.181, 206–207; see Evans 2001:423). Short swords ( _machairōn_ [TG3162, ZG3479]) and clubs were the weapons of choice.
14:46 **grabbed Jesus and arrested him.** They "grabbed" him and "arrested" him. Jesus now submitted to the hands of sinners (14:41).
14:47 **slashing off his ear.** One of the disciples (identified in John 18:10 as Simon Peter) fought. Luke tells us that Jesus healed the servant's ear. Unlike the other Gospels, Mark does not record any rebuke of the disciples here.
14:49 **Why didn't you arrest me in the Temple?** Jesus points out that this arrest could have been made publicly, but they chose to do it by stealth. This was a very "undercover" arrest.
**But these things are happening to fulfill what the Scriptures say about me.** Jesus noted that these events came as no surprise, but were part of a plan to fulfill Scripture. The Gr. lacks an opening clause to introduce the _hina_ [TG2443, ZG2671] phrase, but rhetorically it is a declaration like the NLT rendering (France 2002:595).
14:52 **ran away naked.** Some suggest an allusion to the naked man fleeing in Amos 2:16, where the judgment was so great that the mighty could only flee naked (Lane 1974:527). Evans (2001:428) argues that the LXX speaks of the naked man as being pursued, not fleeing, and that it is not clear that the naked man was among the mighty. France (2002:596) also doubts an allusion to Amos; the matter is not at all clear.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Judas' presence allowed the religious leaders to meet Jesus away from the crowd. However, they were not sure how the disciples might respond, so they came prepared for battle. When Judas approached, he betrayed Jesus with a kiss, ironically twisting a sign of friendship and devotion into an act of denial. The kiss ensured that the right person would be arrested by the armed men who did not know Jesus or could not recognize him in the dark. To make matters worse, Judas called him "Rabbi!" This title means "teacher" (9:5; 10:51; 11:21), but what Judas did here, he did not learn from Jesus.
Jesus asked those who came to arrest him, "Am I some dangerous revolutionary?" ( _lēstēs_ [TG3027, ZG3334]; 14:48). Jesus asked if he had shown any indications of being an insurgent or robber who was worthy of an arrest with swords and clubs. This is ironic in light of Jesus' charge of 11:17. The robbers of the Temple arrested the deliverer as though he were a robber. After his arrest, "all his disciples deserted him and ran away" (14:50). Just as Jesus predicted in 14:27, the sheep scattered when the shepherd was struck.
The passage ends with one curious detail: "One young man following behind was clothed only in a long linen shirt. When the mob tried to grab him, he slipped out of his shirt and ran away naked" (14:51-52). The identity of this figure has been repeatedly discussed, especially given the vividness of the detail and its seeming unrelatedness to the main line of the story. Was this one showing courage in trying not to flee or was he coming to warn Jesus? Tradition has suggested that this might be Mark, a witness to the events described, but the young man is not identified. Taylor (1966:652) speaks only of an eyewitness known to Mark. It is clear, nonetheless, that the event made an impression on Mark. With this disciple's naked flight, all the disciples had abandoned Jesus and left him alone.
## TEXT [Commentary]
8. The Jewish leaders examine Jesus (14:53-65; cf. Matt 26:57-68; Luke 22:54)
53 They took Jesus to the high priest's home where the leading priests, the elders, and the teachers of religious law had gathered. 54 Meanwhile, Peter followed him at a distance and went right into the high priest's courtyard. There he sat with the guards, warming himself by the fire.
55 Inside, the leading priests and the entire high council[*] were trying to find evidence against Jesus, so they could put him to death. But they couldn't find any. 56 Many false witnesses spoke against him, but they contradicted each other. 57 Finally, some men stood up and gave this false testimony: 58 "We heard him say, 'I will destroy this Temple made with human hands, and in three days I will build another, made without human hands.'" 59 But even then they didn't get their stories straight!
60 Then the high priest stood up before the others and asked Jesus, "Well, aren't you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?" 61 But Jesus was silent and made no reply. Then the high priest asked him, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?"
62 Jesus said, "I AM.[*] And you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God's right hand[*] and coming on the clouds of heaven.[*]"
63 Then the high priest tore his clothing to show his horror and said, "Why do we need other witnesses? 64 You have all heard his blasphemy. What is your verdict?"
"Guilty!" they all cried. "He deserves to die!"
65 Then some of them began to spit at him, and they blindfolded him and beat him with their fists. "Prophesy to us," they jeered. And the guards slapped him as they took him away.
## NOTES
14:53 **the leading priests, the elders, and the teachers of religious law had gathered.** The Jewish leaders that had made the arrest (14:43) gathered in the residence of the high priest Caiaphas to examine Jesus. Mark never names this high priest in his Gospel. He is named in John's Gospel (18:24). This event took place at night because, in part, the leadership wanted to deal with Jesus as quickly as possible. The event was really not a trial in the sense of seeking a verdict to determine a proper resolution. It was more like a grand jury investigation to gather facts that would allow the leadership to ask Rome to execute Jesus, something only Rome could legally do (for full background to this and a full defense of its historicity, see Bock 1998).
14:54 **Peter followed him at a distance.** Peter was trying to maintain his vow to stand with Jesus, but from a distance. He ended up by a fire in the courtyard of the high priest's home.
14:55 **the leading priests and the entire high council were trying to find evidence against Jesus, so they could put him to death. But they couldn't find any.** This was not a trial but more like a grand jury investigation, since the authority to put Jesus to death belonged to Rome. If the investigation worked like a legal scene, then _m. Sanhedrin_ 4.3-4 gives the configuration: the members present sat in a semicircle, while minutes were taken by two clerks on each end. The witnesses and the accused sat in the middle (Lane 1974:532).
14:58 **Temple made with human hands.** "Made with human hands" often suggests something inadequate or less than holy (Lev 26:1, 30; Isa 2:18; 10:11; 19:1; 21:9; 31:7; Hurtado 1989:253). Only Mark has descriptions of the Temples made with and without hands. Mark also uses a term ( _naos_ [TG3485, ZG3724]) that designates the sanctuary as the part of the Temple being discussed (France 2002:606).
14:60 **Well, aren't you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?** The NLT's somewhat paraphrastic rendering brings out the emotional force of the high priest's query. After asking whether Jesus had anything to say in answer to the charges, he asked, "What is it these men testify against you?" The NLT rendering gives Jesus the opportunity to speak in his own defense.
14:61 **But Jesus was silent and made no reply.** Jesus made no reply to this process that had already determined what was going to happen. The situation recalls Isa 53:7.
**Then the high priest asked him, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?"** The high priest asked Jesus if he were the Messiah, for this is what they needed to take before Pilate. If he made this confession, they could say he was claiming to be King of the Jews. For most Jews, the figure of the Son of Man would refer to a judge. Since that judgment would include the nations, it implied Jesus' kingship (Dan 7:9-27; _1 Enoch_ 62:1-16; _Psalms of Solomon_ 17–18). The final deliverer would be the Messiah, King of the Jews. Out of respect, the phrase "Son of the Blessed One," is used instead of naming God. Calling God blessed alluded to his uniqueness ( _m. Berakhot_ 7.3; _1 Enoch_ 77:2).
14:62 **Jesus said, "I am. And you will see the Son of Man seated in the place of power at God's right hand and coming on the clouds of heaven."** This reply is highly significant, for Jesus thus supplied the testimony that sent him to the cross, while laying out a choice before the council as to who he was. The Gr. is, "You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power." The NLT rendering obscures Jesus' choice to replace the high priest's euphemism with one of his own in order to communicate his own respect for God's name. To refer to God as "the power" invoked the kind of divine authority and power God exercised at the Exodus ( _1 Enoch_ 62:7; esp. _Sifre Numbers_ §12 [on 15:31]; _b. Eruvin_ 54b; _b. Yevamot_ 105b).
14:63 **the high priest tore his clothing to show his horror.** This act showed that the high priest regarded Jesus' remarks as blasphemous. The NLT adds "show his horror." The Gr. does not have the phrase, but that emotion would have accompanied this act.
**Why do we need other witnesses?** The priest noted that Jesus had given them all they needed as testimony to take to Rome. Ironically, Jesus had provided the testimony the Jews could not supply themselves, and this testimony would send him to the cross. Jesus' reply—that he was their judge and would come with authority—identified him as the final deliverer, the Messiah, King of the Jews.
14:64 **You have all heard his blasphemy.** The priest specified that in their view, Jesus' crime was the slanderous dishonoring of God.
**"What is your verdict?" "Guilty," they all cried. "He deserves to die."** The leaders rendered their judgment—they would take Jesus to Pilate.
14:65 **Then some of them began to spit at him, and they blindfolded him and beat him with their fists. "Prophesy to us," they jeered. And the guards slapped him as they took him away.** Jesus was mocked by the soldiers and was treated with disrespect as they took him away.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The sources for this scene are often questioned, since Jesus was present without any of his disciples. But numerous sources could have supplied this information. Some of the council or some tied closely to it eventually supported Jesus (Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus, Paul). In addition, the public debate over Jesus' death would have surfaced the Jewish rationale for his death. Since this would have become public knowledge, sources existed beyond Jesus.
The Jewish leaders were seeking a charge that would yield a guilty verdict from the Romans. This was a gathering of the highest Jewish leaders, comprised of the chief priests and the Sanhedrin, the chief council of the Jews ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 1.6). Whether all seventy members were present, considering how fast the trial was assembled, is not clear (France 2002:603; Evans [2001:444] speaks of several members convening here). Surely a quorum was present; as a group, they sought charges against Jesus.
They were initially unable to find a charge that would stick because their witnesses did not agree. The leaders knew that if they took a charge to Rome, their testimony would have to be coherent. What they were gathering did not meet that standard and they knew it. They were violating the law they sought to defend (Exod 20:16). Though Mark's portrayal has the feel of a railroaded judgment, the leaders were trying to determine what might work and what was futile (see France 2002:604-605, who notes how Jeremiah barely escaped with his life when he spoke against the Temple as a precedent for the reaction; Jer 26:7-24).
Finally, some men stood up and gave this false testimony: "We heard him say, 'I will destroy this Temple made with human hands, and in three days I will build another, made without human hands'" (14:58). This focused attention on the volatile topic of the Temple. If Jesus could be shown to have disturbed the sacred site, then the Romans would have to prevent a public riot. Their accusation that Jesus was destroying the Temple (note the first person—" _I_ will destroy") was false. According to John 2:19, Jesus said, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." Jesus did not say he would destroy the Temple, and in any case, Jesus was speaking of his body rather than the Temple. Thus, the testimony was false, although Jesus' remarks established a contrast between the Jerusalem Temple built with people's hands that he would destroy in covenantal judgment, and the temple God would rebuild by resurrection (his body, probably both physical and spiritual in terms of the community his resurrection would form).
All told, the testimonies about Jesus destroying the Temple did not jive. The leaders recognized that this charge was not well supported by the current testimony as they needed for two or three witnesses to agree (Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15). Mark does not say whether the disagreement was in the timing of the statement or in its interpretation, but the leaders knew that the differences, whatever they were, would be exposed. So the Temple charge came to a dead end.
Eventually, however, Jesus gave them a direct reply about his identity by telling them that he was the Messiah. He did this by combining allusions to Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13. He said that he was able to go directly into God's presence to sit with him in heaven, thereby sharing authority at his side. He would also return as the eschatological judge that Daniel describes as the Son of Man riding the clouds (Exod 14:19-20; 34:5; Num 10:34; Ps 104:3; Isa 19:1; only God or the gods ride the clouds in the OT). In other words, Jesus was not just the Messiah, but also the eschatological judge who was about to sit in God's presence to pass judgement on the process now underway. The Jewish leadership may have thought that Jesus was on trial, but one day he would be their judge. To these leaders, Jesus' claim was worse than if he had said that he would sit in the Holy Place in the Temple; Jesus was claiming to be able to sit directly in God's presence in heaven, something that was not regarded as possible except in a few exceptional and controversial cases (Bock 1998:113-183; of the Son of Man in _1 Enoch_ and figuratively of Moses in the _Exagoge of Ezekiel_ ). Jesus claimed to be more than the Messiah and his exaltation would demonstrate the validity of the claim. The Jews heard it as blasphemy and sent Jesus on to the Romans.
This confrontation included the fundamental choices that still exist concerning Jesus. Either Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God who sits at God's side, or he was a blasphemer. Jesus claimed to have direct access to God and to have the authority to judge humanity. The Jewish leaders viewed this as blasphemy and wanted him stopped, and the confrontation led to the cross. The irony is that Jesus himself supplied the testimony to take to Pilate that the Jewish leaders could not get by their own efforts. He chose to go to the cross and provide the deliverance his suffering would make possible. Jesus knew that his story would not end on a cross, but at the right hand of God, with the authority to judge and to ride the clouds as only someone of his stature can do.
## TEXT [Commentary]
9. Peter's denials (14:66-72; cf. Matt 26:69-75; Luke 22:55-65; John 18:25-27)
66 Meanwhile, Peter was in the courtyard below. One of the servant girls who worked for the high priest came by 67 and noticed Peter warming himself at the fire. She looked at him closely and said, "You were one of those with Jesus of Nazareth.[*]"
68 But Peter denied it. "I don't know what you're talking about," he said, and he went out into the entryway. Just then, a rooster crowed.[*]
69 When the servant girl saw him standing there, she began telling the others, "This man is definitely one of them!" 70 But Peter denied it again.
A little later some of the other bystanders confronted Peter and said, "You must be one of them, because you are a Galilean."
71 Peter swore, "A curse on me if I'm lying—I don't know this man you're talking about!" 72 And immediately the rooster crowed the second time.
Suddenly, Jesus' words flashed through Peter's mind: "Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny three times that you even know me." And he broke down and wept.
## NOTES
14:66 **Peter was in the courtyard below.** Roman houses typically had a courtyard in the central area of the house.
14:68 **Just then, a rooster crowed.** This passage is absent in some very important MSS ( B L W); it may have been added in anticipation of the second crowing mentioned in 14:72.
14:71 **Peter swore, "A curse on me if I am lying—I don't know this man you're talking about!"** The NLT turns the narrative of Peter's invoking a curse on himself into part of the response. His third denial is the most emphatic.
14:72 **And immediately the rooster crowed the second time.** Jesus' prediction had come true. The time was between midnight and 3:00 AM (Hurtado 1989:256).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Of Peter's three denials, two came when he was confronted by a servant girl. She said, "You were one of those with Jesus of Nazareth" and Peter responded, "I don't know what you're talking about" (14:67-68). The Greek is emphatic, as Peter said that he neither knew Jesus nor understood what the girl meant. He protested a little too much in this denial—a cock crowed shortly. He moved to the entryway to avoid the pressure, but the servant girl persisted. "This man is definitely one of them," she told others (14:69), but Peter denied it again (14:70). After this, "Some of the other bystanders confronted Peter and said, 'You must be one of them; because you are a Galilean'" (14:70). The other Gospels indicate that Peter's accent gave him away (Matt 26:73). Peter put a curse on himself, vowing that he wasn't lying when he said, "I don't know this man you're talking about!" (14:71). As soon as he said this, the rooster crowed a second time. Jesus' prediction had come true. The text then says, "Suddenly Jesus' words flashed through Peter's mind: 'Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny three times that you even know me.' And he broke down and wept" (14:72). Recalling Jesus' remarks, Peter cried in pain and disappointment. He also had abandoned Jesus.
So as Jesus predicted, Peter denied Jesus three times, and the other disciples had completely abandoned Jesus. That this unflattering story about the most prominent disciple is included in Mark supports the veracity of the entire account.
## TEXT [Commentary]
10. Jesus' trial before Pilate (15:1-15; cf. Matt 27:11-26; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16)
1 Very early in the morning the leading priests, the elders, and the teachers of religious law—the entire high council[*]—met to discuss their next step. They bound Jesus, led him away, and took him to Pilate, the Roman governor.
2 Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?"
Jesus replied, "You have said it."
3 Then the leading priests kept accusing him of many crimes, 4 and Pilate asked him, "Aren't you going to answer them? What about all these charges they are bringing against you?" 5 But Jesus said nothing, much to Pilate's surprise.
6 Now it was the governor's custom each year during the Passover celebration to release one prisoner—anyone the people requested. 7 One of the prisoners at that time was Barabbas, a revolutionary who had committed murder in an uprising. 8 The crowd went to Pilate and asked him to release a prisoner as usual.
9 "Would you like me to release to you this 'King of the Jews'?" Pilate asked. 10 (For he realized by now that the leading priests had arrested Jesus out of envy.) 11 But at this point the leading priests stirred up the crowd to demand the release of Barabbas instead of Jesus. 12 Pilate asked them, "Then what should I do with this man you call the king of the Jews?"
13 They shouted back, "Crucify him!"
14 "Why?" Pilate demanded. "What crime has he committed?"
But the mob roared even louder, "Crucify him!"
15 So to pacify the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He ordered Jesus flogged with a lead-tipped whip, then turned him over to the Roman soldiers to be crucified.
## NOTES
15:1 **took him to Pilate.** The actual Gr. is "handed him over" ( _paredōkan_ [TG3860, ZG4140]). This verb appears frequently for the "giving over" of Jesus (9:31; 10:33; 14:10, 11, 18, 21, 41-44). As the Roman governor, Pilate collected the taxes for Rome, kept the peace, selected the high priest, and protected Rome's interests in Israel.
15:2 **Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?" Jesus replied, "You have said it."** Jesus responded by acknowledging that Pilate had made the remark. This was a roundabout way of saying, "Yes, I am, but not in the sense you intend." This was Jesus' qualified acceptance that he was (and is) the Messiah (on the grammar, see BDF §441; cf. Matt 26:25, 64; 27:11; Luke 22:70; 23:3; John 18:37; Lane 1974:551). Ironically, Pilate gave recognition to who Jesus was.
15:3 **Then the leading priests kept accusing him of many crimes.** Mark gives no details, but Luke 23:2 speaks of leading the people astray, not paying taxes to Rome, and claiming to be a king. The last charge was already on the table, as 15:2 makes clear.
15:4 **Pilate asked him, "Aren't you going to answer them? What about all these charges they are bringing against you?"** Pilate gave Jesus the opportunity to respond. The structure of the Gr. indicates that Pilate fully expected a reply.
15:5 **But Jesus said nothing, much to Pilate's surprise.** Pilate was amazed that Jesus remained silent. The scene again evokes Isa 53:7. Jesus' silence suggested that something was not right about the charges.
15:6 **Now it was the governor's custom each year during the Passover celebration to release one prisoner—anyone the people requested.** We have no outside corroboration of this custom, but that is because we know very little about what Pilate did except when he upset the Jews or was involved with Jesus. Lane (1974:553) notes a singular amnesty enacted in AD 85 by the governor of Egypt as a parallel.
15:7 **Barabbas, a revolutionary.** Pilate allowed the crowd a choice between Barabbas and Jesus. Barabbas is described as a participant in a disturbance ( _stasei_ [TG4714, ZG5087]) who commited a murder during the incident. He is described in the Gr. as part of a group of insurrectionists—a "revolutionary" ( _stasiastōn_ [TG4955A, ZG5086]; see BDAG 940). There is precedent for similar use of this term and related words in Jewish literature (Jdt 7:15; 2 Macc 4:30; 14:6; Josephus _War_ 6.2.8). Ironically, Barabbas's name means "son of the father" in Aramaic, though Mark does not note that. Barabbas's freedom at Jesus' expense highlights the substitutionary nature of Jesus' death.
15:11 **the leading priests stirred up the crowd.** Mark holds the chief priests responsible as the major force behind Jesus' demise. The verb _anaseiō_ [TG383, ZG411] means to "shake up," so "stirring up the crowd" is a good English rendering (Luke 23:5; BDAG 71; Cranfield 1959:450).
15:15 **flogged.** On ancient descriptions, see Josephus _War_ 2.306, 308; 5.449; Livy _History_ 33.36. Mark says that Jesus was scourged, and the NLT has noted the kind of whipping this was likely to be.
**turned him over.** The NLT explains that when Jesus was "delivered over" ( _paredōken_ [TG3860, ZG4140]), he was given to Roman soldiers (for this key term in Mark for being "delivered over," see 15:1). These soldiers were most likely mercenaries—legionaries from surrounding areas. Luke 23:2 and John 19:12 tell us that if Pilate did not deal with Jesus, the charge could be made he was not doing his job, since it related to keeping the peace in the region and the possibility of a king other than Caesar.
**crucified.** On crucifixion, see TDNT 7:573-574; it is regarded as the cruelest form of execution and as "servile punishment" (Evans 2001:482, citing Valerius Maximus 2.7.12; Tacitus _Histories_ 2.72; 4.11; for details, see Hengel 1977). Mark gives no details about it when he narrates Jesus' death.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The section begins with "the leading priests, the elders, and the teachers of religious law" (the entire high council) taking Jesus to Pilate. This is the same group that had been driving events since Jesus was arrested (14:43). Since Pilate was in Jerusalem for the feast, it was seen as wise to get this resolved while Pilate was present. So they went to him "very early in the morning" (15:1).
For Pilate, the political dimensions of Jesus' claims were important. Was he claiming to be another king in competition with Caesar? If he was, it was Pilate's duty to eliminate this threat. In Mark, "King of the Jews" is a description attributed to Jesus exclusively by those who were responsible for his execution—namely, Pilate, the hostile crowd, the soldiers, the chief priests, and the scribes (15:2, 9, 12, 18, 26, 32).
According to Mark, it was the crowd that sought the customary amnesty for a prisoner this Passover. Cranfield (1959:450) suggests that the crowd might have been filled with Barabbas's supporters, just in case amnesty were offered. The crowd, stirred up by the leading priests, asked for the release of Barabbas, a revolutionary (see note on 15:7). Pilate turned Jesus' destiny over to the crowd: "Would you like me to release this 'King of the Jews'?" (15:9). As Pilate asked if Jesus should be given his freedom, he mockingly described Jesus as king. To Pilate, Jesus was an insignificant figure from Galilee, but Pilate "realized by now that the leading priests had arrested Jesus out of envy" (15:10). Pilate recognized that the battle between Jesus and the leaders was a power struggle. The leaders were jealous of the things Jesus could do and were protecting their own power (12:12, 37b).
After hearing that the crowd wanted Barabbas, he turned to them and asked, "Then what should I do with this man you call the king of the Jews?" (15:12). This is the third use of "king of the Jews" in this chapter, with two more instances to follow (15:18, 26). The response from the crowd was startling. "They shouted back, 'Crucify him!'" (15:13). Although the leaders had driven the movement to have Jesus killed, the crowd supported it. Incredulous, Pilate asked the crowd, "Why? . . . What crime has he committed?" (15:14). Pilate still viewed Jesus as innocent (see also 15:10) and as not deserving death. But as the crowd continued to ask for Jesus' crucifixion, Pilate was faced with a public disturbance, so he decided to pacify the crowd by acting in a way that would preserve his popularity rather than serve justice. His alternative plan had failed and he released Barabbas to them. If this move did not go well, Pilate could say that he had simply listened to the locals.
Pilate "ordered Jesus flogged with a lead-tipped whip, then turned him over to the Roman soldiers to be crucified" (15:15). In preparation for crucifixion, those who were to be executed were flogged with whips tipped with lead or animal bone chips, often with the prisoners attached to a pillar (Taylor 1966:584). The idea was to get the victim bleeding so that death would come more quickly.
In this section, Pilate's examination of Jesus shows the pressure that the Jewish leaders placed on the governor. The leaders brought Jesus to him, got the crowd worked up over Jesus, and pressed for the death penalty. Although he tried to get Jesus released, Pilate found the public pressure, and the resulting political threat, to be too great. He knew that Jesus was innocent, but sent him to death anyway. The crowd opted for Barabbas instead of Jesus when they had a chance to free a prisoner, and Jesus was substituted for a state criminal. Jesus died for another, who was freed by his death. In that exchange, Mark pictures the substitutionary death of Jesus (10:45).
## TEXT [Commentary]
11. The soldiers mock Jesus (15:16-20; cf. Matt 27:27-31)
16 The soldiers took Jesus into the courtyard of the governor's headquarters (called the Praetorium) and called out the entire regiment. 17 They dressed him in a purple robe, and they wove thorn branches into a crown and put it on his head. 18 Then they saluted him and taunted, "Hail! King of the Jews!" 19 And they struck him on the head with a reed stick, spit on him, and dropped to their knees in mock worship. 20 When they were finally tired of mocking him, they took off the purple robe and put his own clothes on him again. Then they led him away to be crucified.
## NOTES
15:16 **governor's headquarters.** This was probably Herod's palace (France 2002:637). Pilate would have been Herod's guest, or else have had a room at the Roman fortress, the Antonia. The courtyard suggests Herod's palace; some ancient traditions identify a location on the western slope of the Tyropeon Valley (noted by Evans 2001:489).
**entire regiment.** If this was a _cohort_ , it was a unit of 600 men. If the term is being used in a less technical sense, then it was probably a _maniple_ , or about 200 men.
15:18 **taunted, "Hail! King of the Jews!"** Such mockery of a prisoner was quite common. Evans (2001:488) notes a scene involving a street person in Philo ( _Flaccus_ 6.36-39) and an incident involving the deposed Vitellius in AD 69 from Dio Cassius (64.20-21; so also Eleazar, according to 4 Macc 6:1-30).
15:20 **When they were finally tired of mocking him . . . they led him away to be crucified.** Having had their fun, the soldiers took back the purple robe, clothed him, and sent him to his death. The word for mock ( _empaizō_ [TG1702, ZG1850]) can mean "to treat cruelly" (2 Macc 7:7, 10; TDNT 5:63).
**put his own clothes on him.** This suggests that as a concession to Jewish sensibilities ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 6.3), Jesus was not crucified in the nude. If the soldiers later took his garments prior to the crucifixion, they may have left his undergarment, while soldiers cast lots for his tunic.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The soldiers began mocking Jesus by dressing him in a robe the color of wealth and royalty (Luke 16:19; Rev 18:12; 1 Macc 10:20, 62, 69; 11:58; 14:43-44) and giving him a mock crown of thorns (1 Macc 5:20; 2 Macc 14:4). Some suggest that this crown was made of the long spines of the date palm (Hooker 1991:370), but France (2002:638) questions this.
The soldiers continued to mock and taunt Jesus, thereby showing their complete disrespect for him. The soldiers dropping to their knees imitated the worship of Caesar (Taylor 1966:586). The title they taunted him with ("King of the Jews") shows the political-regal issue that swirled around his person. He was executed as a messianic pretender. When the accounts refer to Jesus as "King of the Jews" (see 15:9), they show that Jesus was executed for more than being a prophet.
Jesus was treated with contempt by the soldiers, all in fulfillment of what he had predicted in 10:34. That Jesus should suffer so much, even as he was about to die on behalf of many (10:45), indicates just how serious the condition of humanity is with regard to the things of God. Jesus went to the cross as a rejected King of the Jews, but God did not share man's rejection of Jesus, and would soon vindicate him through the resurrection.
## TEXT [Commentary]
12. Jesus' crucifixion and death (15:21-39; cf. Matt 27:32-56; Luke 23:26-49; John 19:17-37)
21 A passerby named Simon, who was from Cyrene,[*] was coming in from the countryside just then, and the soldiers forced him to carry Jesus' cross. (Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus.) 22 And they brought Jesus to a place called Golgotha (which means "Place of the Skull"). 23 They offered him wine drugged with myrrh, but he refused it.
24 Then the soldiers nailed him to the cross. They divided his clothes and threw dice[*] to decide who would get each piece. 25 It was nine o'clock in the morning when they crucified him. 26 A sign announced the charge against him. It read, "The King of the Jews." 27 Two revolutionaries[*] were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left.[*]
29 The people passing by shouted abuse, shaking their heads in mockery. "Ha! Look at you now!" they yelled at him. "You said you were going to destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days. 30 Well then, save yourself and come down from the cross!"
31 The leading priests and teachers of religious law also mocked Jesus. "He saved others," they scoffed, "but he can't save himself! 32 Let this Messiah, this King of Israel, come down from the cross so we can see it and believe him!" Even the men who were crucified with Jesus ridiculed him.
33 At noon, darkness fell across the whole land until three o'clock. 34 Then at three o'clock Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?"[*]
35 Some of the bystanders misunderstood and thought he was calling for the prophet Elijah. 36 One of them ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, holding it up to him on a reed stick so he could drink. "Wait!" he said. "Let's see whether Elijah comes to take him down!"
37 Then Jesus uttered another loud cry and breathed his last. 38 And the curtain in the sanctuary of the Temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.
39 When the Roman officer[*] who stood facing him[*] saw how he had died, he exclaimed, "This man truly was the Son of God!"
## NOTES
15:21 **Rufus.** This figure could well be one who later became a leader in Rome (Rom 16:13). As one of those who helped bear the cross, he would have been carrying the cross beam, not the main pole which would already be at the crucifixion site. It is also debated whether the shape of the cross would have been more like a capital T or a lowercase t, or like the Russian cross with more of an X shape. The fact that there is room for a charge above Jesus' head means that the lowercase t type of cross is most likely (Brown 1997:948).
15:22 **Golgotha.** This site has traditionally been associated with the present location of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, some 300 meters from Herod's palace (France 2002:642 and Brown 1997:937-940, who argues for it over the site in the Garden Tomb area). Hooker (1991:372) notes the association of the locale with the burial place of Adam's skull in Jewish thinking.
15:23 **They offered him wine drugged with myrrh, but he refused it.** The offer of such a drink was not unusual (Prov 31:6; _b. Sanhedrin_ 43a; see Mark 14:25, where Jesus said he would not drink again until the consummation; Cranfield 1959:455). The wine may have come from the sympathetic women who were present (France 2002:643). The addition of myrrh made the wine a kind of delicacy and was intended to ease his suffering (Pliny _Natural History_ 14.15, 92-93).
15:24 **Then the soldiers nailed him to the cross.** In 1968, the remains of a crucified man nailed to a cross were discovered at Giv'at ha-Mivtar (Lane 1974:564-565). His feet were nailed together at the heels, which would have made it difficult for him to bear his weight and breathe while crucified. Those crucified could be nailed or tied to the cross, but this text indicates nailing as do the appearances where Jesus invites his disciples to touch his wounds (John 20:27).
**They divided his clothes and threw dice to decide who would get each piece.** The soldiers gambled for his clothes, and lots were cast to see who would get each piece (see Ps 22:18). Tacitus ( _Annals_ 6.29) notes that those sentenced to death lost their property rights.
15:25 **It was nine o'clock in the morning when they crucified him.** The Gr. refers to the "third hour," which on a sunrise to sunrise schedule would mean 9:00 AM. John 19:14 mentions the sixth hour. Of course, the death took time (note 15:33-34). John was probably highlighting the overlap of the crucifixion with the time of sacrifice later in the day.
15:27 **Two revolutionaries were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left.** The NLT describes the criminals as revolutionaries, which reflects the use of _lēstēs_ [TG3027, ZG3334]. This term is often used of a person who acts against the state, but it can also refer to a mere robber (BDAG 594). In his typical brevity, Mark tells us little else about these two except that they contributed to the ridicule (15:32).
15:28 The NLT mg to 15:27 reads, "Some MSS add verse 28, _And the Scripture was fulfilled that said, 'He was counted among those who were rebels_.'" This verse was probably not a part of the original text of Mark's Gospel, since the manuscript evidence for its inclusion is basically a Byzantine reading. Alexandrian and Western witnesses (such as A B C D) exclude it. It was borrowed from Luke 22:37, a parallel text, which cites Isa 53:12.
15:29 **The people passing by shouted abuse.** The term for "shouting abuse" here is _blasphēmeō_ [TG987, ZG1059], which indicates slander. It could suggest blasphemy, especially for a writer like Mark who respected Jesus.
15:31 **mocked Jesus.** The verb for mock ( _empaizō_ [TG1702, ZG1850]) is the same one used of the Roman soldiers in 15:20. Jews and Gentiles mocked him and rejected him. Evans (2001:505) notes how the mocking of Jesus resembles the portrayal of Isaiah's experience in the Jewish text _Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah_ 5:2-3. There is irony and a kind of unwitting prophecy here as Jesus will, in fact, come down from the cross and live again (for a similar unwitting prophecy, see Caiaphas in John 11:51).
15:33 **At noon, darkness fell across the whole land until three o'clock.** In the Gr., the time period is from the sixth hour until the ninth hour. Creation manifested an apocalyptic darkness that pointed to judgment (Exod 10:21-22; Deut 28:29; Isa 13:10; Amos 8:9-10). Philo ( _Providence_ 2.50) spoke of such darkness as indicating the death of a king or the destruction of a city (Lane 1974:571). Here it could portend either.
15:35 **bystanders . . . thought he was calling for the prophet Elijah.** Some observers thought that Jesus might finally be reacting to his taunters by calling on God to send Elijah to his rescue. Elijah was seen as a protector of the innocent (Sir 48:10; TDNT 2:930-935; Evans 2001:507-508; France 202:654 mentions the later Jewish story in _b. Avodah Zarah_ 17b where Elijah rescues Rabbi Eleazar from a Roman trial).
15:36 **filled a sponge with sour wine.** This was probably "wine vinegar" (the term here is _oxos_ [TG3690, ZG3954], BDAG 715, a "favorite beverage of the lower ranks of society"). Someone hoped that perhaps the wine would strengthen Jesus to await Elijah's arrival. It appears to have been offered by one of the Jews who thought Jesus was calling for deliverance. See Ps 69:21, which places the act in the context of a righteous sufferer.
15:38 **And the curtain . . . of the Temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.** This detail shows another way in which creation responded to Jesus' death. This curtain may have governed entry into the Holy Place (Exod 26:37) or into the Holy of Holies (Exod 26:31). These curtains were at least 55 cubits high (France 2002:656). The curtain by the Holy of Holies that pictured the heavens would have been most visible to the public (Evans 2001:509). The symbolic meaning of the act is debated. Was it to signal the Temple's destruction, as France (2002:657), Evans (2001:509), and some of the Fathers argue (see Lane 1974:575; Tertullian _Against Marcion_ 4.42)? Or was it a sign that access to God had been opened up, since the curtain prevented entrance to some (see Nolland 1993:1157-1158 discussing Luke, which has parallel imagery)? Or might it be both (Bock 1996:1861 also discussing Luke)? The event is uncorroborated, but there is a curious later tradition in Judaism that during the last forty years before the Temple's demise, the sanctuary doors would open by themselves ( _b. Yoma_ 39b).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
Jesus, who had just been flogged, was apparently too weak to carry the crossbeam for his crucifixion to the site of execution, though this was expected of each condemned person (Plutarch _Moralia_ 554 A: "Each of the condemned carried his own cross"). So Simon from Cyrene (in North Africa) was selected to bear the cross for Jesus (15:21). Mark identifies him as father to Alexander and Rufus; this suggests that the man became a Christian and was known to Mark's audience (Cranfield 1959:454). At the time, he was probably a diaspora Jew.
The execution took place at Golgotha, which in Aramaic means "Place of the Skull" (15:22). The site was either associated with a skull because it looked like one, or because many had "lost their heads" there. The alternative name, "Calvary," comes from the Latin and shares the meaning "skull." Before the soldiers nailed Jesus to the crossbeam, they offered him drugged wine (see note on 15:23), but Jesus refused to take anything to dull the pain and suffering. The crossbeam was laid on the ground, and then Jesus was nailed to the cross and lifted up to hang on the main beam already in the ground. There he was left to die.
Mark tells us that "a sign announced the charge against him. It read, 'The King of the Jews'" (15:26). With a crucifixion, a charge accompanied the sentenced person. Here it is clear that the Romans viewed Jesus' death as politically motivated. Jesus was mocked as "King of the Jews" (15:18), and he was executed for the same charge (see also 15:2). Cranfield (1959:456) says that the "governor unwittingly proclaimed the truth of Jesus' messianic kingship." All four Gospels note "King of the Jews" as a part of the charge, while differing in other details (Matt 27:37; Luke 23:38; John 19:19 has the fullest statement). Evans (2001:503-504) notes that the expression does not originate with Mark, but with the Romans. Jews would have called such a figure "our King" or "our Messiah." The expression "King of the Jews" suggests a viewpoint outside of Judaism, which contributes to the scene's authenticity. Mark's point is that the real blasphemy was with the people, not in the one being crucified for blasphemy (14:64).
As Jesus was dying on the cross, people passed by, shouting words of abuse. As Mark describes it, they were "shaking their heads in mockery" (15:29), in the tone of Psalm 22:7 and 69:20 (also Jer 18:16). Jesus is portrayed as the righteous sufferer. The people yelled at him, "Ha! Look at you now! . . . you were going to destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days" (15:29). The issue of the Temple came up again, as it did at the trial (14:58). The point of their remarks is that Jesus had failed—he would not meet his third-day claim. Though they could not conceive it, he would meet the claim in his resurrected body (see John 2:19-22). The mocking and abuse continued, as the people shouted out, "Well then, save yourself and come down from the cross!" (15:30). The irony reaches its height here. Those who mocked Jesus thought he had failed. In fact, he would not only be rescued from the death of the cross, but would also save many others in the process.
The narrative continues with more mocking. "The leading priests and teachers of religious law also mocked Jesus. 'He saved others,' they scoffed, 'but he can't save himself!'" (15:31). The irony kicks up one more level. The Jewish leaders spoke of Jesus' deliverance of others (probably an allusion to his miracles), regarding it as a sign of Jesus' impotence that he could not deliver himself. What kind of a Christ-King deliverer could be hanging on a cross? With the resurrection, God, the ultimate deliverer, would save Jesus and thereby provide salvation for others. This verse also echoes Psalm 22:7-8. The scoffing is expressed in an imperfect tense, indicating ongoing derision. Taylor (1966:592) argues that the scene rings true, as "it is hard to believe that this speech is a product of creative imagination." Skeptics sometimes suggest that the leaders would not have been present (as Hooker 1991:374), but they had too much invested not to see the execution through to its end.
They continued their abuse by shouting out, "Let this Messiah, this King of Israel, come down from the cross so we can see it and believe in him!" (15:32). They taunted the King that if he would come down from the cross and survive crucifixion, they would believe. Of course, the reader knows that their faith did not follow when Jesus was raised from death. To call Jesus "King of Israel" adds a nationalist note to the taunt. The call to do something that they could see and respond to may be a slight against Jesus' reply in 14:62. Wisdom of Solomon 2:17-18 teaches that God helps the righteous man and Jesus was failing that test. As France (2002:649) notes, Jesus was losing his soul in order to help others attain theirs, a variation on the theme of 8:35. The taunting was so bad that even the two men crucified with Jesus joined in the derision (15:32).
In the midst of all this mockery, Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means, "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" (15:34). He was not calling out to Elijah (see notes on 15:35-36). In the darkness of judgment, Jesus suffered the anguish of judgment. In Aramaic, he cried out the lament of Psalm 22:1 (the third place in Mark where Aramaic is used; 5:41; 14:36 NLT mg; Matt 27:46 transliterates Heb. here). In the anguish of separation from God, Jesus reached out to the Father, as the psalm declares the sufferer's trust in God (Ps 22:22, 24, 30-31). However, there is no such note of hope here; Mark simply leaves us with the agony of the cross. Jesus was bearing sin for others (10:45).
Then Mark tells us, "Jesus uttered another loud cry and breathed his last" (15:37). Now it was finished. Elijah had not come, only death. But in three days, life would come. As Lane (1974:574) says, "The meaning of his death becomes clear only from the perspective of the triumph of resurrection which marked his vindication and demonstrated that death had no claim on him." Only then did Jesus "come down" from the cross by being taken up to the Father.
After his resurrection, many would come to realize that Jesus was and is the Son of God. A Roman officer realized this by seeing how Jesus died. The text says, "When the Roman officer who stood facing him saw how he had died, he exclaimed, 'This man truly was the Son of God!' " (15:39). This is the climactic confession of the crucifixion and of the book. It matches 1:1 (and 1:11). This soldier, neutral or even initially hostile in his view of Jesus, saw all that transpired and recognized Jesus' unique relationship to God. The soldier was probably the centurion in charge of the execution. Mark uses a Latin loan word to describe the solider—( _kēnturiōn_ [TG2760, ZG3035], meaning "centurion." In contrast to all the mockery by the Jewish leaders and others, this Gentile saw what was going on. Apparently the final words, the darkness, and Jesus' shout were what convinced him that they had killed one who was what he claimed to be. For Jesus to be strong enough to shout at the end of a crucifixion was unusual. How much the centurion actually understood of what he confessed is debated (note Evans 2001:510), as he would not have had the background to know much more than that Jesus was a divinely enabled, commissioned King. Still, his confession was more than a contradiction to the death sentence Jesus received, and the fuller meaning of the title "Son of God" was clear to Mark's readers (1:1, 11; 3:11; 5:7; 9:7; 12:6; 13:32; 14:61-62). On this note, the crucifixion scene ends.
By way of summary, the reader sees the swirl of reactions produced by Jesus' crucifixion. People passing by, the Jewish leaders, most of the soldiers, and those who were hanged with him all mocked him. The descriptions allude to a righteous sufferer meeting unjust rejection, recalling Psalms 22 and 69. The creation went dark in judgment. The temple veil was rent, also pointing to judgment and the opening up of heaven; Jesus went to the Father, having provided the way to God. Finally, a single solider recognized that Jesus, slain as King of the Jews and mocked for not being able to save himself, was indeed the Son of God. The one executed was seen by one of his executioners as executing the will of God. Despite Jesus' death, he was still God's Son, as events three days later would dramatically confirm.
## TEXT [Commentary]
13. Jesus' burial (15:40-47; cf. Matt 27:57-66; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:31-42)
40 Some women were there, watching from a distance, including Mary Magdalene, Mary (the mother of James the younger and of Joseph[*]), and Salome. 41 They had been followers of Jesus and had cared for him while he was in Galilee. Many other women who had come with him to Jerusalem were also there.
42 This all happened on Friday, the day of preparation,[*] the day before the Sabbath. As evening approached, 43 Joseph of Arimathea took a risk and went to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. (Joseph was an honored member of the high council, and he was waiting for the Kingdom of God to come.) 44 Pilate couldn't believe that Jesus was already dead, so he called for the Roman officer and asked if he had died yet. 45 The officer confirmed that Jesus was dead, so Pilate told Joseph he could have the body. 46 Joseph bought a long sheet of linen cloth. Then he took Jesus' body down from the cross, wrapped it in the cloth, and laid it in a tomb that had been carved out of the rock. Then he rolled a stone in front of the entrance. 47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph saw where Jesus' body was laid.
## NOTES
15:43 **Joseph of Arimathea took a risk and went to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. (Joseph was an honored member of the high council, and he was waiting for the Kingdom of God to come.)** Joseph is noted in all four Gospels (Matt 27:57; Luke 23:51; John 19:38). In Mark, the Gr. speaks of Joseph's "taking courage" or "being bold" ( _tolmēsas_ [TG5111, ZG5528]), which suggests the note of risk the NLT translation highlights.
15:44 **Pilate couldn't believe that Jesus was already dead, so he called for the Roman officer and asked if he had died yet.** The NLT strengthens the Gr., which says that "Pilate wondered if he were already dead" to indicate amazement that the body was already being requested. Death by crucifixion could take hours or days longer than Jesus had been on the cross (Evans 2001:520; Hengel 1977:29-31), so Pilate called the centurion to verify his death. There is some discussion as to whether Pilate asked if he had been dead long or asked if he were already dead, since there is a textual problem. Some of the earliest MSS have "already dead" (B D W), but this looks like an easier reading than the more difficult _ei palai_ [TG3819, ZG4093], which means "if [he had been dead] long," in most other MSS (including A C L).
15:45 **The officer confirmed that Jesus was dead, so Pilate told Joseph he could have the body.** Upon confirming the death, Pilate gave the body to Joseph to do with as he wished. This lit. reads that Pilate "gifted Joseph with the corpse." The word _ptōma_ [TG4430, ZG4773] always refers to a corpse in the NT (Matt 14:12; 24:28; Rev 11:8-9; TDNT 6:166-167). Mark's only other use of the word concerns John the Baptist's body (6:29).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This section begins with a transition between the crucifixion scene and the burial scene by noting that certain women who witnessed Jesus' crucifixion (15:40-41) also saw where and how Jesus was buried (15:42-47). The section begins with the statement, "Some women were there, watching from a distance, including Mary Magdalene, Mary (the mother of James the younger and of Joseph), and Salome." Witnesses were present who knew Jesus and were aware of all that had taken place. They had seen the crucifixion and the burial. They are witnesses despite the fact that the witness of women was often prohibited as having no legal value at that time (Tacitus _Annals_ 6.29; Josephus _Antiquities_ 4.219). This supports the historical character of the details, because if someone were trying to invent witnesses to prove a point, they would not use women.
All three women are mentioned here for the first time in Mark. Mary Magdalene has a key role in the resurrection accounts in all the Gospels (see also Luke 8:2). Salome is also involved in Mark's resurrection account (16:1). She may be the mother of the sons of Zebedee noted in Matthew 27:56, but the name was a common one, making this less than certain. The other Mary could be the same person as Mary, the wife of Clopas (John 19:25), and/or the same as the mother of James and Joseph in Matthew 27:56 (one of the sons was also known as Joses, the name Mark uses in the Gr. here). She was probably not Mary, the mother of Jesus, as she is listed second and the connection is made to others, not to Jesus.
Mark tells the reader that these women "had been followers of Jesus and had cared for him while he was in Galilee. Many other women who had come with him to Jerusalem were also there" (15:40). These three women (Mary Magdalene, Mary, and Salome) were the most prominent among a larger group of pilgrims traveling with Jesus. They had cared for Jesus, as Luke 8:1-3 reports.
Having noted which women were present at the crucifixion, Mark says, "This all happened on Friday, the day of preparation, the day before the Sabbath" (15:42). Mark locates the day specifically as the day of preparation before the day of Sabbath rest. Everything for the Sabbath was prepared that day, so the Sabbath could be a day of rest. To fulfill Jewish law, a person's body had to be buried on the day of their death. This meant that preparations for burial had to happen quickly, in the three hours between Jesus' death and the sun's setting that ended the day (Deut 21:23; 2 Sam 21:12-14; Tob 1:17-19; 2:3-7, where burying the dead is an act of piety).
Joseph of Arimathea came to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. His request challenged the opinion of those who sought Jesus' death by requesting a decent burial for Jesus. As a member of the Sanhedrin (or high council), he was a major Jewish leader (Evans 2001:518-519 defends the historicity of his presence in the account). Not everyone rejected Jesus. Joseph's description as one who awaited the Kingdom also suggests that he was not hostile to Jesus. Either he was not present at the hearing where "all" condemned Jesus (14:64), or the earlier verse was hyperbolic in referring to the overwhelming majority with no dissenting voice heard. He asked to have Jesus' body, which the Romans would otherwise have left to rot on the cross or be eaten by birds (Lane 1974:578). Jews were more inclined to at least dispose of the body, but Joseph wanted Jesus to have an appropriate tomb.
Mark slows down his account to note a few details of Joseph's care of Jesus' body in five distinct actions: "Joseph bought a long sheet of linen . . . took Jesus' body down . . . wrapped it . . . laid it in a tomb that had been carved out of the rock. Then he rolled a stone in front of the entrance" (15:46). The major items omitted from the account are the washing of the body, a detail important to Jews ( _m. Sanhedrin_ 23.5), and any note about spices (see John 19:40), which would also have been likely. The rock tomb was probably a family burial place. Joseph probably acted with others, because rolling the stone would have been a major task for just one person (Lane 1974:580). John's Gospel tells us that Nicodemus helped to give Jesus an honorable burial (John 19:39-40).
Mark concludes this section by telling his readers that "Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph saw where Jesus' body was laid" (15:47). Two of the women noted in 15:40 watched Joseph inter Jesus' body, so the burial was witnessed by two people, the minimum number required in another context to verify evidence demanding a death sentence (Deut 17:6; 19:15). That women were the key witnesses is unusual, but again this points to the account's trustworthiness (see comments above).
This section tells us that Jesus was buried with dignity by Joseph, a Jewish leader, verifying that not every prominent Jew was against Jesus. This section also informs us that Jesus was definitely dead. He was buried in a tomb known to his followers, and his body was not left to rot or to remain dishonorably exposed overnight. Pilate permitted all of this. Two witnesses saw his dead body being buried. The scene was set for Jesus' resurrection from the dead.
## TEXT [Commentary]
14. The resurrection of Jesus (16:1-8; cf. Matt 28:1-10; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-18)
1 Saturday evening, when the Sabbath ended, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome went out and purchased burial spices so they could anoint Jesus' body. 2 Very early on Sunday morning,[*] just at sunrise, they went to the tomb. 3 On the way they were asking each other, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?" 4 But as they arrived, they looked up and saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled aside.
5 When they entered the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a white robe sitting on the right side. The women were shocked, 6 but the angel said, "Don't be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus of Nazareth,[*] who was crucified. He isn't here! He is risen from the dead! Look, this is where they laid his body. 7 Now go and tell his disciples, including Peter, that Jesus is going ahead of you to Galilee. You will see him there, just as he told you before he died."
8 The women fled from the tomb, trembling and bewildered, and they said nothing to anyone because they were too frightened.[*]
## NOTES
16:1 **purchased burial spices.** This term for spices is used only in this scene in the NT (Luke 23:56; 24:1; John 19:40).
16:2 **Very early on Sunday morning, just at sunrise.** The unusual double reference to the time as very early in the morning at sunrise emphasizes that the women went as soon as they could, as night became morning.
16:3 **Who will roll away the stone for us?** The women were concerned about how they would get into the tomb. These stones were anywhere from five to six feet in diameter, so they weighed hundreds of pounds (Evans 2001:535). Such stones were set into a groove in front of the entrance, making their removal difficult.
16:5 **saw a young man.** In Judaism, angels were described as young men (2 Macc 3:26, 33; Josephus _Antiquities_ 5.277; France 2002:679).
**shocked.** _exethambēthēsan_ [TG1568, ZG1701]; cf. 14:33.
16:8 **The women fled from the tomb, trembling and bewildered, and they said nothing to anyone because they were too frightened.** At this point we must address the fact that among the various manuscripts, five endings to Mark have been preserved: (1) The Gospel could end at 16:8, per the evidence of B 304 syrs copsa (one MS) arm geo (two MSS) Hesychius Eusebius and MSS according to Eusebius, Jerome, and Severus. (2) The NLT's "shorter ending", per the evidence of itk. (3) The NLT's "longer ending" of 16:9-20, per the evidence of A C D 037 038 f13 33 Irenaeus, Augustine, and MSS according to Eusebius, Jerome, and Severus. (4) There is an alternate longer ending with an addition after 16:14 ("And they excused themselves, saying, 'This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits. Therefore reveal your righteousness now'—thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, 'The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, that they may inherit the spiritual and imperishable glory of righteousness that is in heaven'"; see the NRSV mg and the NLT mg), per the evidence of W and MSS according to Jerome. (5) Including both the shorter ending and the traditional longer ending is also possible, per the evidence of L 044 083 099 274mg 579 syrh (mg) copsa (MSS) copbo (MSS).
The manuscript evidence suggests that 16:8 is the original ending of Mark (Lane 1974:591-592); the two earliest extant MSS ( and B) end there. Certain church fathers, such as Clement and Origen, did not know of the longer ending, while Eusebius, Jerome, and Severus noted its absence in most of the Gr. MSS they knew. It is also lacking in the Eusebian canons on the Gospels from the third century. This is important evidence for its non-originality, for if it existed there is no good explanation for their not using it (France 2002:685-687).
However, many find the ending at 16:8 so abrupt that they suggest that the original ending of Mark has been lost or that this ending was not Mark's original intention (France 2002: 684; Evans 2001:539). Even if 16:8 did not originally conclude this Gospel, there still is no clear support for a longer ending other than these factors: (1) the stylistic oddity of _gar_ [TG1063, ZG1142] (for) in the final phrase of the book, and (2) the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus in Matthew and Luke suggesting an appearance in the original Mark.
The history of the alternate endings of Mark is discussed in the commentary. The existence of several longer versions strongly suggests that they are later additions to the abrupt ending of 16:8. That the traditional longer version (16:9-20) contains a combination of the other Gospels' endings also suggests its secondary character, as does its distinct vocabulary. There are numerous points of contact with the other Gospels—three with Luke, two with Matthew, two with John, and five with Acts. These are noted below (for further discussion on the endings to Mark, see Comfort 2007:[Matt 16:8]).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The women mentioned at the beginning of this chapter witnessed Jesus' crucifixion and/or burial (see Commentary on 15:40-47). The first thing they did after the Sabbath was purchase spices ( _arōmata_ [TG759, ZG808]) to anoint Jesus as a shield for the decaying body odor. Mark does not note that Joseph anointed Jesus with spices, so this is the only anointing mentioned in Mark. However, John says that Nicodemus brought spices and anointed Jesus' body (John 19:39-40). The Synoptic Gospels note Joseph's involvement in the burial, keeping the story simple. These women came to Jesus' tomb early Sunday morning to anoint his body. This was their own way of honoring Jesus, so if they did see Joseph anointing Jesus (15:47), this did not preclude them from doing so as well.
On the way to the tomb, they wondered who would roll the stone away for them. When the women arrived, "they looked up and saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled aside" (16:4). Their problem was solved. The very large stone was now off to the side so they could enter the tomb. When they passed through the entry tunnel and into the chamber, "they saw a young man clothed in a white robe sitting on the right side" (16:5). This person should probably be regarded as a heavenly figure, such as an angel (see note on 16:5; see also Matt 28:2-3; Mark 9:2-3; John 20:12; Acts 1:10; 10:30; Rev 6:11; 7:9, 13). He told them, "Don't be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He isn't here! He is risen from the dead! Look, this is where they laid his body." His revelatory message announced that the resurrection had taken place. The tomb was empty; Jesus' body was no longer among the dead. This could be a scene of discipleship failure at one level, since the women, like their male compatriots, did not take Jesus' resurrection announcements to heart. However, the remark does not really come across as a rebuke. It is more an encouragement to really believe the resurrection has taken place. So the failure is less explicitly presented than earlier in Mark. The ending, if Mark ends at 16:8, leaves the reader hanging. What will he or she do? The opportunity for faith exists—the reader must not be left paralyzed by fear, but take advantage of this opportunity.
The resurrection was a fundamental declaration of the early church (Acts 2:29; 1 Cor 15:3-8, 11). The women were the first to get the message of Jesus' resurrection. Again, this detail would be odd if someone had fabricated Jesus' resurrection, because in that culture it was the witness of men that mattered, not that of women. Hence, the historicity of the account is confirmed (see commentary on 15:40-47).
The angel told the women, "Now go and tell his disciples, including Peter, that Jesus is going ahead of you to Galilee. You will see him there, just as he told you before he died" (16:7). The disciples were instructed to meet Jesus in Galilee, including Peter, who had been restored to the group after his denials. Jesus would do as he had predicted (14:27-28). This remark makes it clear that although Mark did not give details of Jesus' appearances after his resurrection (according to the short ending of Mark; see note on 16:8), Jesus did appear to his disciples. Verse 7 also makes it clear that the story did not end with fear and silence. Jesus did appear to his disciples and someone had to have reported the empty tomb and the message to go to Galilee for that appearance.
If the book ends at 16:8, then the experience of the resurrection is portrayed as an initially overwhelming experience, inciting fear and initial silence in the women. I say "initial silence" because the disciples did get to Galilee and did see Jesus, as Matthew narrates (Matt 28:16-20; Cranfield 1959:469), indicating that the women did eventually speak. John 20:18 has Mary report Jesus' appearance, but does so in a way that may suggest Mary hung around the tomb for a while, finding it hard to believe initially.
Why would Mark end his gospel this way—if, indeed, this is the end of the gospel? It would create an open ending that would allow readers to contemplate these unusual events and make a response of faith to God's unexpected, unusual, and powerful work, a theme in Mark's Gospel (4:41; 5:15, 33, 36; 6:50; 9:6, 32). The declaration of resurrection leaves no alternatives but to remain in fear or to believe. The tomb was empty and Jesus would appear to the disciples (16:5-7). It was time to respond.
The gospel ends with Jesus' resurrection declared as an event to be believed, even though it was almost too much to believe. The women were not prepared to see an empty tomb. Everything about the scene caught them off guard and left them numb, but clearly, it took place. The Gospel's record of the women's experience shows that they eventually talked, for where else would the testimony have come from?
## TEXT [Commentary]
IV. The Added Endings to Mark (post-16:8)
A. The Shorter Ending (post-16:8)
8b Then they briefly reported all this to Peter and his companions. Afterward Jesus himself sent them out from east to west with the sacred and unfailing message of salvation that gives eternal life. Amen.
## NOTES
[Shorter Ending of Mark] This ending appears by itself after 16:8 in itk, and with the traditional longer ending (16:9-20) in L 044 083 099 274mg 579 syrh mg copsa, bo mss (see note on 16:8).
## COMMENTARY [Text]
This short ending does two things. First, it notes that the women did report to Peter (see 16:7) and others. Second, it says that Jesus sent them out to preach the sacred and unfailing message of eternal salvation. Then, with a solemn and unprecedented use of "amen," it closes.
## TEXT [Commentary]
B. The Longer Ending (16:9-20)
9 After Jesus rose from the dead early on Sunday morning, the first person who saw him was Mary Magdalene, the woman from whom he had cast out seven demons. 10 She went to the disciples, who were grieving and weeping, and told them what had happened. 11 But when she told them that Jesus was alive and she had seen him, they didn't believe her.
12 Afterward he appeared in a different form to two of his followers who were walking from Jerusalem into the country. 13 They rushed back to tell the others, but no one believed them.
14 Still later he appeared to the eleven disciples as they were eating together. He rebuked them for their stubborn unbelief because they refused to believe those who had seen him after he had been raised from the dead.[*]
15 And then he told them, "Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone. 16 Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned. 17 These miraculous signs will accompany those who believe: They will cast out demons in my name, and they will speak in new languages.[*] 18 They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won't hurt them. They will be able to place their hands on the sick, and they will be healed."
19 When the Lord Jesus had finished talking with them, he was taken up into heaven and sat down in the place of honor at God's right hand. 20 And the disciples went everywhere and preached, and the Lord worked through them, confirming what they said by many miraculous signs.
## NOTES
16:9 **the first person who saw him was Mary Magdalene, the woman from whom he cast out seven demons.** This description of Mary recalls Luke 8:2.
16:14 As the note at 16:8 indicates, Codex W has a long addition, which involves a defense by the disciples of their doubting response: "This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not permit God's truth and power to conquer the evil spirits. Therefore reveal your justice now." In response, Jesus declared the end of Satan's power as a time fulfilled, and predicted that dreadful things would happen. He noted that he was handed over to death for those who sinned, to prevent them from sinning as they returned to the truth. The result is that they will inherit spiritual, incorruptible, and righteous glory in heaven. This terminology is uniquely distinct from the Gospels.
16:15 **Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone.** The expression "to everyone" in the NLT is "all the creation" in Gr., so the rendering clarifies the common meaning of the figure. "Going" is a dependent participle in the Gr., so the believers were commanded primarily to preach but that by means of their going into all the world.
16:17 **speak in new languages.** The NLT renders "tongues" as "new languages," highlighting the fresh linguistic enablement that is the gift.
16:18 **They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won't hurt them.** Second century Jewish texts also speak of not being overcome by poison ( _Testament of Joseph_ 6:2; _Testament of Benjamin_ 3:5; 5:2). Cf. Acts 28:3-6.
16:19 **he was taken up into heaven and sat down in the place of honor at God's right hand.** The NLT adds a reference to the right hand of God as a "place of honor," which simply explains its importance.
16:20 **the Lord worked through them.** Lit., "the Lord working with them." The Gr. term _sunergountos_ [TG4903, ZG5300] means to "work together" with someone.
## COMMENTARY [Text]
The traditional longer ending to Mark was composed by someone (perhaps in the second century) who drew from the other Gospels and Acts. The writer's mention that Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene (16:9) parallels John 20:11-18. However, the writer then goes on to say that Mary went to the disciples and told them that she had seen the risen Christ (16:10-11). This doesn't concur with John 20:1-2 or any of the other Gospels, where Mary first went to tell the disciples only that the tomb was empty. Jesus had not yet appeared. The writer then tells us that the disciples did not believe Mary (16:11). This note of a lack of faith parallels Luke 24:11, but in Luke, the angelic appearance and the empty tomb are not believed.
Following this, the writer of the longer ending wrote, "Afterward he appeared in a different form to two of his followers who were walking from Jerusalem into the country" (16:12). The Emmaus Road appearance is recorded in Luke 24:13-35. The idea that Jesus had "another form" comes from the fact that initially the two disciples on the way to Emmaus did not recognize him. The writer then says, "They rushed back to tell the others, but no one believed them" (16:13). This summarizes Luke 24:33-35, but the note of unbelief is distinct and may come from 24:34, because in Luke, the Emmaus report is trumped by the report of an appearance to Peter. There is no indication in Luke that the report was not believed.
In 16:14, the writer says, "still later he [Jesus] appeared to the eleven disciples as they were eating together." This apparently alludes to Luke 24:38-41. The text continues, "He rebuked them for their stubborn unbelief because they refused to believe those who had seen him after he had been raised from the dead." This does not allude to a specific text, but it is similar to Luke 24:11 and resembles the doubting Thomas scene (John 20:24-29). After this, Jesus told the disciples to "go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone" (16:15). This is the longer reading's equivalent of the Great Commission recorded in Matthew 28:18-20. In the longer ending, however, Jesus says, "Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned" (16:16). The remark is very similar to John 3:18, 36. The text, probably a second century addition, indicates the importance of baptism in the early church.
The writer then moves to a number of items pertaining to miraculous signs. Jesus says, "These miraculous signs will accompany those who believe: They will cast out demons in my name, and they will speak in new languages" (16:17). The passage underscores the miraculous signs believers would employ in support of the gospel message. Texts such as John 14:12 and Acts 5:12 may be in view, as well as the accounts of Acts 2:3-4; 10:46; 16:18; 19:6. Some curious words follow: "They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won't hurt them. They will be able to place their hands on the sick, and they will be healed" (16:18). The reference to snakes reflects the language of Acts 28:3-6 and Luke 10:19. The events of Acts 3:7 and 9:12, 17 point to the laying on of hands for healing.
The writer of the longer ending then records the ascension, based on Luke 24:50-53 and Acts 1:2, 9-11. He concludes with the words, "And the disciples went everywhere and preached, and the Lord worked through them, confirming what they said by many miraculous signs" (16:20). This final verse of the long ending notes the fulfillment of the commission, in that the disciples obeyed the call of 16:15 by preaching the gospel. Furthermore, what Jesus predicted would happen (16:17-18) was now happening—the Lord was confirming the disciples' work with many miraculous signs.
# BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bauckham, Richard, editor
1988 _The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking Gospel Audiences_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Blomberg, Craig
1997 _Jesus and the Gospels_. Nashville: Broadman & Holman.
Bock, Darrell L.
1994 _Luke 1:1–9:50_. Baker's Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament 3a. Grand Rapids: Baker.
1996 _Luke 9:51–24:53_. Baker's Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament 3b. Grand Rapids: Baker.
1998 _Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism and the Final Examination of Jesus_. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
2001 "The Kingdom of God in New Testament Theology," Pp. 28-60 in _Looking into the Future: Evangelical Studies in Eschatology_. Editor, David W. Baker. Grand Rapids: Baker.
2002a _Studying the Historical Jesus_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
2002b _Jesus According to Scripture_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Brown, Raymond E.
1997 _An Introduction to the New Testament_. The Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday.
Burridge, Richard A.
1992 _What Are the Gospels? A Comparison with Greco-Roman Biography_. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comfort, Philip
2007 _New Testament Text and Translation Commentary_. Carol Stream: Tyndale.
Cranfield, C. E. B.
1959 _The Gospel according to Saint Mark_. The Cambridge Greek Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Donahue, J. R.
1971 "Tax Collectors and Sinners: An Attempt at Identification," _Catholic Biblical Quarterly_ 33:39-61.
Evans, Craig A.
2001 _Mark 8:27–16:20_. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word.
France, R. T.
2002 _The Gospel of Mark_. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Garland, David E.
1996 _The NIV Application Commentary: Mark_. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Guelich, R. A.
1989 _Mark 1–8:26_. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word.
1992 "Mark." Pp. 512-525 in _Dictionary of_ _Jesus and the Gospels_. Editors, Joel Green, Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity.
Gundry, Robert H.
1993 _Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Guthrie, Donald
1990 _New Testament Introduction_. Rev. ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Hanson, K. C. and Douglas E. Oakman
1998 _Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts_. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Hengel, Martin
1977 _Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross_. Philadelphia: Fortress.
1981 _The Charismatic Leader and His Followers_. Translator, James C. G. Greig; editor, John Riches. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
1985 _Studies in the Gospel of Mark_. Translator, John Bowden. London: SCM.
Hooker, Morna D.
1991 _The Gospel According to Saint Mark_. Black's New Testament Commentaries. London: A & C Black.
Hurtado, Larry
1989 _Mark_. New International Biblical Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
Johnson, S. E.
1960 _The Gospel according to St. Mark_. Harper's New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harpers.
Lane, William L.
1974 _The Gospel according to Mark_. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Marcus, Joel
2000 _Mark 1-8_. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday.
Meier, John P.
2001 _A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus_. Vol. 3, _Companions and Competitors_. The Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday.
Metzger, Bruce M.
1971 _A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament_. New York: United Bible Societies.
Nolland, John.
1993 _Luke 18:35–24:53_. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word.
Schürer, E. (G. Vermes, F. Millar, M. Black, editors)
1979 _The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ_. Vol. 2. Rev ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Sherwin-White, A. N.
1963 _Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament_. Oxford: Clarendon.
Stein, Robert H.
1987 _The Synoptic Problem_. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Strack, Herman, and Paul Billerbeck
1922–1961 _Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch_. 6 vols. Munich: Beck.
Taylor, Vincent
1966 _The Gospel according to St Mark_. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.
Twelftree, Graham H.
1999 _Jesus the Miracle Worker: A Historical and Theological Study_. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.
Witherington III, Ben
2001 _The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary_. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
# THE CORNERSTONE BIBLICAL COMMENTARY SERIES
Volume 1
_Genesis_ : Allen Ross
_Exodus_ : John N. Oswalt
Volume 2
_Leviticus_ : David W. Baker
_Numbers_ : Dale A. Brueggemann
_Deuteronomy_ : Eugene H. Merrill
Volume 3
_Joshua_ : Joseph Coleson
_Judges_ : Lawson G. Stone
_Ruth_ : Jason Driesbach
Volume 4a
_1-2 Samuel_ : J. Robert Vannoy
Volume 4b
_1-2 Kings_ : William H. Barnes
Volume 5a
_1-2 Chronicles_ : Mark J. Boda
Volume 5b
_Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther_ : Gary V. Smith
Volume 6
_Job_ : August H. Konkel
_Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs_ : Tremper Longman III
Volume 7
_Psalms_ : Mark D. Futato
_Proverbs_ : George M. Schwab
Volume 8
_Isaiah_ : Larry L. Walker
_Jeremiah, Lamentations_ : Elmer A. Martens
Volume 9
_Ezekiel_ : David L. Thompson
_Daniel_ : Eugene Carpenter
Volume 10
_Hosea, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah_ : Richard Patterson
_Amos, Micah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi_ : Andrew Hill
Volume 11
_Matthew_ : David L. Turner
_Mark_ : Darrell L. Bock
Volume 12
_Luke_ : Allison A. Trites
_Acts_ : William J. Larkin
Volume 13
_John_ : Grant R. Osborne
_1-3 John_ : Philip W. Comfort and Wendell C. Hawley
Volume 14
_Romans_ : Roger Mohrlang
_Galatians_ : Gerald L. Borchert
Volume 15
_1 Corinthians_ : William Baker
_2 Corinthians_ : Ralph P. Martin _with_ Carl N. Toney
Volume 16
_Ephesians_ : Harold W. Hoehner
_Philippians, 1-2 Thessalonians_ : Philip W. Comfort
_Colossians, Philemon_ : Peter H. Davids
Volume 17
_1 Timothy_ : Linda Belleville
_2 Timothy, Titus_ : Jon C. Laansma
_Hebrews_ : J. Ramsey Michaels
Volume 18
_James, 1-2 Peter, Jude_ : Grant R. Osborne
_Revelation_ : M. Robert Mulholland Jr.
# NOTE
[1] Generally, one may simply use the original four-digit Strong's number to identify words in tools using Strong's system. If a Tyndale-Strong's number is followed by a capital letter (e.g., TG1692A), it generally indicates an added subdivision of meaning for the given term. Whenever a Tyndale-Strong's number has a number following a decimal point (e.g., TG2013.1), it reflects an instance where new research has yielded a separate, new classification of use for a biblical word. Forthcoming tools from Tyndale House Publishers will include these entries, which were not part of the original Strong's system.
# NLT NOTES
1:1 Greek Jesus the Messiah, Son of David and son of Abraham.
1:3 Greek Aram, a variant spelling of Ram; also in 1:4. See 1 Chr 2:9-10.
1:7 Greek Asaph, a variant spelling of Asa; also in 1:8. See 1 Chr 3:10.
1:8a Greek Joram, a variant spelling of Jehoram; also in 1:8b. See 1 Kgs 22:50 and note at 1 Chr 3:11.
1:8b Or ancestor; also in 1:11.
1:10 Greek Amos, a variant spelling of Amon; also in 1:10b. See 1 Chr 3:14.
1:11 Greek Jeconiah, a variant spelling of Jehoiachin; also in 1:12. See 2 Kgs 24:6 and note at 1 Chr 3:16.
1:19 Greek to divorce her.
1:21 Jesus means "The LORD saves."
1:23 Isa 7:14; 8:8, 10 (Greek version).
2:1 Or royal astrologers; Greek reads magi; also in 2:7, 16.
2:2 Or star in the east.
2:6a Greek the rulers.
2:6b Mic 5:2; 2 Sam 5:2.
2:15 Hos 11:1.
2:18 Jer 31:15.
3:2 Or has come, or is coming soon.
3:3 Isa 40:3 (Greek version).
3:7 Or coming to be baptized.
3:11a Or in.
3:11b Or in the Holy Spirit and in fire.
3:15 Or for we must fulfill all righteousness.
3:16 Some manuscripts read opened to him.
4:3 Greek the tempter.
4:4 Deut 8:3.
4:6 Ps 91:11-12.
4:7 Deut 6:16.
4:10 Deut 6:13.
4:15-16 Isa 9:1-2 (Greek version).
4:17 Or has come, or is coming soon.
4:25 Greek Decapolis.
5:3 Greek poor in spirit.
5:6 Or for righteousness.
5:21 Exod 20:13; Deut 5:17.
5:22a Some manuscripts add without cause.
5:22b Greek uses an Aramaic term of contempt: If you say to your brother, 'Raca.'
5:22c Greek if you say, 'You fool.'
5:22d Greek Gehenna; also in 5:29, 30.
5:23 Greek gift; also in 5:24.
5:26 Greek the last kodrantes [i.e., quadrans].
5:27 Exod 20:14; Deut 5:18.
5:29 Greek your right eye.
5:30 Greek your right hand.
5:31 Deut 24:1.
5:33 Num 30:2.
5:38 Greek the law that says: 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' Exod 21:24; Lev 24:20; Deut 19:21.
5:41 Greek milion [4,854 feet or 1,478 meters].
5:43 Lev 19:18.
5:44 Some manuscripts add Bless those who curse you. Do good to those who hate you. Compare Luke 6:27-28.
5:47 Greek your brothers.
6:11 Or Give us today our food for the day; or Give us today our food for tomorrow.
6:13a Or And keep us from being tested.
6:13b Or from evil. Some manuscripts add For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.
6:17 Greek anoint your head.
6:33 Some manuscripts do not include of God.
7:2a Or For God will judge you as you judge others.
7:2b Or The measure you give will be the measure you get back.
7:3 Greek your brother's eye; also in 7:5.
7:4 Greek your brother.
7:6 Greek Don't give the sacred to dogs.
7:13 Greek The road that leads to destruction.
8:4 See Lev 14:2-32.
8:5 Greek a centurion; similarly in 8:8, 13.
8:6 Or child; also in 8:13.
8:17 Isa 53:4.
8:20 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
8:22 Greek Let the dead bury their own dead.
8:28 Other manuscripts read Gerasenes; still others read Gergesenes. Compare Mark 5:1; Luke 8:26.
9:4 Some manuscripts read saw.
9:6 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
9:11 Greek with tax collectors and sinners?
9:13 Hos 6:6 (Greek version).
9:14 Some manuscripts read fast often.
10:1 Greek unclean.
10:3 Other manuscripts read Lebbaeus; still others read Lebbaeus who is called Thaddaeus.
10:4 Greek the Cananean, an Aramaic term for Jewish nationalists.
10:7 Or has come, or is coming soon.
10:18 Or But this will be your testimony against the rulers and other unbelievers.
10:22 Greek on account of my name.
10:23 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
10:24 Or Disciples.
10:25 Greek Beelzeboul; other manuscripts read Beezeboul; Latin version reads Beelzebub.
10:28 Greek Gehenna.
10:29 Greek one assarion [i.e., one "as," a Roman coin equal to 1/16 of a denarius].
10:35-36 Mic 7:6.
10:41 Greek receive a prophet in the name of a prophet.
11:3 Greek Are you the one who is coming?
11:6 Or who are not offended by me.
11:10 Mal 3:1.
11:12 Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.
11:14 See Mal 4:5.
11:19 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
11:23 Greek to Hades.
12:7 Hos 6:6 (Greek version).
12:8 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
12:18-21 Isa 42:1-4 (Greek version for 42:4).
12:24 Greek Beelzeboul; also in 12:27. Other manuscripts read Beezeboul; Latin version reads Beelzebub.
12:42 Greek The queen of the south.
12:43 Greek unclean.
12:47 Some manuscripts do not include verse 47. Compare Mark 3:32 and Luke 8:20.
13:11 Greek the mysteries.
13:14-15 Isa 6:9-10 (Greek version).
13:35 Some manuscripts do not include of the world. Ps 78:2.
13:37 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
13:39 Or the age; also in 13:40, 49.
13:55 Other manuscripts read Joses; still others read John.
14:1 Greek Herod the tetrarch. Herod Antipas was a son of King Herod and was ruler over Galilee.
14:25 Greek In the fourth watch of the night.
14:27 Or The 'I AM' is here; Greek reads I am. See Exod 3:14.
14:30 Some manuscripts do not include strong.
15:4a Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16.
15:4b Exod 21:17 (Greek version); Lev 20:9 (Greek version).
15:6 Greek their father; other manuscripts read their father or their mother.
15:8-9 Isa 29:13 (Greek version).
15:22 Greek Canaanite.
16:2-3 Several manuscripts do not include any of the words in 16:2-3 after He replied.
16:4 Greek the sign of Jonah.
16:13 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
16:16 Or the Christ. Messiah (a Hebrew term) and Christ (a Greek term) both mean "anointed one."
16:17 Greek Simon bar-Jonah; see John 1:42; 21:15-17.
16:18a Greek that you are Peter.
16:18b Greek and the gates of Hades.
16:19a Or bind, or lock.
16:19b Or loose, or open.
16:21 Some manuscripts read Jesus the Messiah.
16:22 Or began to correct him.
16:26 Or your self? also in 16:26b.
17:4 Greek three tabernacles.
17:9 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
17:10 Greek that Elijah must come first?
17:20 [17:21 note] Some manuscripts add verse 21, But this kind of demon won't leave except by prayer and fasting. Compare Mark 9:29.
17:24 Greek the two-drachma [tax]; also in 17:24b. See Exod 30:13-16; Neh 10:32-33.
17:25a Greek Simon?
17:25b Greek their sons or others?
17:27 Greek a stater [a Greek coin equivalent to four drachmas].
18:5 Greek in my name.
18:9 Greek the Gehenna of fire.
18:10 Some manuscripts add verse 11, And the Son of Man came to save those who are lost. Compare Luke 19:10.
18:15a Greek If your brother.
18:15b Some manuscripts do not include against you.
18:18a Or bind, or lock.
18:18b Or loose, or open.
18:20 Greek gather together in my name.
18:21 Greek my brother.
18:22 Or seventy-seven times.
18:24 Greek 10,000 talents [375 tons or 340 metric tons of silver].
18:28 Greek 100 denarii. A denarius was equivalent to a laborer's full day's wage.
18:35 Greek your brother.
19:4 Gen 1:27; 5:2.
19:5 Gen 2:24.
19:7 See Deut 24:1.
19:9 Some manuscripts add And anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. Compare Matt 5:32.
19:12 Greek and some make themselves eunuchs.
19:16 Some manuscripts read Good Teacher.
19:17 Some manuscripts read continue to keep.
19:18-19 Exod 20:12-16; Deut 5:16-20; Lev 19:18.
19:28a Or in the regeneration.
19:28b "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
19:30 Greek But many who are first will be last; and the last, first.
20:2 Greek a denarius, the payment for a full day's labor; similarly in 20:9, 10, 13.
20:18 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
20:19 Greek the Gentiles.
21:5a Greek Tell the daughter of Zion. Isa 62:11.
21:5b Zech 9:9.
21:7 Greek over them, and he sat on them.
21:9a Greek Hosanna, an exclamation of praise that literally means "save now"; also in 21:9b, 15.
21:9b Pss 118:25-26; 148:1.
21:13 Isa 56:7; Jer 7:11.
21:16 Ps 8:2 (Greek version).
21:29-31 Other manuscripts read "The second." In still other manuscripts the first son says "Yes" but does nothing, the second son says "No" but then repents and goes, and the answer to Jesus' question is that the second son obeyed his father.
21:42 Ps 118:22-23.
21:44 This verse is not included in some early manuscripts. Compare Luke 20:18.
22:19 Greek a denarius.
22:24 Deut 25:5-6.
22:31 Greek read about this? God said.
22:32 Exod 3:6.
22:37 Deut 6:5.
22:39 Lev 19:18.
22:44 Ps 110:1.
23:2 Greek and the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses.
23:5 Greek They enlarge their phylacteries and lengthen their tassels.
23:7 Rabbi, from Aramaic, means "master" or "teacher."
23:8 Greek brothers.
23:13 Some manuscripts add verse 14, What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! You shamelessly cheat widows out of their property and then pretend to be pious by making long prayers in public. Because of this, you will be severely punished. Compare Mark 12:40 and Luke 20:47.
23:15 Greek of Gehenna; also in 23:33.
23:23 Greek tithe the mint, the dill, and the cumin.
23:24 See Lev 11:4, 23, where gnats and camels are both forbidden as food.
23:26 Some manuscripts do not include and the dish.
23:38 Some manuscripts do not include and desolate.
23:39 Ps 118:26.
24:3 Or the age?
24:9 Greek on account of my name.
24:14 Or all peoples.
24:15 Greek the abomination of desolation. See Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11.
24:27 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
24:28 Greek Wherever the carcass is, the vultures gather.
24:29 See Isa 13:10; 34:4; Joel 2:10.
24:30 See Dan 7:13.
24:31 Greek from the four winds.
24:34 Or this age, or this nation.
24:36 Some manuscripts do not include or the Son himself.
25:1 Or virgins; also in 25:7, 11.
25:15 Greek talents; also throughout the story. A talent is equal to 75 pounds or 34 kilograms.
25:21 Greek Enter into the joy of your master [or your Lord]; also in 25:23.
25:31 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
25:32 Or peoples.
25:40 Greek my brothers.
25:41 Greek his angels.
26:2 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
26:7 Or reclining.
26:20 Or Jesus reclined.
26:28 Some manuscripts read the new covenant.
26:31 Greek I will strike. Zech 13:7.
26:42 Greek If this cannot pass.
26:53 Greek twelve legions.
26:59 Greek the Sanhedrin.
26:64a Greek seated at the right hand of the power. See Ps 110:1.
26:64b See Dan 7:13.
26:71 Or Jesus the Nazarene.
27:6 Greek since it is the price for blood.
27:9 Or I took.
27:9-10 Greek as the LORD directed me. Zech 11:12-13; Jer 32:6-9.
27:16 Some manuscripts read Jesus Barabbas; also in 27:17.
27:25 Greek "His blood be on us and on our children."
27:27 Or into the Praetorium.
27:32 Cyrene was a city in northern Africa.
27:35 Greek by casting lots. A few late manuscripts add This fulfilled the word of the prophet: "They divided my garments among themselves and cast lots for my robe." See Ps 22:18.
27:38 Or criminals; also in 27:44.
27:46a Some manuscripts read Eloi, Eloi.
27:46b Ps 22:1.
27:49 Some manuscripts add And another took a spear and pierced his side, and out flowed water and blood. Compare John 19:34.
27:54 Greek The centurion.
27:62 Or On the next day, which is after the Preparation.
28:1 Greek After the Sabbath, on the first day of the week.
28:19 Or all peoples.
1:1 Some manuscripts do not include the Son of God.
1:2 Mal 3:1.
1:3 Isa 40:3 (Greek version).
1:8 Or in; also in 1:8b.
1:10 Or toward him, or into him.
1:14 Some manuscripts read the Good News of the Kingdom of God.
1:16 Simon is called "Peter" in 3:16 and thereafter.
1:23 Greek unclean; also in 1:26, 27.
1:41 Some manuscripts read Moved with anger.
1:44 See Lev 14:2-32.
2:10 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
2:16a Greek the scribes of the Pharisees.
2:16b Greek with tax collectors and sinners?
3:11 Greek unclean; also in 3:30.
3:14 Some manuscripts do not include and called them his apostles.
3:17 Greek whom he named Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder.
3:18 Greek the Cananean, an Aramaic term for Jewish nationalists.
3:22 Greek Beelzeboul; other manuscripts read Beezeboul; Latin version reads Beelzebub.
3:32 Some manuscripts add and sisters.
4:11 Greek mystery.
4:12 Isa 6:9-10 (Greek version).
4:24 Or The measure you give will be the measure you get back.
5:1 Other manuscripts read Gadarenes; still others read Gergesenes. See Matt 8:28; Luke 8:26.
5:2 Greek unclean; also in 5:8, 13.
5:20 Greek Decapolis.
5:36 Or ignored.
6:3a Some manuscripts read He's just the son of the carpenter and of Mary.
6:3b Most manuscripts read Joses; see Matt 13:55.
6:7 Greek unclean.
6:8 Greek no copper coins in their money belts.
6:14 Some manuscripts read He was saying.
6:22 Some manuscripts read the daughter of Herodias herself.
6:37 Greek It would take 200 denarii. A denarius was equivalent to a laborer's full day's wage.
6:44 Some manuscripts read fed from the loaves.
6:48 Greek About the fourth watch of the night.
6:50 Or The 'I AM' is here; Greek reads I am. See Exod 3:14.
7:3 Greek have washed with the fist.
7:4a Some manuscripts read sprinkle themselves.
7:4b Some manuscripts add and dining couches.
7:7 Isa 29:13 (Greek version).
7:10a Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16.
7:10b Exod 21:17 (Greek version); Lev 20:9 (Greek version).
7:11 Greek 'What I would have given to you is Corban' (that is, a gift).
7:15 [7:16 note] Some manuscripts add verse 16, Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand. Compare 4:9, 23.
7:24 Some manuscripts add and Sidon.
7:25 Greek unclean.
7:27 Greek Let the children eat first.
7:31 Greek Decapolis.
8:18 Jer 5:21.
8:29 Or the Christ. Messiah (a Hebrew term) and Christ (a Greek term) both mean "anointed one."
8:31 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
8:32 Or began to correct him.
8:36 Or your self? also in 8:37.
9:5 Greek three tabernacles.
9:9 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
9:11 Greek that Elijah must come first?
9:18 Or becomes weak.
9:19 Or said to his disciples.
9:25 Greek unclean.
9:29 Some manuscripts read by prayer and fasting.
9:37 Greek in my name.
9:43a [9:44, 46, 48 note] Greek Gehenna; also in 9:45, 47.
9:43b Some manuscripts add verse 44, 'where the maggots never die and the fire never goes out.' See 9:48.
9:45 Some manuscripts add verse 46, 'where the maggots never die and the fire never goes out.' See 9:48.
9:48 Isa 66:24.
9:49 Greek salted with fire; other manuscripts add and every sacrifice will be salted with salt.
10:4 See Deut 24:1.
10:6 Gen 1:27; 5:2.
10:7 Some manuscripts do not include and is joined to his wife.
10:7-8 Gen 2:24.
10:19 Exod 20:12-16; Deut 5:16-20.
10:24 Some manuscripts read very hard for those who trust in riches.
10:31 Greek But many who are first will be last; and the last, first.
10:33a "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
10:33b Greek the Gentiles.
10:51 Greek uses the Hebrew term Rabboni.
10:52 Or on the way.
11:9 Greek Hosanna, an exclamation of praise that literally means "save now"; also in 11:10.
11:9-10 Pss 118:25-26; 148:1.
11:16 Or from carrying merchandise through the Temple.
11:17 Isa 56:7; Jer 7:11.
11:19 Greek they left; other manuscripts read he left.
11:25 [11:26 note] Some manuscripts add verse 26, But if you refuse to forgive, your Father in heaven will not forgive your sins. Compare Matt 6:15.
12:10-11 Ps 118:22-23.
12:12 Greek They.
12:15 Greek a denarius.
12:19 See Deut 25:5-6.
12:26a Greek in the story of the bush? God said to him.
12:26b Exod 3:6.
12:29-30 Deut 6:4-5.
12:31 Lev 19:18.
12:36 Ps 110:1.
12:42 Greek two lepta, which is a kodrantes [i.e., a quadrans].
13:6 Greek claiming, 'I am.'
13:9 Or But this will be your testimony against them.
13:10 Or all peoples.
13:13 Greek on account of my name.
13:14a Greek the abomination of desolation. See Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11.
13:14b Or it.
13:24-25 See Isa 13:10; 34:4; Joel 2:10.
13:26a "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
13:26b See Dan 7:13.
13:27 Greek from the four winds.
13:30 Or this age, or this nation.
13:33 Some manuscripts add and pray.
14:3 Or reclining.
14:5 Greek for 300 denarii. A denarius was equivalent to a laborer's full day's wage.
14:18 Or As they reclined.
14:21 "Son of Man" is a title Jesus used for himself.
14:24 Some manuscripts read the new covenant.
14:27 Greek I will strike. Zech 13:7.
14:36 Abba is an Aramaic term for "father."
14:55 Greek the Sanhedrin.
14:62a Or The 'I AM' is here; or I am the LORD. See Exod 3:14.
14:62b Greek seated at the right hand of the power. See Ps 110:1.
14:62c See Dan 7:13.
14:67 Or Jesus the Nazarene.
14:68 Some manuscripts do not include Just then, a rooster crowed.
15:1 Greek the Sanhedrin; also in 15:43.
15:21 Cyrene was a city in northern Africa.
15:24 Greek cast lots. See Ps 22:18.
15:27a Or Two criminals.
15:27b [15:28 note] Some manuscripts add verse 28, And the Scripture was fulfilled that said, "He was counted among those who were rebels." See Isa 53:12; also compare Luke 22:37.
15:34 Ps 22:1.
15:39a Greek the centurion; similarly in 15:44, 45.
15:39b Some manuscripts add heard his cry and.
15:40 Greek Joses; also in 15:47. See Matt 27:56.
15:42 Greek It was the day of preparation.
16:2 Greek on the first day of the week; also in 16:9.
16:6 Or Jesus the Nazarene.
16:8 The most reliable early manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark end at verse 8. Other manuscripts include various endings to the Gospel. A few include both the "shorter ending" and the "longer ending." The majority of manuscripts include the "longer ending" immediately after verse 8.
16:14 Some early manuscripts add: And they excused themselves, saying, "This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not permit God's truth and power to conquer the evil [unclean] spirits. Therefore, reveal your justice now." This is what they said to Christ. And Christ replied to them, "The period of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other dreadful things will happen soon. And I was handed over to death for those who have sinned, so that they may return to the truth and sin no more, and so they may inherit the spiritual, incorruptible, and righteous glory in heaven."
16:17 Or new tongues; some manuscripts do not include new.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 6,436 |
Home » Newsroom » Press Releases » Lantronix Named Winner of 2023 IoT Breakthrough Awards
Lantronix Named Winner of 2023 IoT Breakthrough Awards
Received "IoT Innovation – Enterprise Solution of the Year" Award for Its 24-Port Managed Gigabit Ethernet PoE++ Switch
IRVINE, Calif., Jan. 12, 2023 — Lantronix Inc. (NASDAQ: LTRX), a global provider of secure turnkey solutions for the Industrial Internet of Things (IoT) and the Intelligent IT market, today announced that it was named a winner of the 2023 IoT Breakthrough Awards. It received the "IoT Innovation – Enterprise Solution of the Year" Award for its 24-port Managed Gigabit Ethernet PoE++ Switch (SM24TBT2DPB). The IoT Breakthrough Awards have recognized the world's best IoT companies, products, services and people since 2017.
"We are honored to be named a winner of the 2023 IoT Breakthrough Awards," said Paul Pickle, president and CEO of Lantronix. "We attribute our fast-paced growth to our innovations in IoT for intelligent IT, artificial intelligence, robotics, communications and mobility, which empower our clients to develop world-changing innovations in industries ranging from enterprise to smart cities."
PoE shipments are projected to increase from $175.7 million in 2021 to $279.6 million in 2026 and will comprise 47 percent of campus switch port shipments by 2026, according to research firm Dell'Oro Group. During the forecast period, they expect that higher-power capacity PoE ports (greater than 30 watts per port) will become more prevalent to support new devices, such as security cameras, LED lighting, network-attached storage, building automation, power gateways and industrial controls.
The IoT Breakthrough Awards honor the excellence of IoT companies, technologies and products. The awards are presented by the Tech Breakthrough organization, a leading market intelligence platform. The award process encompasses comprehensive analysis of 4,000 entries from IoT companies with products offering solutions from connected home to industrial and enterprise IoT solutions.
This year's winners from other categories include an impressive list of top companies and startups, including Amazon, ecobee, Moen, General Electric, Mitsubishi Electric, Cox, Rockwell Automation, Johnson Controls, Lenovo, HARMAN and Verizon.
Lantronix's 24-Port Managed Gigabit Ethernet PoE++ Switch
Lantronix's 24-Port Managed Gigabit Ethernet PoE++ Switch powers multiple applications from a single device and is ideal for IoT applications such as intelligent LED lighting and smart building IoT applications, including access control, digital signage, wireless access points (WAPs) and IP surveillance systems.
Lowers energy cost and consumption
Leverages low voltage power that lowers installation costs
Supplies 90 Watts per port to support high-power IP Surveillance applications
Offers faster and secure deployment, documentation and management through a cloud-based device manager
Lantronix Inc. is a global provider of secure turnkey solutions for the Internet of Things (IoT) and Remote Environment Management (REM), offering Software as a Service (SaaS), connectivity services, engineering services and intelligent hardware.
Lantronix enables its customers to accelerate time to market and increase operational up-time and efficiency by providing reliable, secure and connected Intelligent Edge IoT and Remote Management Gateway solutions.
Lantronix's products and services dramatically simplify the creation, development, deployment and management of IoT and IT projects across Robotics, Automotive, Wearables, Video Conferencing, Industrial, Medical, Logistics, Smart Cities, Security, Retail, Branch Office, Server Room, and Datacenter applications. For more information, visit the Lantronix website.
Learn more at the Lantronix blog, which features industry discussion and updates. Follow Lantronix on Twitter, view our YouTube video library or connect with us on LinkedIn.
"Safe Harbor" Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Any statements set forth in this news release that are not entirely historical and factual in nature, including, without limitation, statements related to our solutions, technologies and products, are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results, future business, financial condition, or performance to differ materially from our historical results or those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statement contained in this news release. The potential risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, such factors as the effects of negative or worsening regional and worldwide economic conditions or market instability on our business, including effects on purchasing decisions by our customers; the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our employees, supply and distribution chains, and the global economy; cybersecurity risks; changes in applicable U.S. and foreign government laws, regulations, and tariffs; our ability to successfully implement our acquisitions strategy or integrate acquired companies; difficulties and costs of protecting patents and other proprietary rights; the level of our indebtedness, our ability to service our indebtedness and the restrictions in our debt agreements; and any additional factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on Aug. 29, 2022, including in the section entitled "Risk Factors" in Item 1A of Part I of such report, as well as in our other public filings with the SEC. Additional risk factors may be identified from time to time in our future filings. The forward-looking statements included in this release speak only as of the date hereof, and we do not undertake any obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances.
© 2023 Lantronix, Inc. All rights reserved. Lantronix is a registered trademark. Other trademarks and trade names are those of their respective owners.
Lantronix Media Contact:
Gail Kathryn Miller
Corporate Marketing &
Lantronix Analyst and Investor Contact:
Jeremy Whitaker
Lantronix Sales:
Americas +1 (800) 422-7055 (US and Canada) or +1 949-453-3990
Europe, Middle East and Africa +31 (0)76 52 36 744
Asia Pacific + 852 3428-2338
China + 86 21-6237-8868
Japan +81 (0) 50-1354-6201
India +91 994-551-2488 | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 1,692 |
Savigny-sur-Seille is een gemeente in het Franse departement Saône-et-Loire (regio Bourgogne-Franche-Comté) en telt 371 inwoners (2004). De plaats maakt deel uit van het arrondissement Louhans.
Geografie
De oppervlakte van Savigny-sur-Seille bedraagt 14,7 km², de bevolkingsdichtheid is 25,2 inwoners per km².
Demografie
Onderstaande figuur toont het verloop van het inwonertal (bron: INSEE-tellingen).
Externe links
Gemeente in Saône-et-Loire | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 8,828 |
{"url":"https:\/\/www.jiskha.com\/questions\/994332\/two-thin-infinitely-long-parallel-wires-are-lying-on-the-ground-a-distance-d-3cm-apart","text":"# PHYSICS\n\nTwo thin, infinitely long, parallel wires are lying on the ground a distance d=3cm apart. They carry a current I_0=200A going into the page. A third thin, infinitely long wire with mass per unit length lambda=5g\/m carries current I going out of the page. What is the value of the current I in amps in this third wire if it is levitated above the first two wires at height h=10cm above them and at a horizontal position midway between them?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n3. \ud83d\udc41 310\n1. draw the forces, there's repulsion between the two equal wire against the third one\n\nWe have:\nF = [uo.I1.I2\/(2.pi.d)]*Ltotal\n\n2*F*sin(a)= m*g = lamba*Ltotal*g\n\nsin(a)=h\/0.5d\n\nReplace the values and you'll I.\n\nBy the way, have you done the one with the thick metal slab?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n2. Hi fima, In above formula, I did not find where is I. How to solve it? I_1and I_2 both are 200A right? But where is I? answer shoud be negative due to repulsion? Thank you very much for your help.\nI did mistake continuously Q1 and Q2, and this is my third question. I am just afraid to try any other question and I don't get any clue to guess the answer.\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n3. Hi Lora,\n\nI1 and I2 are the currents, so one is 200A, and the second is the one you are looking for. So, you have to solve the equation.\n\nAnd forget about the sign, the repulsion force created by the 2 wire are in equilibrium with he weight.\n\nWell, and the question: which is the bigger B created by a cable?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n4. fima, I am confused in L_total..what is L_total?\n\nI am still not doing bigger B created by cable one, but I just try average current one. I thought it is B*l*v but I got wrong. If I can solve bigger B, of course I will let you know.\nThanks\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n5. L total is just reference, since you don't have the lenght of the wire, but you need it for the total mass, and the Force is by lenght unit, it will go, just write it down.\n\nF\/L=uo*I1*I2\/(2*pi*d), that L will be Ltotal. and consdier that the three wire have the same lenght\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n6. whats h? is that the height 10 cm?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n7. I just tried and L was cancelled and I got 2.812 but it is wrong..can you tell me answer please? I appreciate your help.\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n8. I know asking answer is not good at all but I got only 20% in fina till now..just worried to pass\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n9. That seems really small.\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n10. hey guys can you help me in theta of hinge one question?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n11. This is the important eq.\nF\/Ltotal = [uo.I1.I2\/(2.pi.r)]\n\nr = sqrt(h^2+d1^2), d1=1.5 cm & h=10cm\nsin(a)=h\/r\n\n2*F*sin(a)= m*g = lambda*Ltotal*g\n\nin this last Eq replace all values, and be careful with the units...\n\n2*uo*I1*I2\/(2*pi*r)*h\/r=lambda*g\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n12. anyone with this q:\nA straight copper wire that is 1 milimeter in diameter carries a current of 20 miliamps. Whats the magnitude of the largest magnetic field created by this wire in Tesla?\n\nI think B=uo.I\/(2*pi*r)=8*10^-6\n\nB at the perimeter, but I used r^2 instead of r, so I don't want to waste my last chance, anyone has tried that value? or feel like try it out and let me know if that is the correct value?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n13. Hi flo,\nby using this formula, I found B= 40*10^-7..How did you find 8*10^-6?\nI used I=0.02A, r=0.0005m.\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n14. Hi flo, yes it is right. I forgot to multiply by 2\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n15. Hi Lora, so the answer 8*10^-6 is right? you got the green check?\n\nAnd did you get the answer for current in the third cable?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n16. Yep, that's the value.\n@Lora, did you get the answer? Yesterday I could get into edx, I=63.7\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n17. yes flo I got green check, but for current in third cable,when I saw answer I was already tried different no. and got incorrect..:(\n\nCan you guys tell me which one is correct answer for theta?\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n18. I'm on that question too, but i'm not sure how to start that problem....\n\nand the question with the moving rod???!!!\n\n1. \ud83d\udc4d 0\n2. \ud83d\udc4e 0\n\n## Similar Questions\n\n1. ### Geometry\n\nIn trapezoid $ABCD$, $\\overline{AB}$ is parallel to $\\overline{CD}$, $AB = 7$ units, and $CD = 10$ units. Segment $EF$ is drawn parallel to $\\overline{AB}$ with $E$ lying on $\\overline{AD}$ and $F$ lying on $\\overline{BC}$. If\n\n2. ### geometry\n\nMartin drew a pair of perpendicular lines and a pair of parallel lines. Which of these statements best compares the pairs of perpendicular and parallel lines? Answer A: Perpendicular and parallel lines always have a common\n\n3. ### Math\n\nA construction crew wants to hoist a heavy beam so that it is standing up straight. They tie a rope to the beam, secure the base, and pull the rope through a pulley to raise one end of the beam from the ground. When the beam makes\n\n4. ### PHYSISC\n\nTwo parallel, straight wires that are very long are separated by a distance of 0.065 m and carry currents of I1 =15 A and I2 =7.0A. Find the magnitude and direction of the force that the magnetic field of wire 1 applies to a 1.5-m\n\n1. ### Maths\n\nA communications tower has many guy wires supporting it. Two of these guy wires are 10.0 m and 8.0 long. They are attached at the same point on the ground. The longer wire has an angle of inclination of 60 degrees. a) How far from\n\n2. ### Maths\n\nTwo wires support an electricity pole. if the wires make angles of 58\u00b0and 67\u00b0 with the ground and |AB|=21m, calculate the lengths of the wires\n\n3. ### Physics - Verification\n\nTwo long straight parallel wires separated by a distance of 20 cm carry currents of 30 A and 40 A in opposite directions. What is the magnitude of the resulting magnetic field at a point that is 15 cm from the wire carrying the\n\n4. ### Physics\n\nTwo very long, straight, parallel wires separated by distance d carry currents of magnitude I in opposite directions. Find the magnetic field at a point equidistant from the lines, with a distance 2d from each line.\n\n1. ### physics\n\nTwo long parallel wires carry currents of 10 A in opposite directions. they are separated by 40 cm. what is the magnetic field in the plane of the wires that is 20 cm from one wire and 60 cm from the other?\n\n2. ### English\n\nIn Nethergrave Jeremy creates an obstacle to dating the girl he likes by a) lying about where he lives*** b) lying about his poor health c) lying about his father's wealth d) lying about his computer expertise\n\n3. ### english\n\nIn Nethergrave Jeremy creates an obstacle to dating the girl he likes by a) lying about where he lives b) lying about his poor health c) lying about his father's wealth d) lying about his computer expertise\n\n4. ### Physics\n\nTwo straight and parallel wires of length 1.0 m carry a current - the first carries a currecnt of 9.0 A while the other wire carries a current of 4.0 A. What distance must separate the two straight and parallel copper wires if the","date":"2020-10-20 16:38:18","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.6081966757774353, \"perplexity\": 1796.1087706258756}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 20, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2020-45\/segments\/1603107874026.22\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20201020162922-20201020192922-00467.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
A CSP can be often described in several ways, each of which might consist of different types and combinations of constraints, which leads to various statistical results of the resolution, including the execution time, the number of fails, the number of backtracks, the number of nodes etc. The reason for this is, that the combination of constraints and their propagators have a significant impact on the shape and the size of the search tree.
Therefore, the diversity of models and constraints for a given CSP offers us an opportunity to improve the resolution process by using another model in which fewer fails occur during the resolution process.
Based on this idea, previous works show that the performance of a constraint problem often can be improved by converting a sub-problem into a single constraint \cite{TabulationCP,Tabulation,Loeff17A,Loeff18A,IcaartReg}.
In this paper, we propose an algorithm which substitutes parts of CSPs by singleton, locally consistent constraints.
In contrast to \cite{Tabulation}, the replacement is based on the regular membership constraint instead of the table constraint.
Since our algorithm can be applied at the pre-processing stage, other approaches which accelerate the resolution process such as redundant modeling \cite{redundancy96}, parallel search \cite{ParallelSearch}, or parallel consistency \cite{Hamadi02} can be used in combination with ours.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:prelim}, we introduce the necessary notions for the approach. In Section 3, the substitution of small sub-CSPs with the regular membership constraint is explained.
In Section 4, the benefit of our regularization approach is shown in two case studies based on the Solitaire Battleships Problem \cite{csplib:prob014} and the Black Hole Problem \cite{csplib:prob081}. Furthermore, we compare our results with the tabulation approach presented in \cite{Tabulation}.
Finally, Section \ref{sec:future} concludes and proposes research directions for the future.
\begin{remark}
In this paper we will use the notion of a "\textit{regular constraint}" synonym for "\textit{regular membership constraint}".
\end{remark}
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:prelim}
In this section, we introduce necessary definitions and methods for our regularization approach.
We consider CSPs which are defined in the following way:\\
\noindent\textit{CSP} \cite{RDech}
A constraint satisfaction problem (CSP) is defined as a 3-tuple $P =
(X,D,C)$ with $X = \{x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n \}$ is a set of variables, $D = \{D_1,D_2,\ldots$, $D_n\}$ is a set of finite domains where $D_i$ is the domain of $x_i$ and $C = \{c_1, c_2, \ldots, c_m \}$ is a set of primitive or global constraints covering between one and all variables in $X$.\\
\noindent Additionally, we define a sub-CSP $P_{sub}$ as a part of a CSP $P = (X, D, C)$ which covers only a part of the constraints and their variables.\\
\noindent\textit{Sub-CSP} Let $P = (X, D, C)$ be a CSP. For $C' \subseteq C$ we define $P_{sub} = (X',D',C')$ such that $X' = \bigcup_{c \in C'} scope(c)$ with corresponding domains $D' = \{D_i \mid x_i \in X'\} \subseteq D$, where the $scope$ of a constraint $c$ is defined as the set of variables which are part of the constraint $c$ \cite{RDech}\\
\noindent After we defined CSPs and sub-CSPs, we need a measure for the size of such a CSP or sub-CSP.\\
\noindent\textit{size($P$)} We define the maximal size $size(P)$ of a CSP $P = (X, D, C)$ as the product of the cardinalities of the domains of the CSP $P$, see Eq. \ref{eq:sizep}.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sizep}
size(P) = \prod_{i = 1}^{|X|} |D_i|
\end{equation}
\noindent The regular constraint, its propagation \cite{Stretch,Pesant2001,Pesant04} and deterministic finite automatons (DFAs) \cite{Hop} provide the basis of our approach.
We briefly review the notion of a deterministic finite automaton (DFA) and of the regular constraint.\\
\noindent\textit{DFA} \cite{Hop} A deterministic finite automaton (DFA) is a quintuple
$M = (Q$, $\Sigma$, $\delta$, $q_0$, $F)$, where
$Q$ is a finite set of states,
$\Sigma$ is the finite input alphabet,
$\delta$ is a transformation function $Q \times \Sigma \rightarrow Q$,
$q_0 \in Q $ is the initial state,
and $F \subseteq Q$ is the set of final or accepting
states.
A word $w \in \Sigma^*\;
is accepted by $M$,
i.e. $w\in L(M)$, if the corresponding DFA $M$ with the input $w$
stops in a final state $f \in F$.\\
\noindent\textit{Regular Constraint} \cite{Pesant04} Let $M = (Q$, $\Sigma$, $\delta$, $q_0$, $F)$ be a DFA and let $X = \{x_1, x_2, ..., x_n\}$ be a set of variables with $D(x_i) \subseteq \Sigma$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$. Then
\begin{equation}
regular(X,M) = \{(d_1, ..., d_n) | \forall i \; d_i \in D_i, d_1\circ d_2 \circ...\circ d_n \in L(M)\},
\end{equation}
i.e. every sequence $d_1...d_n$ of values for $x_1, ..., x_n$ must be a word of the regular language recognized by the DFA $M$, where $\circ$ is the concatenation of two words.
\section{Substitution of Constraints by Regular Constraints}
\label{sec: substitution}
Previous work \cite{Loeff18A} has shown that each CSP can be transformed into an equivalent one with only one regular
constraint (rCSP), theoretically.
In this section, we present a practical algorithm to transform the constraints of a sub-CSP $P_{sub}$ of a given CSP $P$ into a
regular constraint. For the reason of effectiveness the sub-CSP $P_{sub}$ should be much smaller than the original CSP
$P$ (size($P_{sub}) \ll size(P)$).
It is the aim to detect and substitute such sub-CSPs, which are preferably as big as possible but can be represented by a DFA which is as small as possible at the same time. An algorithm to detect such sub-CSPs must be developed in the future.
Currently, we use the heuristics to find sub-CSPs given in \cite{TabulationCP}. Alternatively, an algorithm like Gottlobs
hypertree decomposition \cite{got08} or Ke Lius det-k-CP \cite{LiuLH17} can be used.
Our transformation algorithm obtains a sub-CSP $P_{sub} = (X', D', C')$ from CSP $P = (X$, $D$, $C)$ as input, where
$C' \subset C$,
$X' = \{x_1,\ldots,x_n\} = \bigcup_{c \in C'}$ $scope(c)$ $\subset X$, $|X'| \ll |X|$ and
$D' = \{D_1,\ldots,D_n\} \subset D$, where $D_i$ is the domain of variable $x_i, \forall i \in
\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, and returns
a regular constraint which is equivalent to the constraints in $C'$.
Our regularization algorithm has two phases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Solve the detected/given sub CSP $P_{sub}$.
\item Transform all solutions $S = \{s_1,s_2,\ldots,s_k\}$ of the sub-CSP $P_{sub}$ into a regular constraint.
\end{enumerate}
The first phase is obvious. Notice that the sub-CSP $P_{sub}$ should be much
smaller than the original CSP $P$, otherwise the solving step would be too time consuming.
We continue with a description of the second phase.
Let $S = \{s_1,s_2,\ldots,s_k\}$ be the
set of all solutions of $P_{sub}$ calculated in step one.
Every solution $s_j$, $j \in \{1,2,\ldots,k\}$ consists of $n$ values
$s_{i,j}$, $i \in \{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, cf. Table \ref{tab:Solution}.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:Solution} The solutions $s_1, ..., s_k$ of the sub-CSP $P_{sub}$}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|l l l l}
\hline
\ $S$ & \ $s_1$ & \ $s_2$ & \ \ldots & \ $s_k$\\
\hline
\ $x_1$ \ & \ $s_{1,1}$ \ & \ $s_{1,2}$ \ & \ \ldots \ & \ $s_{1,k}$ \ \\
\ $x_2$ & \ $s_{2,1}$ & \ $s_{2,2}$ & \ \ldots & \ $s_{2,k}$\\
\ \ \vdots & \ \ \vdots & \ \ \vdots & \ $\ddots$ & \ \ \vdots \\
\ $x_n$ & \ $s_{n,1}$ & \ $s_{n,2}$ & \ \ldots & \ $s_{n,k}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\noindent To define a deterministic finite automaton as the basis for the regular constraint, we need the set $T = \{T_1,\ldots,T_n\}$ of prefix sets of
all solutions of $P_{sub}$, where all elements in $T_i$ are concatenations of the $i$ first values of a solution $s \in S$ (see Eq. \ref{eq1}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1}
T_i = \bigcup\limits_{l=1}^k \{s_{1,l} \ \circ \ s_{2,l} \ \circ \ \ldots \ \circ \
s_{i,l} \; | \; \forall i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}\}
\end{equation}
This results in e.g. $T_1=\{s_{1,1}, s_{1,2},$ $\ldots, s_{1,k}\}$, $T_2 = \{s_{1,1} \circ s_{2,1}, s_{1,2} \circ s_{2,2},
\ldots, s_{1,k} \circ s_{2,k}\}$, $T_n = S$.
Note that we enumerate the elements in each $T_i$ from $1$ to $k$ but actually they mostly have fewer elements then $k$ for the reason that multiple occurrences of elements do not occur in sets. It follows $|T_1| \leq |T_2| \leq \ldots \leq |T_n| = k$.
\medskip
For each element $t$ of each set $T_i,\ i \in \{1,\ldots,n-1\}$ a state $q_{t}$ for the DFA is created, which represents the solution prefix $t$. Furthermore, the initial state $q_{start}$ and the final state $q_{end}$ (representing all solutions $S = T_n$ of $P_{sub}$) are added to $Q$. Thus, the \textit{set of states $Q$ of the DFA} is
$$Q = \{q_{t}\ |\ t \in T_i, i \in \{1,2,\ldots,n-1\}\} \cup \{q_{start},q_{end}\}.$$
The \textit{initial state} is $q_{start}$ and $F= \{q_{end}\}$ is the \textit{set of final states}.
\medskip
\textit{The alphabet $\Sigma$ of the DFA} is the union of all
domains of the variables of $X'$:
\begin{equation}
\Sigma = \bigcup\limits_{D_i \in D'} D_i
\end{equation}
\medskip
Finally, we define the \textit{transition function $\delta$} as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Let
$t \in T_{1}$.
Then it holds
\begin{equation}
\label{eq9}
\delta(q_{start},t) = q_t
\end{equation}
\item
Let
$t_{i-1}$ be an element in $T_{i-1}$,
$t_{i}$ be an element in $T_{i}$,
$i \in \{2,\ldots, n-1\}$ and
$w \in D_i$ with $t_{i} = t_{i-1} \circ w$.
Then it holds
\begin{equation}
\label{eq10}
\delta(q_{t_{i-1}},w)=q_{t_i}
\end{equation}
\item
Let
$t_{n-1}$ be an element in $T_{n-1}$,
$t_{n}$ be an element in $T_{n} = S$ and
$w \in D_n$ with $t_{n} = t_{n-1} \circ w$.
Then it holds
\begin{equation}
\label{eq11}
\delta(q_{t_{n-1}},w)= q_{end}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\medskip
\noindent This altogether provides the DFA
$M = (Q, \Sigma, \delta, q_{start},\{q_{end}\})$.
The constraint $regular(X', M)$ can be used as a replacement for the
constraints of $C'$ in the original CSP $P$.
\begin{remark} This algorithm is only useful for sub-CSPs $P_{sub}$ which are
proper subsets of the original CSP $P$ ($size(P_{sub}) \ll size(P)$). Solving a sub-problem $P_{sub}$ and
finding all solutions is also an NP-hard problem.
Nevertheless, due to the exponential growth of constraint problems, sub-problems with smaller size than the original problem can be solved significantly faster.
\end{remark}
\section{Examples and Experimental results}
\label{sect:example}
After presenting our approach to transform the constraints of small sub-CPSs into a regular constraint, we want to show two case studies to underline its benefits. For this, we use the Black Hole Problem \cite{csplib:prob081} and the Solitaire Battleships Problem \cite{csplib:prob014} from the CSPlib.
All the experiments are set up on a DELL laptop with an Intel i7-4610M CPU, 3.00GHz, with 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 and running under Windows 7 professional with service pack 1. The algorithms are implemented in Java under JDK version 1.8.0\_191 and Choco Solver \cite{choco}.
We used the $DowOverWDeg$ search strategy which is explained in \cite{BoussemartHLS04} and is used as default search strategy in the Choco Solver \cite{choco}.
\subsection{The Black Hole Problem}
Black Hole is a common card game, where all 52 cards are played one after
the other from seventeen face-up fans of three cards into a discard pile named 'black hole', which contains at the beginning only the card $A\spadesuit$. All cards are visible at all times. A card can be played into the 'black hole' if it is adjacent
in rank to the previous card (colors are not important). The goal is to play all cards into the Black Hole.
Black Hole was modelled for a variety of solvers
by Gent et al. \cite{DBLP:Gent}. We use the
simplest and most declarative model of Dekker et al. \cite{DBLP:Dekker}, where two variables $a$ and
$b$ represent adjacent cards if $|a-b| \; mod \; 13 \in \{1,12\}$.
The heuristic \textit{Weak Propagation}, presented in \cite{TabulationCP}, detects the adjacency constraints as replaceable\footnote{In \cite{TabulationCP}, the detected constraints are substituted by table constraints, in contrast to the here presented approach; we will substitute them with regular constraints.}.
For our benchmark suite we computed 50 different instances of the Black Hole Problem, where 49 instances are randomly created (so the position of every card in the 17 fans is random) and the remaining instance has an enumerated card distribution ($1\spadesuit$, $2\spadesuit$, ..., $K\spadesuit$, $A\clubsuit$, $1\clubsuit$,..., $K\clubsuit$, $A\heartsuit$, $1\heartsuit$, ..., $K\heartsuit$, $A\diamondsuit$, $1\diamondsuit$, ..., $K\diamondsuit$).
For all instances, we limited the solution time to 10 minutes and each problem was solved in 4 ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textit{Original}: The problem was modelled as described in \cite{DBLP:Dekker}.
\item \textit{Table}: The detected adjacency constraints were substituted by table constraints.
\item \textit{Regular}: The detected adjacency constraints were substituted by regular constraints.
\item \textit{RegularIntersected}: The detected adjacency constraints were substituted by only one regular constraint. The single regular constraint was created by the intersection of the underlying automatons of the substituted regular constraints from item (3) \textit{Regular} as given above.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\pgfplotsset{every axis legend/.append style={at={(0.5,1.03)},anchor=south}}
\begin{axis}[width= \textwidth,height=6cm, legend columns=4]
\addplot[mark=x,only marks] table [only marks]
{
x y
1 16.416
2 99.389
3 89.677
4 98.175
5 0.000
6 96.174
7 79.630
8 -9.000
9 87.075
10 99.514
11 99.947
12 99.638
13 98.391
14 99.760
15 99.988
16 99.984
17 93.536
18 99.942
19 99.899
20 99.815
21 20.659
22 94.053
23 96.044
24 95.829
25 0.000
26 97.466
27 99.900
28 93.546
29 99.985
30 99.686
31 99.979
32 84.861
33 99.947
34 99.964
35 99.984
36 98.486
37 99.880
38 99.857
39 99.909
40 99.235
41 99.865
42 74.427
43 99.987
44 99.962
45 58.537
46 0.000
47 99.884
48 93.675
49 97.359
50 99.984
};
\addplot[mark=triangle, red,only marks] table [only marks]
{
x y
1 6.868
2 98.956
3 86.897
4 97.634
5 0.000
6 96.599
7 69.406
8 -9.500
9 86.395
10 99.000
11 99.885
12 99.565
13 97.542
14 99.626
15 99.987
16 99.971
17 89.633
18 99.889
19 99.818
20 99.604
21 35.125
22 92.794
23 99.419
24 92.939
25 0.000
26 93.094
27 99.723
28 98.061
29 99.986
30 99.449
31 99.977
32 82.593
33 99.889
34 99.908
35 99.984
36 97.566
37 99.751
38 99.744
39 99.646
40 98.498
41 99.580
42 42.354
43 99.980
44 99.931
45 50.000
46 0.000
47 99.806
48 94.153
49 96.646
50 99.985
};
\addplot[mark=o, blue,only marks] table [only marks]
{
x y
1 7.784
2 98.761
3 82.283
4 99.217
5 0.000
6 96.918
7 99.218
8 -6.200
9 91.156
10 99.036
11 99.862
12 99.613
13 95.519
14 99.747
15 99.986
16 99.984
17 88.155
18 99.962
19 99.863
20 99.711
21 57.027
22 80.192
23 90.053
24 97.046
25 0.000
26 97.024
27 99.904
28 92.586
29 99.986
30 99.653
31 99.981
32 82.043
33 99.954
34 99.933
35 99.986
36 98.022
37 99.750
38 99.726
39 99.782
40 99.332
41 99.861
42 56.070
43 99.987
44 99.948
45 73.171
46 0.000
47 99.476
48 95.465
49 97.431
50 99.985
};
\legend{Table \hspace*{0.5cm}, Regular \hspace*{0.5cm}, RegularIntersected}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The time improvements (in \%) of the \textit{Table}, \textit{Regular} and \textit{RegularIntersected} models for finding the first solution of each instance of the Black Hole Problem in comparison to the \textit{Original} model (0\%).} \label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{Overwiev of the Black Hole bechmark.}\label{tab1}
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|}
\hline
&Ave. Solution Time & Ave. Imp. in \% & $\#$ Fastest & $\#$ Sol. Instances
\\
\hline
\textit{Original} & 516.432s &- &1 &7\\\hline
\textit{Table} & 58.796s & 83.413\% & 25& 47\\\hline
\textit{Regular} & 63.679s& 82.054\%& 2& 47\\\hline
\textit{RegularIntersected} & 54.883s& 84.165\% &19& 47\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\noindent Figure \ref{fig1} shows the time improvements (in \%) of the three substituted models (\textit{Table}, \textit{Regular} and \textit{RegularIntersected}) in comparison to the \textit{Original} model when the first solution is searched. In 49 of 50 cases all modified models are better than the original. The only exception is sample case 8, where the original approach is $62 - 95\%$ faster than the substituted ones\footnote{For case 8 exists a deterioration of 65\% (90\%, 95\%) for the \textit{RegularIntersected} (\textit{Table} and \textit{Regular}) approach. To keep the graphic small the negative values were drawn in $\frac{1}{10}$ of the real distance. In cases 5, 25 and 46 none of the four models found a solution in the time bounds of 10 minutes.}. Table \ref{tab1} shows that the \textit{Table} approach was 25 times, the \textit{RegularIntersected} approach was 19 times, the \textit{Regular} approach was two times and the \textit{Original} approach was one time the fastest. In average we could reach the first solution $83.413\%$, $82.054\%$ or $84.165\%$ faster than the \textit{Original} approach and we could solve many more problem instances with the substitution approaches in the time limit in comparison to the \textit{Original} model (47 instead of 7).
\subsection{The Solitaire Battleships Problem}
The Solitaire Battleships Problem is a famous symbol puzzle, where several ships with different sizes must be placed on a two-dimensional grid.
The ships may be oriented horizontally or vertically, and no two ships will occupy adjacent grid squares, not even diagonally. Numerical values along the right hand side of and below the grid indicate the number of grid squares in the corresponding rows and columns that are occupied by vessels (see more details in \cite{csplib:prob014}).
We created an equivalent Choco version of the \mbox{\textit{MiniZinc}} model given in \cite{csplib:prob014} and tested the introductory example and the 35 instances given in the "sb\_Mini-Zinc\_Benchmarks.zip" from \cite{csplib:prob014}. We indicated the "spacing constraints", the "ship shape constraints" and the "count number of bigger ships constraints" as potential good candidates for a substitution by regular (or table) constraints.
For all instances we limited the solution time to 30 minutes and each problem
was solved in five ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textit{Original}: The problem was modelled as described in \cite{csplib:prob014}.
\item \textit{Table}: With reference to \cite{csplib:prob014}, the single lines 75 to 80 of the "spacing constraints", the single lines 86 to 89 and the three lines 91 to 93 together of the the "ship shape constraints" and each two lines 117 to 118 and 122 to 123 together of the "count number of bigger ships constraints" were each substituted by singleton table constraints.
\item \textit{Regular}: The lines enumerated in \textit{Table} were substituted with regular constraints.
\item \textit{RegularIntersected}: Equivalently to \textit{Regular}, except the partial constraints in "count number of bigger ships constraints" which count the number of ships of size $s$ in a row, respectively in a column, were combined each to one regular constraint.
\item \textit{TableRegularIntersected}: There, we have the same combined regular constraints (for representing the "count number of bigger ships constraints") as described in \textit{RegularIntersected},
but, apart from that, use the table constraints described in \textit{Table} (for representing the "spacing constraints" and "ship shape constraints").
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\pgfplotsset{every axis legend/.append style={at={(0.5,1.03)},anchor=south}}
\begin{axis}[width= \textwidth,height=6cm, legend columns=4]
\addplot[mark=x,only marks] table [only marks]
{
1 99.471
2 78.078
3 91.323
4 -35.616
5 94.389
6 70.374
7 82.625
8 86.560
9 97.729
10 92.823
11 40.708
12 92.227
13 0.000
14 0.000
15 81.746
16 96.802
17 -65.803
18 4.993
19 6.200
20 92.382
21 58.280
22 -40.746
23 39.169
24 22.110
25 0.000
26 72.967
27 0.000
28 0.000
29 0.000
30 0.000
31 -84.676
32 0.000
33 58.273
34 91.797
35 99.995
36 -81.290
};
\addplot[mark=triangle, red,only marks] table [only marks]
{
1 94.052
2 0.000
3 -80.692
4 8.625
5 -28.390
6 -40.407
7 63.960
8 78.505
9 -39.001
10 41.140
11 0.000
12 0.000
13 0.000
14 0.000
15 -46.973
16 -77.945
17 -65.760
18 -79.497
19 -90.087
20 -76.625
21 0.000
22 -30.596
23 -74.121
24 -22.142
25 0.000
26 0.000
27 0.000
28 0.000
29 0.000
30 0.000
31 -88.731
32 0.000
33 0.000
34 -30.616
35 82.267
36 87.190
};
\addplot[mark=o, blue,only marks] table [only marks]
{
1 97.949
2 72.483
3 -28.975
4 -85.366
5 95.465
6 92.641
7 59.824
8 -13.321
9 -85.592
10 94.613
11 95.777
12 77.453
13 0.000
14 0.000
15 -46.985
16 98.330
17 -65.749
18 -27.147
19 51.296
20 -65.233
21 76.172
22 77.264
23 92.571
24 82.433
25 0.000
26 0.000
27 0.000
28 0.000
29 0.000
30 0.000
31 -22.616
32 99.751
33 0.000
34 55.606
35 99.666
36 90.934
};
\addplot[mark=square, purple,only marks] table [only marks]
{
1 91.869
2 94.887
3 96.158
4 54.699
5 92.689
6 93.127
7 90.852
8 69.087
9 94.220
10 96.491
11 99.285
12 95.373
13 0.000
14 33.165
15 20.402
16 98.451
17 -65.790
18 2.773
19 91.293
20 94.170
21 94.170
22 78.741
23 98.056
24 81.724
25 48.226
26 16.638
27 0.000
28 0.000
29 0.000
30 0.000
31 74.765
32 99.870
33 0.000
34 59.546
35 99.282
36 93.248
};
\legend{Table \hspace*{0.5cm}, Regular \hspace*{0.5cm}, RegularIntersected \hspace*{0.5cm}, TableRegularIntersected}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The time improvements (in \%) of the \textit{Table}, \textit{Regular}, \textit{RegularIntersected} and \textit{TableRegularIntersected} models for finding the first solution of each instance of the Solitaire Battleships Problem in comparison to the \textit{Original} model (0\%).} \label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{Overwiev of the Black Hole bechmark.}\label{tab2}
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|}
\hline
&Ave. Sol. Time & Ave. Imp. in \% & $\#$ Fastest & $\#$ Sol. Instances
\\
\hline
\textit{Original} & 935.168& -& 1& 23\\\hline
\textit{Table} & 632.955 & 37.303\%
&9 &28\\\hline
\textit{Regular} &1120.421 & -11.551\%
&0 &17\\\hline
\textit{RegularIntersected} & 677.923 & 29.701\%
& 2& 26\\\hline
\textit{TableRegularIntersected} & 507.820 & 60.763\%
& 19& 30\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\noindent Figure \ref{fig2} shows that the results for the Solitaire Battleships Problem are not that clear as the results for the Black Hole Problem. A look into table \ref{tab2} reveals that the improvements for finding a first solution are very streaky.
The \textit{Table} approach was the best approach, if using only one substitution style (tabulation or regularization). It found the first solution in 9 cases as fastest and was in average 37\% faster than the original approach. The \textit{Regular} approach slows the solution process down here but the \textit{RegularIntersected} approach leads again to a speed up (2 times fastest approach, 29.701\% better as the \textit{Original} approach), which is not much worse than the speed up from the \textit{Table} approach.
The \textit{TableRegularIntersected} approach shows that a combination of regularization and tabulation can lead to a significant improvement. Here it was the best approach. It could solve the most problems (30), could find most often as fastest the first solution (19) and had in average the biggest time improvement (60.763\%).
\remark{The \textit{TableRegularIntersected} approach was not calculated fully automatically here, but it shows the potential of both approaches in combination. Future work has to be done automate the combination of both approaches.}
\remark{In the evaluation, we did not present the needed time for the trans-
formations. Depending on the specific CSPs, we observed big differences
in the necessary transformation times. In our case, the total transformation time
needed for all transformations were in all Black Hole instances less than three and in all Solitaire Battleship instances less than four seconds.
Because the transformation time can be neglected in comparison to the solution
time (less than three respectively four seconds vs. 10 respectively 30 minutes) we did not figure out them explicitly.}
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
\label{sec:future}
We presented a new approach for the optimization of general CSPs using the regular constraint.
For this a suitable sub-set of constraints are detected (for example with heuristics presented in \cite{TabulationCP}), solved separately and transformed into a regular constraint. Two benchmarks stress the benefit of this approach in comparison to the original problems and the competitiveness to the tabulation approach presented in \cite{Tabulation}. Furthermore, our benchmarks indicate the potential of a combination of both approaches.
In the future we will research heuristics, for finding sub-CSPs which are especially suitable for the regularization approach.
Besides, we want to consider the idea of direct transformations from several global constraints to equivalent regular constraints \cite{Loeff18A} and the combination of regular constraints transformed from global constraints with regular constraints transformed from sub-CSPs. We expect that this combination approach can be applied more often than the tabulation approach \cite{Tabulation}, because big sub-CSPs can be represented by a small DFA often; in contrast to this a table constraint always needs to store all solution tuples.
Therefore, the regularization approach looks more promissing for big problems.
The most obvious next step is a detailed comparison of the regularization approach with the tabulation approach and the formulation of heuristics which suggest when which approach is more advantageous.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 2,348 |
FAJARDO, Puerto Rico—It smacked of a cunning plan. The organizers of last week's planets conference put one of the best talks in the very last session of the very last day.
The Hubble Space Telescope has had a long and illustrious run, helping to pin down the age of the universe and pointing the way to the existence of dark energy.
looks at a troubled history, some remarkable discoveries and the future of the instrument. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 7,807 |
News: NEW CHILD BOARD CREATED IN THE POLITICAL SECTION FOR THE 2016 ELECTION
Home Help Login Register
Scared Monkeys Discussion Forum > Current Events and Musings > Religion (discussion and debate) > Topic: Pope Francis
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 » Go Down
Author Topic: Pope Francis (Read 4027923 times)
grace-land
Monkey Mega Star
Re: Pope Francis
« Reply #1960 on: October 04, 2014, 10:04:21 PM »
http://www.news.va/en/news/cardinal-baldisseri-on-the-synod-on-the-family
Cardinal Baldisseri on the Synod on the Family
Vatican City, 3 October 2014 (VIS) – A press conference was held this morning in the Holy See Press Office during which Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, secretary general of the Synod of Bishops, outlined the structure of the Extraordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the Family, to be inaugurated by the Pope during a solemn mass in St. Peter's Basilica next Sunday.
The Cardinal explained that among the 191 Synod Fathers there will be 61 Cardinals, one Cardinal Patriarch, 7 Patriarchs, one major archbishop, 67 metropolitan archbishops, 47 bishops, one auxiliary bishop, 1 priest and 6 religious. There will also be 16 experts, 38 auditors and 8 fraternal delegates. He also remarked that since this assembly will consider the theme of the family, special emphasis has been given to married couples, parents and family heads, a total of 12 persons; there is also one married couple within the group of experts.
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-leads-prayer-vigil-ahead-of-synod
Pope leads prayer vigil ahead of Synod
2014-10-04 Vatican Radio
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis presided a prayer vigil in St. Peter's Square on Saturday evening, ahead of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family, which is set to begin on Sunday at the Vatican.
The outdoor vigil began at 7 p.m., Rome time, and drew tens of thousands of faithful. During his homily, the Pope asked that the Church pray for the Synod Fathers, in particular for the gift to listen in the manner of God, to have a spirit of openness in discussions and to maintain a fixed gaze on Jesus Christ.
Thousands of people were also gathered in the square for the pre-vigil program, which included the testimonies of married and engaged couples, Scripture readings, prayer, singing and reflections on the family, written by Pope Francis and his predecessors.
Below is the Vatican Radio translation of the Pope's homily:
Dear families, good evening!
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-family-is-integral-part-of-gods-plan-for-huma
Pope: Family is integral part of God's plan for humanity
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis urged the Synod Bishops to listen to the Lord's call to "care for the family" which is "an integral part of His loving plan for humanity".
The Holy Father said that "Synod Assemblies are not meant to discuss beautiful and clever ideas" but to "better nurture and tend to the Lord's vineyard."
He spoke this morning during the Opening Mass of the Synod of Bishops in St. Peter's Basilica. The two week General Assembly will discuss the "The Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of the Evangelization".
Please find below the translated text of the Holy Father's homily:
Today the prophet Isaiah and the Gospel employ the image of the Lord's vineyard. The Lord's vineyard is his "dream", the plan which he nurtures with all his love, like a farmer who cares for his vineyard. Vines are plants which need much care!
God's "dream" is his people. He planted it and nurtured it with patient and faithful love, so that it can become a holy people, a people which brings forth abundant fruits of justice.
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-encourages-all-families-to-read-the-bible
Pope encourages all families to read the Bible
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis has asked for prayers for the bishops who are about to begin work in the two-week Synod of the Family and invited all families to keep a Bible handy in their homes, and read it often.
Addressing the crowds gathered in St. Peter's Square for the Angelus prayer on Sunday, he mentioned the just-celebrated Mass in St. Peter's Basilica to inaugurate the Extraordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the Family.
The Pope explained that the bishops have been called to take care and promote the family according to God's plan, and thus they will meet for two intense weeks of listening and dialogue on the theme "The Pastoral Challenges of the Family within the context of Evangelization".
"For the family to be able to proceed well, with trust and with hope, it must be nurtured by the Word of God" he said.
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/famiglia-sinodo-36710/
10/ 3/2014
Synod on Family to end with a text voted on by the Fathers
The Extraordinary Synod on the Family which opens next Monday (5-19 October) will end with a "concluding document", a Relatio Synodi which will be voted on by the Synod Fathers. The document will be sent to the Pope and to Bishops' Conferences across the world, along with a "short questionnaire". It is being sent ahead of next year's Ordinary Synod. The news was announced today by the Synod Secretary, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, at a press conference in the Vatican. The Tuscan cardinal said he hoped the Synod discussions would be "free", "peaceful" and "honest".
"The "Relatio Post Disceptationem" produced at the end of the first week will form the basis for the work that will follow in the second week in the "circuli minores" and which the Synod Fathers will examine before the concluding "Relatio Synodi" document is published. This final document will be sent to the Holy Father," the Tuscan cardinal said. The "Relatio Synodi" differs from the concluding messages usually published at the end of every synodal assembly (this time Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi has been asked to write the message). It replaces the proposals ("propositiones") the Synod Fathers usually sent the Pope during these assemblies. "There will be no "propositiones". The document will be published as one single "propositio"," Baldisseri explained to journalists. Participants will vote on the text on Saturday 18 October in the afternoon. The vote will be a simple "yes" ("placet") or "no" ("non placet") vote, Cardinal Baldisseri explained. Even the reports which single work groups ("circoli minores") will present at the plenary session will be voted on first. The document "will be published at a suitable moment, one or two days after" the vote. The work of the second assembly – the Ordinary Synod on the Family, scheduled for 2015 – will be based on this document. It will be "sent to Bishops' Conferences" around the world, so that they can formulate a response and examine the content of the working document. The final document produced at the Extraordinary Synod will be supplemented by a short questionnaire given that the family is a vast subject and there are other issues regarding it that have not been touched yet." As such, no decisions will be taken at the end of the Extraordinary Synod, which ends on 19 October.
Links are provided in the article to follow the event.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/what-you-need-to-know-about-pope-franciss-synod-on-the-family/2014/10/04/25ccc374-4b36-11e4-b72e-d60a9229cc10_story.html
What you need to know about Pope Francis's synod on the family
Following the synod
On Sunday, Pope Francis convenes a special type of meeting of bishops — one held only two other times — meant to start a frank debate about the church's teachings and practices with which Catholics seem to most disagree, struggle with and ignore: family, marriage and sexuality.
The Extraordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops is to run for two weeks. Its theme: "The Pastoral Challenges of the Family In the Context of Evangelization."
Here are the basics:
Who: The meeting brings together 191 high-level clergy members from around the world, as well as 16 experts and 38 other laypeople who will speak to the bishops. Most of the laypeople are married couples attending to talk about their experiences. One of the couples is Muslim-Catholic.
What: During the first week, everyone meets for four hours in the morning and three more in the afternoon. The second week, they will break into smaller groups.
How can I follow the event? The Vatican's press office created a Web site, synod14.vatican.va , where you can watch news conferences. The office says it will send updates through its Twitter feed, @HolySeePress , and is encouraging the many reporters attending the synod to use the hashtag #synod14 .
There is also Vatican Radio and Salt and Light TV . And you can keep up with The Washington Post's coverage on Twitter: @mboorstein. We'll be writing about this regularly throughout the two weeks.
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-to-synod-fathers-speak-frankly-and-listen-hum
Pope to Synod Fathers: speak frankly and listen humbly
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/be-frank-humble-pope-francis-tells-bishops-at-synod-launch-77158/
Be frank, humble – Pope Francis tells bishops at synod launch
Vatican City, Oct 6, 2014 / 07:45 am (CNA/EWTN News).- During the opening session for the extraordinary synod on the family, Pope Francis told participants not to be afraid of saying what they truly think, and that only by doing this can they reach real conclusions.
"You have to say all that which in the Lord you feel you have to say: without human respect, without timidity," the Pope told synod participants in his Oct. 6 opening remarks.
"And, at the same time, you must listen with humility and accept with an open heart what your brothers say. Synodality is exercised with these two attitudes."
Initiated yesterday with a mass presided over by the pontiff, the Extraordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the Family reflects on the theme "The pastoral challenges of the family in the context of evangelization," and was called for by the Pope in order to form a more concrete reflection for the Ordinary Synod to take place in 2015.
The synod will conclude with the beatification of Pope Paul VI, institutor of the synod of bishops, by Pope Francis on Oct. 19.
Speaking directly to the synod rapporteur, secretary-general and the three president delegates of different episcopal conferences present, Pope Francis explained that they bring to the meetings "the voice of the particular Church, gathered at the level of local churches by the Episcopal Conferences."
"This voice you bring in synodality. It's a great responsibility: to bring the realities and problems of the Church, to help them walk that road that which is the Gospel of the family," the Pope continued.
And one basic condition of synodality, he said, is to "speak clearly. No one say 'You can't say this; think of me this way or that...' You have to say everything that you feel with frankness."
http://www.news.va/en/news/bishops-share-impressions-of-synods-opening-sessio
Bishops share impressions of Synod's opening session
(Vatican Radio) The Church needs leaders that are listening to their people, speaking honestly, seeking consensus and discerning new ways of supporting family life. Those were the guidelines that emerged from a press conference held at the conclusion of the morning session by four of the key players in this Synod of Bishops. They were Hungarian Cardinal Peter Erdo, French Cardinal André Vingt-Troi, Italian Archbishop Bruno Forte and Mexican Archbishop Carlos Aguiar Retes. Philippa Hitchen takes a closer look.....
Listen: :
Cardinal Erdo, who gave the introductory presentation to the Synod's opening session, stressed changes in the working method of the meeting to better reflect a Church that is listening to the needs of its people. In a departure from tradition, his presentation to the gathering of 253 Synod participants was given in Italian, rather than Latin, and already included some of the ideas circulated by the bishops in response to the questionnaire on the family sent out to dioceses around the world last year.
Archbishop Forte, special secretary for the Synod, stressed the continuation of the work started by Pope Paul VI in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council, to include the voice of all baptised people in the key discussions of the day. He said the bishops are still learning how to do that and he urged all the Synod participants to heed to Pope Francis' words and to speak honestly and freely, without prejudice or preconceived answers.
http://www.news.va/en/news/card-wuerl-warns-against-expecting-instant-pastora
Card. Wuerl warns against expecting instant pastoral from Synod
(Vatican Radio) The Synod is a process, "we should not expect sound bite solutions" to the challenges facing the family in todays' "secularized culture", says the Archbishop of Washington DC, Cardinal Donald Wuerl.
He was speaking to Vatican Radio on the eve of the first full day of working sessions in the Extra-Ordinary Synod of Bishops on the challenges of the family in the context of evangelization.
Pastoral solutions to intractable problems are not going to come instantly", noted the Cardinal who sees among the biggest challenges facing the family in his own diocese that of living out the Christian vision of family life in a secularized society:
"The secular world, the secular vision doesn't have a lot of space for a relationship with God, or a transcendent reality beyond us … that world has created a individualism and a self-referential world that doesn't leave a lot of space for a healthy marriage and a family life that is going to follow on from that".
Cardinal Wuerl also points to the fact that there are few "supports" in today's world for marriage and the family, for objective right and wrong. He said the Church needs to them realize that this is the reality that many Catholics are living in and have been wounded by:
http://www.news.va/en/news/summary-of-the-relatio-ante-disceptationem
Summary of the Relatio ante disceptationem
Vatican City, 6 October 2014 (VIS) – The "Report prior to discussion" presented this morning by Cardinal Peter Erdo, relator general, introduces the work of the Synod, emphasising the main points in relation to which the discussion of the Assembly should develop. In this sense, it is important to highlight a new element: the report of this Synod Assembly already includes the Synod Fathers' written discourses, sent in advance to the Secretariat General of the Synod, with the aim of responding better to the collegial sense of the Assembly.
First and foremost, Cardinal Erdo's report encourages the family to be regarded with hope and mercy, proclaiming its value and beauty as, in spite of the many difficulties, it is not a "model off course"; we live in a world of mere emotions, he continues, in which life "is not a project, but rather a series of moments" and "stable commitment appears formidable" for humanity rendered fragile by individualism. But it is precisely here, faced with these "signs of the times", that the Gospel of the family offers itself as a remedy, a "true medicine" that is to be proposed by "placing oneself in the corner of those who find it more difficult to recognise and live it".
No, therefore, to "doom and surrender" within the Church. "There exists a clear and broadly shared heritage of faith". For example, ideological forms such as gender theory or the equality of homosexual unions with marriage between a man and a woman do not find consensus among the majority of Catholics, while marriage and the family are still largely understood as a "patrimony" for humanity, to be protected, promoted and defended. Certainly, among believers doctrine is often little known or practised, but this does not mean that it is under discussion". This is particularly relevant in relation to the indissolubility of marriage and its sacramental nature among baptised persons. The indissolubility of marriage is not called into question; on the other hand, it is uncontested and for the greater part observed also in the pastoral practice of the Church with those whose marriages have failed and who seek a new beginning. Therefore, not doctrinal, but rather practical questions – inseparable from the truths of faith – are in discussion in this Synod, of an exquisitely pastoral nature".
« Reply #1970 on: October 07, 2014, 01:17:39 AM »
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/benedict-could-attend-paul-vi-beatification-spokesman-reveals-40153/
Benedict could attend Paul VI beatification, spokesman reveals
Vatican City, Oct 6, 2014 / 02:22 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Retired pontiff Benedict XVI may take part to Paul VI's beatification Mass Oct. 19, revealed Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office.
Asked if the former Pope was expected to give his personal contribution to the two-week synod of bishops, Fr. Lombardi said during a press conference that "it is not expected that the Pope emeritus will take part in the synod, which is so committing and long."
"Since his resignation, the Pope emeritus has been living a private life in prayer," Fr. Lombardi, adding that "everybody hopes to see him for Paul VI's beatification."
The beatification Mass will take place Oct. 19, at the end of the extraordinary synod on the family – the synod of bishops being an institution the late Pope wanted and promoted.
Pope Francis said in an interview with Italian outlet "Corriere della Sera" that Paul VI is one of his models, and he praised his predecessor for the promulgation of the encyclical "Humanae Vitae," issued notwithstanding the opposing views about its content held by a majority of public opinion.
The connection between Paul VI and Benedict XVI, however, is stronger. Paul VI appointed Joseph Ratzinger as archbishop of Munich in 1977, and shortly after created him a cardinal.
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-in-santa-marta-remembering-the-story-of-gods
Pope in Santa Marta: Remembering the story of God's love for us
(Vatican Radio) If we want to give glory to God, we must remember all He has done for us. But that also means remembering our sins. It means being honest with ourselves, said Pope Francis as he reflected on the Readings of the Day during morning Mass at Casa Santa Marta.
The Lord "chose his people and accompanied them during their journey in the wilderness, throughout their lives", said Pope Francis commenting on the first reading in which St. Paul recalls his past life, without hiding his sins.
What "God did with His people - the Pope said - he has done and continues to do which each of us". The Pope then asked "where we were chosen because Christian, and not that person over there, far away who has never even heard of Jesus Christ?". "It 'a grace," was the Pope's answer: "A grace of love".
http://www.news.va/en/news/sexuality-and-more-inclusive-language-on-synod-age
Sexuality and more inclusive language on Synod agenda
(Vatican Radio) At the daily press briefing in the Vatican on Tuesday, journalists heard how bishops meeting on the second full day of the Synod for the Family have been discussing the importance of using more inclusive language to talk about people living outside the teachings of the Church. They've also been stressing the need for a 'gradual' or 'stepping stones' approach to couples, and the recognition that elements of truth also exist in those relationships which do not conform to the Church's ideal vision of family life.
The head of the Holy See press office Fr Federico Lombardi and his assistants spoke of the many different subjects under discussion on the first two days of the Synod, in particular the need for a more sensitive and inclusive language about family life that will not turn people away from the Church. Canadian Fr Tom Rosica gave some specific examples from the English speaking bishops present at the meeting:
"Language such as 'living in sin,' 'intrinsically disordered,' or 'contraceptive mentality' are not necessarily words that invite people to draw closer to Christ and the Church."
Synod participants have also been underlining the need to apply the so-called 'law of graduality' or 'stepping stones approach' as they minister to people living in all kinds of relationships that do not conform to the Church's ideal of marriage and family life.
"Questa tema della gradualità è stata ripresa………non si raggiunge ancora questa ideale."
Fr Lombardi used an analogy from the Second Vatican Council which led to profound changes in the Catholic Church's relations with other Christians and people of other religious traditions. During the Council, bishops agreed that while the fullness of Christ's Church "subsists" only in the Catholic Church, important elements of truth and holiness also exist in other churches and faith communities. In a similar way, he said, valid and important elements of true love and holiness can also exist in a relationship that does not conform to the full vision of an ideal Catholic marriage.
http://www.news.va/en/news/synod-the-family-from-a-philippines-perspective
Synod: The family from a Philippines perspective
(Vatican Radio) At 9 am this, in the presence of the Holy Father, the third General Congregation of the Extraordinary Synod on the family, was held in the Synod Hall at the Vatican, to continue the general debate.
Tuesday's session entitled: The Gospel of the family and Natural Law and family and vocation of the person in Christ opened with a brief presentation by Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, Archbishop of Manila (Philippines), who introduced the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. George Campos, from of Couples for Christ in the Philippines present at the synod as Auditors.
Please find below the presentation given for Cardinal Luis Tagle
The testimony of the married Australian couple has been discussed in various articles. The full testimony is at the link.
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/synod14-full-text-of-second-general-congregation
Synod14: Full Text of Second General Congregation
Interventions from President Delegate Cardinal Vingt Trois and a Married Australian Couple
Vatican City, October 07, 2014
Below is a translation of the Second General Congregation of the Synod of Bishops held Monday afternoon in the Vatican
SYNOD 14
Synod 14 – 2nd General Congregation: "God's Plan for Marriage and the Family (Part I, chapter 1)" and "Knowledge of Holy Scripture and of the Teaching on Marriage and the Family (Part I, chapter 2)"
Introduction of the President Delegate, Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois. Testimony of Spouses Ron (Romano) and Mavis Pirola (Sydney, Australia)
Held at 4:30 pm today, in the presence of the Holy Father in the Hall of the Synod in the Vatican, was the Second General Congregation of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family. The general debate begins with this Congregation, which is following a thematic order in correspondence with the Parts and Chapters of the Instrumentum laboris.
Today's thematic session: God's Plan on Marriage and the Family (Part I, chapter 1), and Knowledge of Holy Scripture and of the Teaching on Marriage and the Family (Part I, chapter 2) opened with a brief presentation by the rotating President Delegate, Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois, Archbishop of Paris, France, who introduced the testimony of spouses Romano and Mavis Pirola, directors of the Australian Catholic Marriage and Family Council, Australia, present at the Synod as Auditors.
Here is a translation of the texts.
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/synod14-second-general-congregation-summary-of-the-general-debate
Synod14: Second General Congregation: Summary of the General Debate
"Based on the premise that the family is the basic unit of human society, the cradle of gratuitous love ... it was reiterated that the family constitutes the future of humanity and must be protected"
Below is the Vatican's unofficial translation of the summary of the general debate of the Second General Congregation held yesterday afternoon in the Vatican:
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/synod14-full-text-of-third-general-congregation
Synod14: Full Text of Third General Congregation
" A world worthy of our humanity, image of God, is possible if, on our part as Church and through the Pastoral of the Family, we work in faith and charity to render present the Kingdom of God in the world."
Synod 14 – 3rd General Congregation: Homily of Cardinal Chibly Langlois, Bishop of Les Cayes, Haiti, during the prayer of Tierce
Synod 14 – 3rd General Congregation: "The Gospel of the Family and the Natural Law" (Part I, chapter 3) and "The Family and the Vocation of the Person in Christ" (Part I, chapter 4)
At 9 o'clock today, the 3rd General Congregation of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family opened, in the presence of the Holy Father, with the singing of Tierce. Following is a translation of the homily that Cardinal Chibly Langlois, Bishop of Les Cayes, Haiti, gave during the praying of Tierce.
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/synod14-third-general-congregation-summary-of-the-general-debate
Synod14: Third General Congregation: Summary of the General Debate
"It is necessary to transmit a vision of marriage that does not regard it as a destination, but rather as a path to a higher end, a road towards the growth of the person and of the couple, a source of strength and energy."
Below is the Vatican's unofficial translation of the summary of the Third General Congregation of the Synod of Bishops which took place this morning in the Vatican.
Third General Congregation: Summary of the general debate
Holy Father: present
Synod Fathers: 184
The general debate continued throughout today's third general Congregation. The theme
according to the order of the Instrumentum Laboris was: "The Gospel of the Family and the
Natural Law" (Part I, Chapter 3) and "The Family and Vocation of the Person in Christ" (Part
I, Chapter 4).
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/synod14-family-s-approach-to-same-sex-relationship-is-damaging-says-pro-family-coalition
Synod14: Family's Approach to Same-Sex Relationship Is 'Damaging', Says Pro-Family Coalition
Testimony Criticized for Presenting Homosexual Relationships as "Models That Can Be Legitimately Chosen"
A testimony given to the Synod on the Family about welcoming homosexual couples has been called "damaging" by a concerned international coalition of pro-family groups.
Voice of the Family made the comments following the intervention given yesterday by Ron and Mavis Pirola, one of the married couples chosen to address the Synod on the Family meeting in Rome.
In their testimony, the Pirolas said friends of theirs were planning their Christmas family gathering "when their gay son said he wanted to bring his partner home too. They fully believed in the Church's teachings and they knew their grandchildren would see them welcome the son and his partner into the family.
"Their response could be summed up in three words, 'He is our son'," the couple said. "What a model of evangelization for parishes as they respond to similar situations in their neghbourhood! It is a practical example of what the Instrumentum laboris says concerning the Church's teaching role and its main mission to let the world know of God's love."
Maria Madise, Voice of the Family's coordinator, said the ready acceptance of a son and his homosexual lover to a gathering where the grandchildren would welcome them into the family "gives a false lead to families and parishes [which] is no example of love and mercy towards anyone.
"The unqualified welcome of homosexual couples into family and parish environments in fact damages everybody, by serving to normalise the disorder of homosexuality. It damages children by presenting homosexual relationships as models which may legimitately be chosen," Madise continued.
"It damages adults by making them complicit in tacit endorsements of the immoral and dangerous homosexual lifestyle. And it damages the homosexual couples themselves by failing to guide them with the truth in charity – that their relationship is gravely harmful for their moral and spiritual health."
Madise added: "It is because we desire the eternal happiness of those we love that we need to support them to overcome temptation and to live chastely. This path is not easy, but nor is any cross that is the way of true mercy, love and new life." She also explained that the Church is clear that 'a truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin.'"
In a 1986 letter to bishops on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, the Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith stated that although the particular inclination of the homosexual person "is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder."
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-francis-to-address-top-european-institutions
Pope Francis to address top European Institutions
The European Parliament is the only directly-elected EU body and one of the largest democratic assemblies in the world. Its 751 Members are there to represent the EU's 500 million citizens. They are elected once every five years by voters from across the 28 Member States.
The Council of Europe is the continent's leading human rights organisation. It includes 47 member states, 28 of which are members of the European Union. All Council of Europe member states have signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights, a treaty designed to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-divisions-between-christians-are-wounds-in-th
Pope: divisions between Christians are wounds in the Church
Pope Francis appealed for Christian unity on Wednesday pointing out that divisions between Christians of different denominations are hurtful for the Church and for Christ.
Speaking to the crowds gathered in St. Peter's Square for the weekly General Audience, the Pope said that we must not forget that there are many who belong to different confessions who share our faith in Christ.
Many of us, even within our Catholic Church – he said – have resigned ourselves to this division that has often been cause of conflict, suffering and even wars throughout the course of history.
And the Pope invited those present to ask themselves what is their position regarding all this: "are we resigned, or even indifferent to this division? Or do we firmly believe that we can and we must walk together towards reconciliation and full communion?"
Divisions between Christians – the Pope continued – wound the Church and wound Christ. The Church – he said – is the body and Christ is the head.
He pointed out that divisions between Christ's followers are clearly contrary to his will, as expressed in his prayer to the Father that all might be one, so that the world might believe (cf. Jn 17:21).
http://www.news.va/en/news/synod-family-breakdown-not-a-crisis-in-truth-but-m
Synod: Family breakdown not a crisis in truth, but methodology
(Vatican Radio) The breakdown in marriage and family life, particularly in Western culture is not the result of "a crisis of truth, but rather as a crisis of methodology" and the "pastoral programs that attempt to address the negative issues impacting marriage and family life" fail to meet "the magnitude of the cultural challenges facing us today".
This is according to Jeffery and Alice Heinzen who are from the diocese of Le Crosse, Wisconsin USA, were asked to address the second part of the Synod's working document, the Instrumentum laboris, namely, "The Pastoral Program for the Family in Light of New Challenges".
In their testimony, the Heinzin's spoke of how the breakdown in family life is impacting in the handing down of the faith between generations. They said that where once the home was the domestic Church and the parent the primary educator in the faith – this is no longer the case.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 » Go Up
Jump to: Please select a destination: ----------------------------- FORUM RULES ----------------------------- => Forum Rules and Tips ----------------------------- Polls, Polls and more Polls ----------------------------- => Missing Persons Polls => Current Events/News Polls => Crime and Trial Polls => Just For Fun Polls ----------------------------- Missing Persons - High Profile ----------------------------- => Missing Persons High Profile ===> Dylan Redwine, 13yrs old, last seen 11/19/12, Vallecito, CO ===> Kyron Horman - Portland Oregon ===> Caylee Marie Anthony - Florida (BODY FOUND) =====> Caylee's Law - by State =======> Caylee's Law - text =======> ALABAMA =======> ALASKA =======> ARIZONA =======> ARKANSAS =======> CALIFORNIA =======> COLORADO =======> CONNECTICUT =======> DELAWARE =======> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA =======> FLORIDA =======> GEORGIA =======> HAWAII =======> IDAHO =======> ILLINOIS =======> INDIANA =======> IOWA =======> KANSAS =======> KENTUCKY =======> LOUISIANA =======> MAINE =======> MARYLAND =======> MASSACHUSETTS =======> MICHIGAN =======> MINNESOTA =======> MISSISSIPPI =======> MISSOURI =======> MONTANA =======> NEBRASKA =======> NEVADA =======> NEW HAMPSHIRE =======> NEW JERSEY =======> NEW MEXICO =======> NEW YORK =======> NORTH CAROLINA =======> NORTH DAKOTA =======> OHIO =======> OKLAHOMA =======> OREGON =======> PENNSYLVANIA =======> PUERTO RICO =======> RHODE ISLAND =======> SOUTH CAROLINA =======> SOUTH DAKOTA =======> TENNESSEE =======> TEXAS =======> UTAH =======> VERMONT =======> VIRGINIA =======> WASHINGTON =======> WEST VIRGINIA =======> WISCONSIN =======> WYOMING =====> Caylee Marie Anthony Murder Trial Archives ===> Sierra Lamar, 15yrs old, Morgan Hill, CA Missing Since March 16, 2012 ===> JO ANN (JODIE) BAIN AND 3 DAUGHTERS MISSING 4/27/2012(2 murdered 2 safe) ===> Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6 yrs old missing 4/21/12 Tucson, AZ (Body Found) ===> Jennifer Kesse - Orlando/Ocoee, Florida ===> Susan Powell 28yrs old, missing 12/6/09 West Valley City, Utah ===> Michelle Loree Parker, Last Seen 11/17/11, Orlando, FL ===> Celina Cass, 11yrs old missing 7/25/11 New Hampshire ===> Aliayah Lunsford, 3yrs old, Weston, West VA, missing since 9/24/2011 ===> Lisa Irwin, 10mo old missing since 10/4/2011 KC, MO ===> Robyn Gardner missing in Aruba August 2, 2011 => Missing Persons - High Profile - Archives ----------------------------- Virginia Area Missing and Murdered - possible connections ----------------------------- => Morgan Dana Harrington, 20yrs missing VA Tech 10/17/09(BODY FOUND) => Hannah Elizabeth Graham missing since 9/13/14 Charlottesville, VA => Alexis Murphy, missing since 8/3/13 Charlottesville, VA => Samantha Ann Clarke 19yrs. old Orange Va. Last seen 09/13/10 => Dashad Sage Smith missing since 11/20/12 Charlottesville, VA => Cassandra Morton 23, Lynchburg, missing 10/10/09 body found 11/29/09 ----------------------------- High Profile Crimes and Trials (not missing persons) ----------------------------- => Jodi Arias trial - for the murder of Travis Alexander => Trial of George Zimmerman - 2nd Degree Murder of 17yr old Trayvon Martin => Scott Peterson Appeal of Murder Conviction ----------------------------- Missing, Exploited and True Crime ----------------------------- => Missing Exploited and True Crime ===> Missing Persons Forum =====> Missing Found or Presumed Deceased =====> Missing Found Safe =====> Missing Endangered Runaways =====> Resourses, Search Groups and Fundraisers ===> Crimes Against Children, Elderly and the Disabled ===> Crimes of Passion/Anger ===> Serial Killers and Their Possible Victims ===> Unsolved Crimes =====> Finally Solved ===> Haleigh Marie Cummings - Florida ===> Adji Desir - Florida ===> Somer Renee Thompson 7 yo, Orange Park FL 10/19/09(BODY FOUND) ===> Tracy Ocasio - Orlando/Ocoee, Florida ===> Shaniya Nicole Davis, 5 Fayetteville, NC Missing 11/10/09(BODY FOUND) ===> Holly Bobo, 20yrs old missing Parsons, TN 4/13/11 ===> Hailey Dunn - 13yrs old - Colorado City, TX missing 12/27/10 (Body Found) ===> Elizabeth Olten - 9yrs, Jefferson City, MO missing 10/21/09 (BODY FOUND) ===> Lindsey Baum - McCleary, WA 6/26/09 ===> Amber Leeanne Dubois 14yrs old - Escondido, CA(BODY FOUND) ===> Chelsea King, 17, Missing 2-25-2010 Rancho Bernadino CA (BODY FOUND) ===> Sandra Cantu, 8 years old - Tracy, CA(BODY FOUND) ===> Madeleine McCann - Portugal ===> Christine Marie Sheddy - missing since 11/13/2007 - Maryland(BODY FOUND) ===> Nevaeh Amyah Buchanan 5yr Monroe Michigan(BODY FOUND) ===> Gabriel Johnson 8 mo., last seen 12/26/09 Tempe AZ-San Antonio TX ===> Stacy Ann Peterson missing & Kathleen Savio murdered - Illinois ===> Zahra Clare Baker - 10yrs old Hickory, NC (Body Found) ----------------------------- Natalee Holloway ----------------------------- => Natalee Holloway => Important Case Documents ===> Joran Statements/PV's ===> Paulus Statements/PV's ===> Deepak Statements/PV's ===> Satish Statements/PV's ===> Misc Statements/PV's => LCD Archive => Shango/Simian and other Codetalkers ----------------------------- Current Events and Musings ----------------------------- => Monkey Musings / Open Discussion => Pop Culture Main ===> Hugely Popular TV Shows ===> Movies and Television ===> Social Media ===> Music ===> Books ===> Scared Monkeys Radio with Dana Pretzer => Health and Medical Issues => Food and Product Recalls => News of the Day => Business News => Sports => Political Forum => Religion (discussion and debate) ----------------------------- The Monkey Lounge ----------------------------- => The Monkey Lounge ===> Fashion & Decorating ===> What's Cooking? Recipes ===> Games => Inspirational ===> Memorial - Gone but Never Forgotten ===> Gratefulness - Light a Candle in Prayer ===> Inspirational scriptures, songs, stories and prayers ----------------------------- Natalee Discussions (2005 ARCHIVE) ----------------------------- => Natalee Holloway => Theory and Speculation => Links and References Only => Natalee Breaking News Archive ----------------------------- General Discussions (2005 ARCHIVE) ----------------------------- => News Issues => Chit Chat
Use of this web site in any manner signifies unconditional acceptance, without exception, of our terms of use. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 2,149 |
/*
Common styles for all published customer sites
*/
p,ul,ol,blockquote
{
margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0;
overflow:visible;
}
ol
{
padding-left:2em;
}
ul
{
padding-left:1.5em;
}
li div
{
display:inline;
}
body
{
margin-left:0;
margin-right:0;
margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0;
overflow:visible;
}
img
{
border:0;
}
/* Used for all new footer text containers - 22.6 - JLK */
.div-text-footer-container
{
float: left;
text-align: center;
margin-top:5px;
font-size:11px;
}
/* Legacy - Pre 22.6 */
.div-plain-text-menu
{
float: left;
text-align: center;
color:#999999;
margin-top:5px;
font-size:11px;
}
/* Legacy - Pre 22.6 */
#divLocalSeachFooter
{
float: left;
text-align: center;
color:#999999;
margin-top:5px;
font-size:11px;
}
.fn{
display:inline;
}
.adr{
display:inline;
}
.tel{
display:inline;
}
.street-address{
display:inline;
}
#divVPBrandFooter
{
margin: 8px 8px;
font-family: Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif;
font-size: 11px;
text-align: center;
margin-top: 36px;
}
#divVPBrandFooter a
{
text-decoration: none;
color: #333;
}
/* Styles for new branded footer */
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter
{
margin-top: -30px;
width: 100%;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter table
{
height: 31px;
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD
{
padding: 2px 5px 2px 5px;
font-size: 14px;
color: #FFFFFF;
font-weight: bold;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD a
{
font-size: 14px;
color: #FFFFFF;
font-weight: bold;
text-decoration: none;
cursor: pointer;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD span
{
vertical-align: middle;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD img
{
border: 0;
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
vertical-align: middle;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD.left-cap
{
background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/background/freemium-footer/left-cap.png);
background-position: left top;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 5px;
padding: 0;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD.right-cap
{
background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/background/freemium-footer/right-cap.png);
background-position: left top;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 5px;
overflow: hidden;
padding: 0;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD.mid
{
background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/background/freemium-footer/center.png);
background-position: left top;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
width: 30px;
padding: 0;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD.mid-left
{
background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/background/freemium-footer/left-stretch.png);
background-position: left top;
background-repeat: repeat-x;
text-align: left;
}
#divVPBrandFooter .VPNewBrandFooter TD.mid-right
{
background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/background/freemium-footer/right-stretch.png);
background-position: left top;
background-repeat: repeat-x;
text-align: right;
}
/* mapquest disclaimer etc */
.legalese
{
font-size: xx-small;
color: #999999;
}
div.legalese
{
width: 600px;
margin: 30px auto;
text-align: center;
}
.legalese a
{
color: #999999;
}
.legalese a:visited
{
color: #999999;
}
.media-player-container
{
border-collapse: collapse;
}
.media-player-song-title
{
font-family: Arial;
font-size: 12px;
font-weight: bold;
}
.media-player-song-description
{
font-family: Arial;
font-size: 11px;
font-weight: normal;
}
/* The main calendar widget. DIV containing a table. */
div.calendar { position: relative; z-index:100; }
.calendar, .calendar table {
border: 1px solid #556;
font-size: 11px;
color: #000;
cursor: default;
background: #eef;
font-family: tahoma,verdana,sans-serif;
}
/* Header part -- contains navigation buttons and day names. */
.calendar .button { /* "<<", "<", ">", ">>" buttons have this class */
text-align: center; /* They are the navigation buttons */
padding: 2px; /* Make the buttons seem like they're pressing */
}
.calendar .nav {
background: #778;
}
.calendar thead .title { /* This holds the current "month, year" */
font-weight: bold; /* Pressing it will take you to the current date */
text-align: center;
background: #fff;
color: #000;
padding: 2px;
}
.calendar thead .headrow { /* Row <TR> containing navigation buttons */
background: #778;
color: #fff;
}
.calendar thead .daynames { /* Row <TR> containing the day names */
background: #bdf;
}
.calendar thead .name { /* Cells <TD> containing the day names */
border-bottom: 1px solid #556;
padding: 2px;
text-align: center;
color: #000;
}
.calendar thead .weekend { /* How a weekend day name shows in header */
color: #a66;
}
.calendar thead .hilite { /* How do the buttons in header appear when hover */
background-color: #aaf;
color: #000;
border: 1px solid #04f;
padding: 1px;
}
.calendar thead .active { /* Active (pressed) buttons in header */
background-color: #77c;
padding: 2px 0px 0px 2px;
}
/* The body part -- contains all the days in month. */
.calendar tbody .day { /* Cells <TD> containing month days dates */
width: 2em;
color: #456;
text-align: right;
padding: 2px 4px 2px 2px;
}
.calendar tbody .day.othermonth {
font-size: 80%;
color: #bbb;
}
.calendar tbody .day.othermonth.oweekend {
color: #fbb;
}
.calendar table .wn {
padding: 2px 3px 2px 2px;
border-right: 1px solid #000;
background: #bdf;
}
.calendar tbody .rowhilite td {
background: #def;
}
.calendar tbody .rowhilite td.wn {
background: #eef;
}
.calendar tbody td.hilite { /* Hovered cells <TD> */
background: #def;
padding: 1px 3px 1px 1px;
border: 1px solid #bbb;
}
.calendar tbody td.active { /* Active (pressed) cells <TD> */
background: #cde;
padding: 2px 2px 0px 2px;
}
.calendar tbody td.selected { /* Cell showing today date */
font-weight: bold;
border: 1px solid #000;
padding: 1px 3px 1px 1px;
background: #fff;
color: #000;
}
.calendar tbody td.weekend { /* Cells showing weekend days */
color: #a66;
}
.calendar tbody td.today { /* Cell showing selected date */
font-weight: bold;
color: #00f;
}
.calendar tbody .disabled { color: #999; }
.calendar tbody .emptycell { /* Empty cells (the best is to hide them) */
visibility: hidden;
}
.calendar tbody .emptyrow { /* Empty row (some months need less than 6 rows) */
display: none;
}
/* The footer part -- status bar and "Close" button */
.calendar tfoot .footrow { /* The <TR> in footer (only one right now) */
text-align: center;
background: #556;
color: #fff;
}
.calendar tfoot .ttip { /* Tooltip (status bar) cell <TD> */
background: #fff;
color: #445;
border-top: 1px solid #556;
padding: 1px;
}
.calendar tfoot .hilite { /* Hover style for buttons in footer */
background: #aaf;
border: 1px solid #04f;
color: #000;
padding: 1px;
}
.calendar tfoot .active { /* Active (pressed) style for buttons in footer */
background: #77c;
padding: 2px 0px 0px 2px;
}
/* Combo boxes (menus that display months/years for direct selection) */
.calendar .combo {
position: absolute;
display: none;
top: 0px;
left: 0px;
width: 4em;
cursor: default;
border: 1px solid #655;
background: #def;
color: #000;
font-size: 90%;
z-index: 100;
}
.calendar .combo .label,
.calendar .combo .label-IEfix {
text-align: center;
padding: 1px;
}
.calendar .combo .label-IEfix {
width: 4em;
}
.calendar .combo .hilite {
background: #acf;
}
.calendar .combo .active {
border-top: 1px solid #46a;
border-bottom: 1px solid #46a;
background: #eef;
font-weight: bold;
}
.calendar td.time {
border-top: 1px solid #000;
padding: 1px 0px;
text-align: center;
background-color: #f4f0e8;
}
.calendar td.time .hour,
.calendar td.time .minute,
.calendar td.time .ampm {
padding: 0px 3px 0px 4px;
border: 1px solid #889;
font-weight: bold;
background-color: #fff;
}
.calendar td.time .ampm {
text-align: center;
}
.calendar td.time .colon {
padding: 0px 2px 0px 3px;
font-weight: bold;
}
.calendar td.time span.hilite {
border-color: #000;
background-color: #667;
color: #fff;
}
.calendar td.time span.active {
border-color: #f00;
background-color: #000;
color: #0f0;
}
.RegistryLinkTextUrl
{
padding-left: 10px;
}
.GuestBookHeader
{
padding-top: 5px;
font-weight:bold;
}
.GuestBookMessageRow
{
font-weight:bold;
padding-top: 5px;
padding-bottom: 5px;
}
.GuestBookMessage
{
padding-bottom: 10px;
background-image:url("../../images/b09/site-builder/background/customer-sites-hr.png");
background-position:bottom;
background-repeat:repeat-x;
}
.GuestBookSmiley
{
height: 20px;
width: 20px;
}
/* start blogs */
h1 { font-size: 20pt; }
h1.blog-title { margin-bottom: 5px; }
h2 {}
h2.filter-title { margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 0px; }
h3 { font-size: 15px; }
h3.post-title { margin-bottom: 2px; }
div.post-author { margin-bottom: 22px; }
span.post-author, span.comment-author { font-weight: bold; }
table.comment-entry { border-collapse: collapse; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; }
table.comment-entry td { padding-top: 20px; }
table.comment-entry .textbox-entry { vertical-align: top; width: 45%; }
table.comment-entry .action { text-align: right; }
table.comment-entry input, table.comment-entry textarea { border-color: #a5acb2; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px; margin-top: 5px; }
.comment-count { border-collapse: collapse; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; }
.comment-count td { background-repeat: no-repeat; height: 41px; margin: 0px; padding: 5px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: right; vertical-align: top; }
.comment-count .left { background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageSmall/MessageSmall_03.png); width: 7px; }
.comment-count .middle { background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageSmall/MessageSmall_05.png); background-repeat: repeat-x; margin-right: -10px; padding-right: -10px; }
.comment-count .right { background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageSmall/MessageSmall_07.png); width: 21px; }
table.comment-replies {border-collapse:collapse;margin-left:35px;}
table.comment-replies td {background-repeat:no-repeat;margin:0px;padding:0px;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td {background-position:bottom;height:42px;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td.left {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/top_left.png);width:12px;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td.middle {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/top_middle.png);background-repeat:repeat-x;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td.right {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/top_right.png);width:12px;}
table.comment-replies tr.middle td {background-repeat:repeat-y;}
table.comment-replies tr.middle td.left {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/middle_left.png);}
table.comment-replies tr.middle td.middle {position:relative;}
table.comment-replies tr.middle td.right {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/middle_right.png);}
table.comment-replies tr.bottom td {height:12px;}
table.comment-replies tr.bottom td.left {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/bottom_left.png);width:12px;}
table.comment-replies tr.bottom td.middle {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/bottom_middle.png);background-repeat:repeat-x;}
table.comment-replies tr.bottom td.right {background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/bottom_right.png);width:12px;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td.arrow {background-image: url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/top_middle.png); BACKGROUND-REPEAT: repeat-x;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td.arrow img {float:left;}
table.comment-replies tr.top td.arrow div {width:340px;float:left;background-image:url(../../images/b09/site-builder/containers/MessageLarge/top_middle.png);background-repeat:repeat-x;margin:0px;padding:0px;position:relative;top:21px;height:35px;}
table.comment-replies div.content {margin-bottom:-26px;position:relative;top:-36px;}
div.post-category-list { clear: both; float:left;}
div.blog-trackback-link-container { text-align:right;}
table.category-trackback-table{width:100%;float:left; position:relative;}
span.category-list-header { font-weight: bold; }
span.post-link { text-decoration: underline; }
table.post-list th { display: none; }
hr.blog { height: 1px; border: dotted 1px #dddddd; }
/* end blogs */
form.gsearch
{
width: 95%;
margin-top: 10px;
}
input.ginput
{
BORDER-BOTTOM: #c0c0c0 1px solid;
BORDER-LEFT: #c0c0c0 1px solid;
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px;
MARGIN: 0px;
PADDING-LEFT: 0px;
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px;
COLOR: #484848;
BORDER-TOP: #c0c0c0 1px solid;
BORDER-RIGHT: #c0c0c0 1px solid;
PADDING-TOP: 0px;
width: 68%;
float:left;
height: 20px;
margin-right: 2px;
}
input.fbutton,
input.gbutton
{
padding:0;
width:30%;
margin: 0;
background: url(http://www.google.com/images/srpr/nav_logo14.png) 50% bottom;
border: medium none;
border-bottom: #999 1px solid;
border-left: #ccc 1px solid;
border-top: #ccc 1px solid;
border-right: #999 1px solid;
outline: 0 none;
cursor: pointer;
height: 22px;
}
div.gpowered
{
font-size:11px;
color:#676767;
vertical-align:middle;
margin-top: 2px;
text-align: left;
}
div.gpowered img
{
vertical-align:middle
} | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 4,900 |
Мария дель Пилар Рольдан Тапия де Хиффениг (, род. 18 ноября 1939) — мексиканская фехтовальщица, призёр Олимпийских игр.
Биография
Мария дель Пилар Рольдан Тапия родилась в 1939 году в Мехико. Её родители — Анхель Рольдан и Мария Тапия — были теннисистами высокого уровня, отец даже играл в мексиканском Кубке Дэвиса. В 10 лет Мария дель Пилар прочитала «Три мушкетёра», и заинтересовалась фехтованием. В 1952 году в Мехико переехал итальянский профессор фехтования, и 13-летняя Мария стала его первой ученицей. Чтобы обеспечить дочери наилучшие условия для занятий, Анхель Рольдан оборудовал дома фехтовальный зал, а с 1954 года сам увлёкся фехтованием. Фехтованием увлеклась и младшая сестра Марии дель Пилар — Мария де Лоурдес.
В ноябре 1954 года 15-летняя Мария дель Пилар зарегистрировалась для участия в отборочном турнире на Панамериканские игры. Набравшись опыта на Панамериканских играх и Играх Центральной Америки и Карибского региона, в 1956 году она в составе мексиканской сборной отправилась на Олимпиаду в Мельбурн.
Олимпиада-1956 была её первым опытом состязаний с электронной фиксацией уколов. Несмотря на свой юный возраст, 17-летняя Мария дель Пилар сумела дойти до полуфинала и в итоге заняла 10-е место. По возвращении домой она и родители решили, что для улучшения техники и спортивного роста ей нужно соревноваться за границей, а не только внутри страны. В 1958 году Мария приняла участие в Открытом чемпионате США, и заняла 7-е место. В 1959 году на Играх Центральной Америки и Карибского бассейна она выиграла бронзовую медаль в индивидуальном зачёте, и серебряную — в командном (в команде была и её сестра — Мария де Лоурдес). После этого Мария дель Пилар занимала только первые места: национальные чемпионаты по фехтованию на рапирах, Панамериканские игры, открытый чемпионат США.
Мария стала лучшей рапиристкой Америки, но сильнейшие фехтовальщики мира жили в Европе, поэтому для подготовки к Олимпиаде-1960 Мария дель Пилар решила совершить тур по Европе. Она приняла участие в открытых первенствах Нидерландов и ФРГ, была 7-й на турнире в Париже, завоевала бронзовую медаль в Люксембурге. В 1960 году на Олимпиаде в Риме её было доверено стать знаменосцем сборной Мексики — это был первый случай в истории Олимпиад, когда национальный флаг несла женщина. Мария дель Пилар поставила своей целью на этих Играх прорваться в финальный раунд, и добилась её — в итоге она стала 7-й.
По возвращении в Мехико Мария дель Пилар вышла замуж за бизнесмена Хиффенига. В декабре 1961 года родился первый сын — Эдгар, а в 1963 — дочь Ингрид. Семья поддерживала Марию в её спортивных делах, и она продолжала завоёвывать медали на международных чемпионатах. В 1963 году стало известно, что Олимпиада-1968 пройдёт в Мехико. Тем большее разочарование вызвало известие о том, что на Олимпиаду-1964 Мексиканский олимпийский комитет решил не брать фехтовальщиков, так как «среди них нет того, кто мог бы достойно представить страну».
В 1965 году Мария дель Пилар для лучшей подготовки к Олимпиаде наняла польского тренера — Ежи Бочака. Он помог ей улучшить мастерство, и в 1966 году она завоевала золотую медаль Панамериканских игр. В итоге на Олимпиаде 1968 года она смогла завоевать серебряную медаль.
Ссылки
Интервью с Марией дель Пинар
Фехтовальщики Мексики
Серебряные призёры летних Олимпийских игр 1968 года
Фехтовальщики на летних Олимпийских играх 1956 года
Фехтовальщики на летних Олимпийских играх 1960 года
Фехтовальщики на летних Олимпийских играх 1968 года | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 9,665 |
Le Merle à dos gris (Turdus hortulorum) est une espèce de passereaux appartenant à la famille des Turdidae.
Habitat et répartition
Cet oiseau vit en Manchourie et régions limitrophes de Sibérie et de la péninsule coréenne ; il hiverne dans le sud-est de la Chine et le nord-est du Vietnam.
Son cadre de vie naturel est les forêts tempérées.
Liens externes
Turdidae | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 6,516 |
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Stellar clusters are ideal environments to investigate variability. Knowing the cluster characteristics (age, distance, reddening and chemical abundancies), it is possible to derive some basic properties of its individual members exhibiting variability, as well as their evolutionary status. Such combined studies provide additional information about stellar evolution processes, with respect to analyzing variable stars alone. In the domain of asteroseismology, for example, investigating pulsating variable stars in stellar clusters allows us to better constrain the modeling of the oscillation mode, and helps refine our understanding of the instability strip.
Conversely, variable stars can contribute to the characterization of their host cluster. Hence, if a stellar cluster is confirmed to contain RR Lyrae stars or Cepheids (whose period - luminosity relation makes them ideal standard candles), then it is possible to determine the distance and reddening of the cluster.
In this prospect, the Gaia ESA cornerstone mission, launched in December 2013, offers a unique opportunity to significantly change the landscape in both domains of stellar variability and stellar aggregates. During its 5-year lifetime, Gaia will survey about one billion objects over the entire sky, down to $G \approx 20$ mag ($G$ being the Gaia broad-band white light magnitude). Gaia's science data comprise micro-arcsecond global astrometry, photometry with standard errors at the milli-magnitude (mmag) level, and medium-resolution (resolving power $\sim 11,500$) spectroscopy down to $G \approx 17$ mag \citep{deBruijne2012}\footnote{For more information on Gaia performances, please see the Gaia webpage \url{http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/gaia/science-performance}}. This will represent a major census of stellars clusters, determining accurate distances for a few hundred of them in our Galaxy, and providing a complete list of their members.
The derived isochrones will enable to improve stellar models, and to learn more about stellar evolution, structure and atmospheres. In addition, by combining high-precision photometry with simultaneous astrometry and spectroscopy, Gaia will make a complete and homogeneous variability search possible, including low-amplitude variables. Hence, this mission will drastically increase the number of known variable stars.
The Gaia Nominal Scanning Law (NSL) involves fast observing cadences, with groups of nine consecutive CCD observations separated by about $4.85$s from each other, followed by gaps of 1h46min or 4h14min between two successive groups, where a group is referred to as field-of-view transit \citep{deBruijne2012}\footnote{For more information on the Gaia spacecraft, instruments and observing strategy, please see the Gaia webpage \url{http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/gaia/spacecraft-instruments}}. This time sampling enables the investigation of the rather unexplored domain of \textit{short timescale variability}, from tens of seconds to a dozen hours. A variety of astronomical objects are known to exhibit such rapid variations in their light-curve, whether periodic or transient, with amplitudes ranking from a few mmags to a few magnitudes. Some examples of short timescale variable types are listed in Table \ref{tab:varTypeListPeriodic}. However, only a small number of such objects are currently known, from a few tens to a few hundred sources depending on the variable type. This is the consequence of the inherent observational constraints when targeting fast variability, both in terms of time sampling and photometric precision, particularly if you are interested in low amplitudes variations. Thanks to Gaia capabilities, these numbers are going to be significantly increased, which will improve our knowledge and understanding of these specific sources, bringing invaluable clues in several fields of astrophysics (pulsation theories, distance estimates, physics of degenerate matter...).
As part of the Gaia Data Processing and Analysis Consortium \citep[DPAC,][]{Mignard2008}, within the Coordination Unit 7 \citep[CU7,][]{Eyer2015} whose activities are dedicated to the Variability Processing, our task is to develop, implement, test and apply methods for automated detection and characterization of short timescale variables with Gaia data.
Once these Gaia short timescale variable candidates are identified, supplementary ground-based observations will be performed in order to confirm the suspected variability. A specific workpackage of CU7 is dedicated to this aspect, and their activities contribute to the validation of the Gaia data prior to any public data release. Then, after Gaia data are made available to the whole community, ground-based follow-up of the detected short timescale variables will be performed to further characterize these objects. In this double perspective, we plan to perform a ground-based high cadence photometric follow-up of short timescale variable candidates detected by Gaia and belonging to stellar clusters. Thus, we develop a pipeline for reduction and analysis of the resulting photometric data, which will be observed with the $1.2$m Euler Swiss telescope (La Silla, Chile) and with the $1.2$m Mercator Flemish telescope (La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain).
In this work, we present the preparation of this combined analysis of short timescale variability, from Gaia data to ground-based observations. In section \ref{shortTimescaleGaia}, we investigate the power of Gaia for detecting short timescale variables, as well as the question of contamination by false positives. Section \ref{ePipe} is dedicated to the description of \textit{ePipe}, our reduction pipeline for the analysis of ground-based photometric observations. We show an example of what can be done with \textit{ePipe}, emphasizing on the complementarity between data from telescopes on Earth and Gaia data.
\section{Detection of short timescale variability with Gaia}
\label{shortTimescaleGaia}
Our goal is to assess Gaia capabilities in terms of short timescale variability detection, using Gaia per-CCD photometry in $G$ band. Our study is based on extensive light-curve simulations, for various types of short timescale variables. In this proceeding, we limit ourselves to the case of fast \textit{periodic} variability, with periods shorter than $0.5$d. Further analysis including \textit{transient} variability will be detailed in a future paper (Roelens et al., in prep.).
\subsection{The variogram method}
\label{shortTimescaleGaia_variogram}
As part of our activities within CU7, we are responsible for implementing an algorithm specifically dedicated to the automated detection of short timescale variables from Gaia photometry. The method we use for this purpose is the \textit{variogram method}, also known as the \textit{structure function method}. Its basic idea is to investigate astronomical light-curves for variability by quantifying the difference in magnitude between two measurements as function of the time lag between them. Given a time series of magnitudes $(m_{i})_{i=1..n}$ observed at times $(t_{i})_{i=1..n}$. The variogram value for a time lag $h$ is denoted by $\gamma(h)$. It is defined as the average of the squared difference in magnitude $(m_{j} - m_{i})^{2}$ computed on all pairs $(i, j)$ such that $\vert t_{j} - t_{i} \vert = h$. This formulation corresponds to the classical first order structure function as defined by \citet{Hughes1992}. By exploring different lag values, a \textit{variogram plot} associated to the time series can be built (referred to as variogram). This variogram provides information on how variable the considered source is, and on the characteristics of the variability when appropriate. Figure \ref{fig:typicalVariograms} shows typical variograms for a periodic or pseudo-periodic variable, and for a transient.
If the analyzed time series exhibits some variability, the expected features in the variogram are:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the shortest lags, a plateau at $\gamma \sim 2\sigma_{noise}^{2}$, where $\sigma_{noise}$ is the measurement noise.
\item Towards longer lags, an increase of the variogram values, followed by a second plateau at $\gamma \sim 2\sigma^{2}$, where $\sigma$ is the standard deviation of the time series.
\end{itemize}
If the underlying variation is periodic or pseudo-periodic, this second plateau is followed by a succession of dips. In the case of a transient, the second plateau can be followed by complex structures, like other plateaus or decreases in the variogram values, depending on the origin of the variability (stochasticity, flares, ...).
Indeed, the power of the variogram method relies on the fact that it can handle periodic variability as well as transient events. In addition, it provides an estimate of the characteristic variation timescale. Hence, for a transient, the typical timescale $\tau$ is of the order of the lag at which the variogram starts plateauing. As mentioned previously, there can be more than one plateau, indicating that the considered variability has several typical timescales. For a periodic variable, the position of the first dip after plateauing gives a rough estimate of the underlying period. We emphasize that we do not consider the variogram as a substitute to other period search methods, such as the Fourier based periodograms, which determine the period much more precisely in the case of strictly periodic variations. But it can be complementary to these periodograms, and for example help distinguish true period from aliases \citep[e.g., see ][]{Eyer1999}. Besides the variogram performs quite well with non-strictly periodic variability, where Fourier-based methods usually fail.
However, in this work we are only interested in the outcome of the variogram method in terms of variability detection. We do not present any result on characteristic timescale estimation. This analysis will be detailed in a future paper (Roelens et al., in prep.).
Suppose that a variogram similar to one of these in Figure \ref{fig:typicalVariograms} is derived from a light-curve observed by Gaia. We denote by $h_{k}$ the explored lags and by $\gamma(h_{k})$ the associated variogram values. The first step is to know whether the considered source is a true variable or not. In the Gaia context, several hundreds of thousands of light-curves will be investigated for short timescale variability. Thus, the detection of short timescale variable candidates should be performed in an automated way.
One possible criterion to distinguish constant sources from variable ones, according to their variograms, is to fix a detection threshold $\gamma_{det}$ such that:
\begin{itemize}
\item If for at least one lag $h_{k}$ you have $\gamma(h_{k}) > \gamma_{det}$ then your source is flagged as variable,
\item If for all lags you have $\gamma(h_{k}) < \gamma_{det}$ then your source is flagged as constant.
\end{itemize}
$\gamma_{det}$ defines the variance value above which you consider that the variability in the signal is sufficiently significant not to be due to noise only. Depending on the chosen value, the definition of what is "real" variability is more or less restrictive.
For the sources identified as variable, we define the \textit{detection timescale} $\tau_{det}$ as the smallest lag for which
$\gamma(\tau_{det}) > \gamma_{det}$. $\tau_{det}$ is characteristic of the underlying variability in the light-curve, and quantifies the associated variation rate. The shorter the detection timescale, the higher the change in magnitude per unit time.
\subsection{Simulated short timescale variable light-curves}
\label{shortTimescaleGaia_simus}
In order to evaluate the power of the variogram method for detecting short timescale variables with Gaia, we decided to simulate extensive light-curve sets for different types of such astronomical objects. The main purpose of these simulations is to mimic how variability is seen through the eyes of Gaia. As mentioned before, we focused only on periodic variables. The short timescale variable types that we simulate are listed in Table \ref{tab:varTypeListPeriodic}, together with the corresponding period and amplitude ranges. Note that the word "amplitude" refers to the peak-to-peak amplitude of the variation. In this work, all the simulated variables have periods shorter than $0.5$d.
The simulation principle we used for generating periodic light-curves is the following one. First, we build empirical, phase-folded, normalized templates, from observed light-curves found in the literature with relevant period and amplitude information. Figure \ref{fig:dsctTemplate} represents an example of a $\delta$ Scuti template, retrieved from ASAS-3 catalogue\footnote{\url{http://www.astrouw.edu.pl/asas/?page=catalogues}} of variable stars \citep{Pojmanski2002}. The second ingredient of our recipe is the magnitude of the source we want to simulate. We take it randomly between $8$ and $20$ mag, which are approximately the bright and faint end of the Gaia $G$ photometry for most objects of interest. Finally, we choose the period $P$ and amplitude $A$ of the simulated variable star. To make our simulations realistic, when possible we draw the couple ($P$, $A$) from empirical period-amplitude probability distributions, retrieved from existing variable star catalogues. An example of such a 2D probability distribution can be found in Figure \ref{fig:dsctPAdistrib}. If there is not enough information in literature, we randomly draw the period and amplitude in the appropriate ranges given in Table \ref{tab:varTypeListPeriodic}. Once we have all these ingredients, we scale the phase-folded template at the proper amplitude A. Then we generate the observing time values, following the appropriate time sampling and over the required time step, and we convert them into phases according to the simulation period P. Finally, we compute the magnitudes corresponding to each observing time from the scaled template.
For our analysis, we generate two different types of light-curves:
\begin{itemize}
\item The \textit{continuous} light-curves, noiseless, with a very tight and perfectly regular time sampling, over a timespan $\Delta t \sim 5P$ where $P$ is the period of the simulation. The continuous data set is used to assess what we could detect in an ideal situation. It comprises 100 distinct simulations for each of the 8 variable types listed in Table \ref{tab:varTypeListPeriodic}.
\item The \textit{Gaia-like} light-curves, corresponding to the same variables as in the continuous data set (same period, amplitude and magnitude), but this time with a time sampling following the Gaia NSL, and adding noise according to a magnitude-error distribution retrieved from real Gaia data. The timespan is of the order of five years, which is the nominal duration of the Gaia mission.
\end{itemize}
The left panels of Figures \ref{fig:dsct84continuous} and \ref{fig:dsct84gaialike} show the two light-curves obtained for the same $\delta$ Scuti star, one simulated in the continuous way, and the other simulated in the Gaia-like way.
\subsection{Variogram analysis on the continuous data set}
\label{shortTimescaleGaia_analyseCont}
For each simulated continuous light-curve, we calculated the associated theoretical variogram, for the appropriate lag values defined by the underlying time sampling (i.e. explored lags are multiples of the time step $\delta t$). Figure \ref{fig:dsct84continuous} represents an example of such light-curve and variogram. Then, we applied the short timescale variability detection criterion described in section \ref{shortTimescaleGaia_variogram}, with $\gamma_{det} = 10^{-3}\mathrm{mag}^{2}$. As shown in right panel of Figure \ref{fig:dsct84continuous}, our $\delta$ Scuti example is detected, with a detection timescale $\tau_{det,continuous} \simeq 10^{-2.2} \mathrm{d} \simeq 9.1\mathrm{min}$.
Among the 800 periodic variable simulations in the continuous data set, 603 (75.4\%) are flagged as short timescale variables with our criterion, and 197 (24.6\%) are missed. The main discriminating criterion between the detected and the not detected objects is the input amplitude $A$ of the simulation (see Figure \ref{fig:histAcontinuous}). With our choice of $\gamma_{det}$, the smallest amplitude detected is $A \simeq 0.043\mathrm{mag}$. The overlap visible between the two distributions, in the top-left panel of Figure \ref{fig:histAcontinuous}, mostly corresponds to AM CVn simulations. Indeed, AM CVn eclipses are very fast. Thus, in our simulations we have much fewer measurements sampling the eclipses than the quiescence stage, which produces variogram values lower than expected. Consequently, higher amplitudes are required for AM CVn stars to be flagged as variable than for the other variable types. This effect is clearly visible if we compare the amplitude distributions of detected and not detected variables, for AM CVn simulations only (top-right panel of Figure \ref{fig:histAcontinuous}), and for all simulated types but AM CVn (bottom panel of Figure \ref{fig:histAcontinuous}). All in all, with $\gamma_{det} = 10^{-3} \mathrm{mag}^{2}$, the amplitude limits for detecting short timescale variables in an ideal noiseless case are:
\begin{itemize}
\item $A \gtrsim 0.14$ mag for AM CVn stars,
\item $A \gtrsim 0.046$ mag for the seven other types simulated.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Variogram analysis on the Gaia-like data set}
\label{shortTimescaleGaia_analyseGaia}
Our analysis of the continuous data set (section \ref{shortTimescaleGaia_analyseCont}) reveals that, with the detection criterion applied, ideally we should detect any short period ZZ Ceti, $\beta$ Cephei, $\delta$ Scuti, RR Lyrae and eclipsing binary with amplitude above $0.046$ mag, and any AM CVn star with amplitude above $0.14$ mag. But what happens if we move to the Gaia-like sampling?
Similarly to what we did for the continuous data set, we computed the variogram associated with each simulated Gaia-like light-curve. This time, the lags explored are defined by the Gaia NSL, namely the time intervals between CCD measurements ($4.85$s, $9.7$s, $14.6$s, $19.4$s, $24.3$s, $29.2$s, $34$s, $38.8$s), and these between the different transits ($1$h$46$min, $4$h$14$min, $6$h, $7$h$46$ etc...), up to $h \simeq 1.5$d. Note that no lag can be explored from about 40s to 1h46min, which may have consequences on the detectability of some sources and on their detection timescale. Then, we applied our detection criterion, keeping $\gamma_{det} = 10^{-3}\mathrm{mag}^{2}$.
Figure \ref{fig:dsct84gaialike} shows the Gaia-like light-curve and associated observational variogram, for the same simulated $\delta$ Scuti as in Figure \ref{fig:dsct84continuous}. As it can be seen, this $\delta$ Scuti star is also detected in the Gaia-like data set, with $\tau_{det,Gaia-like} \simeq 1$h$46$min. The detection timescale is longer in the Gaia-like case than in the continuous case, which is somehow expected: indeed, $\tau_{det,continous}$ falls in the lag gap mentioned above, hence in the Gaia-like framework the detection is pushed towards longer lags.
Among the 800 Gaia-like simulations of short period variables, 606 (75.8\%) are detected, and 194 (24.2\%) are missed. In Table \ref{tab:continuousVSgaialike}, we compare the detection results in the continuous data set to the detection results in the Gaia-like data set. Most of what we expected to detect from the ideal case is detected in the Gaia-like data set. Similarly, most of what should not be detected according to the continuous data set analysis is not detected in the Gaia-like data set. Only a few sources are flagged variable in one data set and not in the other. After further investigation of these specific cases, we found that the three sources detected in the continuous data set and not in the Gaia-like one are all AM CVn stars, with very few points sampling their eclipses in the Gaia-like light-curves. Hence their variability is missed by Gaia. Moreover, the six sources not detected in the continuous data set and detected in the Gaia-like one are variables with input amplitude just below the amplitude limit. The addition of noise in the light-curve slightly increases their variogram values, and pushes them above the detection limit.
As a conclusion, the variogram method applied to Gaia-like light-curves allows a good recovery of short period variables, with respect to what is expected from the ideal case.
However, ensuring that short timescale periodic variables can be detected by Gaia is necessary, but not sufficient. We also have to make sure that our method limits the number of false detections, for true variables not mixed with an overflow of false positives. Thus, we completed our Gaia-like data set with 1000 simulations of constant stars, with magnitude between $8$ and $20$ mag. Once again, we calculated the associated observational variograms, and applied the detection criterion. Finally, 81 of the simulated constant sources are flagged as short timescale variables, which represents a rate of 8.1\% false positives. As one can see in Figure \ref{fig:histMagConstants}, all the false detections correspond to sources fainter than $\sim 18.5$ mag. At this faint end of Gaia G photometry, the noise measurement level gets close to the limit fixed by our detection threshold. Thus the value of $\gamma_{det}$ used for our analysis is not adapted for faint sources. Hence, the next step will be to refine our choice of $\gamma_{det}$, eventually with different values depending on the average magnitude of the source. The goal will be to find a proper balance between an acceptable rate of false positives, and an optimized detection of as many short period variables as possible.
\section{ePipe: a pipeline for ground-based follow-up of variable stars}
\label{ePipe}
In section \ref{shortTimescaleGaia}, we showed that Gaia data are promising in the exploration of the domain of short timescale periodic variability. By the end of the nominal mission, Gaia will provide several tens of thousands of short timescale variable candidates, together with a lot of homogeneous information about each of these objects, thanks to its simultaneous astrometric, photometric and spectroscopic measurements. However, although Gaia will be very complete, particularly in terms of fraction of variable objects detected, supplementary observations of such candidates will be necessary. It will allow us to confirm the suspected variability and / or to further characterize these variable sources.
In this perspective, we plan to perform photometric ground-based follow-up of short timescale variable stars detected in stellar clusters by Gaia. We will observe them with the Euler telescope in La Silla (Chile), and the Mercator telescope in La Palma (Canary Islands, Spain), ensuring a coverage of both northern and southern skies. During the last few months, we have been developing a pipeline, named \textit{ePipe}, for reduction and analysis of high cadence photometry from Euler and Mercator telescopes. \textit{ePipe} performs classical photometric reduction (i.e. bias substraction and flat field division), as well as astrometry and source detection on the reduced science images. It can also produce aperture photometry for the detected sources, and differential photometry of stellar clusters if a list of reference sources is provided \citep{Saesen2010}.
\textit{ePipe} can process hundreds of observations of stellar clusters or individual sources, and return the corresponding light-curve in apparent magnitude or in differential magnitude. In the future, we will enrich the pipeline with specific tools dedicated to variability analysis: the variogram method, adapted to the specificities of ground-based high cadence follow-up, as well as Fourier techniques for period and amplitude determination.
Though we have not found Gaia short timescale variable candidates yet, we already use \textit{ePipe} for the Gaia data, in the frame of the Gaia Science Alerts \citep{Hodgkin2013,Wyrzykowski2016}. As part of Gaia DPAC, the Gaia Science Alerts (GSA) group, mostly based in Cambridge (UK), is in charge of rapid analysis of daily Gaia data deliveries, in order to announce transient objects observed by Gaia. The GSA team identify and classify either new sources which were not visible in previous scans, or old sources experiencing a sudden brightening or darkening. GSA has started routine operation in July 2014, and alerts are publicly reported on the GSA webpage\footnote{\url{http://gaia.ac.uk/selected-gaia-science-alerts}}. To fully exploit their scientify potential, these transient objects require immediate additional observations from the ground, including multiband photometric follow-up. Hence, when an observer involved in the GSA working group has time on a telescope from which a recent alert is visible, the target can be confirmed and characterized doing photometry and spectroscopy. Then, follow-up data are sent for automated calibration to the Cambridge Photometric Calibration Server\footnote{\url{http://gsaweb.ast.cam.ac.uk/followup/}}, and published in the photometric alerts webpage\footnote{hhtp://gsaweb.ast.cam.ac.uk/alerts/home} together with the Gaia data.
In this context, we had several opportunities to observe Gaia Science Alerts during our own observing runs at the Euler and Mercator telescopes. In April 2016, we followed the candidate supernova \textit{Gaia16ali} with the ECAM camera at the Euler telescope in La Silla (Chile). We obtained one image per night with the modified Gunn R passband, during five nights. We reduced each image with \textit{ePipe} immediately after being observed. Figure \ref{fig:Gaia16aliSDSS} shows the SDSS image of the sky around \textit{Gaia16ali}. Figure \ref{fig:Gaia16aliECAM} represents one of our ECAM image of \textit{Gaia16ali} after reduction. Whereas nothing appears at the position of the detected science alert in the SDSS image, a bright source is clearly visible in our ECAM image. Figure \ref{fig:Gaia16aliLC} shows the light-curve of \textit{Gaia16ali} as one can find it in the alert webpage\footnote{\url{http://gsaweb.ast.cam.ac.uk/alerts/alert/Gaia16ali/}}, combining Gaia measurements and our data. Our reaction time was fast enough to the publication of this alert to catch the rising phase of the supernova. With our observations, we confirmed \textit{Gaia16ali} as a supernova candidate, which has been reported in an astronomical telegram \citep[ATel,][]{Roelens2016}\footnote{\url{www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=8980}}.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclu}
In this work, we present our preliminary results for the study of short timescale variability in stellar clusters, combining Gaia data and ground-based follow-ups.
By means of extensive light-curve simulations, we assessed the power of Gaia for detecting variability at typical timescales shorter than a dozen of hours. We showed that, in that prospect, the variogram method applied to the Gaia per-CCD photometry is a promising approach, and ensures the recovery of short period variables with amplitudes above $0.046$ mag ($0.14$ mag for AM CVn stars), with a 8\% rate of false positives. In the future, we will focus on the refinement of our technique to reduce this rate. We already tested the variogram method on some real Gaia light-curves, observed during the first month of nominal science operations, in summer 2014, and more data are currently analyzed.
Once the Gaia short timescale variable candidates will be identified, we will follow-up from ground the members of stellar clusters, firstly to confirm them and validate the future published data in the frame of the DPAC activities, secondly in the perspective of scientific exploitation of Gaia, to further characterize these specific objects. The photometric reduction pipeline we developed in this context, named \textit{ePipe}, is now ready for such a study. We already use \textit{ePipe} in the frame of the GSA photometric follow-up, demonstrating the important synergy between Gaia and ground-based observations. In the future, \textit{ePipe} will implement additional methods specifically dedicated to variability analysis.
\bibliographystyle{cs19proc}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 9,574 |
By: Blake Crouch
Narrated by: Jeffrey Kafer
A Thriller
Narrated by: Phil Gigante
Five days ago a rash of bizarre murders swept the country. Senseless. Brutal. Seemingly unconnected. A cop walked into a nursing home and unloaded his weapons on elderly and staff alike. A mass of school shootings. Prison riots of unprecedented brutality. Mind-boggling acts of violence in every state. Four Days Ago the murders increased ten-fold. Three days ago the President addressed the nation and begged for calm and peace. Two days ago the killers began to mobilize. Yesterday all the power went out. Tonight....
Good story Bad performance
By D. Watson on 13-06-20
Revised Edition
Narrated by: Luke Daniels
On Christmas Day in 1893, every man, woman, and child in a remote gold-mining town disappeared, belongings forsaken, meals left to freeze in vacant cabins - and not a single bone was ever found.
Turned me into the walking dead for three days. Had to listen to it.
By I. Burke on 14-11-16
Narrated by: Jon Lindstrom, Abby Craden
All across the country, people are waking up to lives different than the ones they fell asleep to. Are they suffering from False Memory Syndrome, a mysterious, new disease that afflicts people with vivid memories of a life they never lived? Or is something far more sinister behind the fracturing of reality all around him? Miles away, neuroscientist Helena Smith is developing a technology that allows us to preserve our most intense memories and relive them. If she succeeds, anyone will be able to re-experience a first kiss, the birth of a child, the final moment with a dying parent.
Crouch Hones His Craft!
By Simon on 18-06-19
Thicker than Blood
The Complete Andrew Z. Thomas Trilogy
Narrated by: Eric G. Dove
Andrew Z. Thomas is a successful writer of suspense thrillers, living the dream at his lake house in the piedmont of North Carolina. One afternoon in late spring, he receives a bizarre letter that eventually threatens his career, his sanity, and the lives of everyone he loves. A murderer is designing his future, and for the life of him, Andrew can't get away.
Graphically violent - and non-returnable
By MillyMoo on 19-03-20
Seven years ago, suspense novelist Andrew Thomas' life was shattered when he was framed for a series of murders. The killer's victims were unearthed on Andrew's lakefront property, and since he was wanted by the FBI, Andrew had no choice but to flee and to create a new identity. Andrew does just that in a cabin tucked away in the remote wilderness near Haines Junction, Yukon. His only link to society is by email, through which he learns that all the people he ever loved are being stalked and murdered.
By Dean on 18-09-17
Narrated by: Jon Lindstrom
'Are you happy in your life?' Those are the last words Jason Dessen hears before the masked abductor knocks him unconscious. Before he wakes to find himself strapped to a gurney, surrounded by strangers in hazmat suits. Before the man he's never met smiles down at him and says, 'Welcome back, my friend.' In this world he's woken up to, Jason's life is not the one he knows. His wife is not his wife. His son was never born. And Jason is not an ordinary college physics professor but a celebrated genius who has achieved something remarkable. Something impossible.
gripping, fast paced, extremely enjoyable
By anon on 03-01-17
Break You
Somehow, Luther Kite has found them. Following the events of Desert Places and Locked Doors, Andy Thomas and Violet King are hiding out in the wilds of northern Canada, where Violet has a four-month-old son and a burgeoning romance with Andy. On a cold, rainy night at their cabin in the woods, the promise of an idyllic life that seems just around the corner is shattered when a man from their past, a monster of pure malevolence, returns.
Desert Places
Greetings. There is a body buried on your property, covered in your blood. The unfortunate young lady's name is Rita Jones. In her jeans pocket you'll find a slip of paper with a phone number on it. Call that number. If I have not heard from you by 8:00 P.M., the police will receive an anonymous call. I'll tell them where Rita Jones is buried on your property, how you killed her, and where the murder weapon can be found in your house. (I do believe a paring knife is missing from your kitchen.)
By Paul C. on 24-02-17
Origins of a D-List Supervillain
By: Jim Bernheimer
Even D-list supervillains have to start somewhere. Follow Cal Stringel's misadventures as he climbs to the lowest levels of supervillany in the prequel to the smash hit, Confessions of a D-List Supervillain. Angry that he wouldn't be known as the engineer who made Ultraweapon's force blasters, Cal resigns to chase after a bigger, better paycheck. However, the Promethia Corporation isn't going to let him go that easily and sets out to make his life a living hell.
Anti-hero/supervillain
By Helen on 11-07-17
A Supervillain Novel (Whoosh! Bam! Pow! Book 1)
By: James Maxey
Narrated by: Emerson Hardy
Sundancer is a militant radical who channels the heat and light of the sun, capable of melting steel and vaporizing anyone who stands in her way. Pit Geek is seemingly immortal, able to survive any injury, but haunted by fragmented memories. Together, these supervillains launch a crime spree bold enough to threaten the world's economy. To stop them, the government authorizes a new band of superheroes known as the Covenant to hunt down the menaces.
By ThatPerson on 23-03-21
A House by the Sea
Winthrop House, Book 1
By: Ambrose Ibsen
Narrated by: James Foster
After his book becomes a best seller, novelist Jack Ripley moves into a house on the edge of Cutler Harbor with his wife and two daughters. Nearly a century old, Winthrop House is newly-restored and boasts a gorgeous oceanfront view. But everything is not what it seems. Though picturesque, Jack learns that the house has been shunned for decades by the locals, owing to a number of mysterious disappearances and inexplicable deaths on the grounds.
Just bad
By Emma on 09-10-20
By: Jeremy Robinson
In the middle of the night, an explosion rocks Cambridge, Massachusetts and wakes Saul Signalman from bed. Blue, ethereal light pulses into the sky. A FaceTime call pulls him away from the view. It's his wife, consumed in light, bidding him farewell. And then - the call ends. The explosion of light intensifies. The power goes out. Electronic devices stop working. In the dead of night, he races to his wife's lab at the explosion's core, but the building is missing. His wife is gone.
By Ian on 28-10-19
For Will Innis and his daughter, Devlin, the loss was catastrophic. Every day for the past five years, they wonder where she is, if she is - Will's wife, Devlin's mother - because Rachael Innis vanished one night during an electrical storm on a lonely desert highway, and suspected of her death, Will took his daughter and fled.
Now, Will and Devlin live under different names in another town, having carved out a new life for themselves as they struggle to maintain some semblance of a family.
When, one night, a beautiful, hard-edged FBI agent appears on their doorstep, they fear the worst. But she hasn't come to arrest Will. "I know you're innocent," she tells him, "because Rachael wasn't the first...or the last."
Desperate for answers, Will and Devlin embark on a terrifying journey that spans 4,000 miles from the desert southwest to the wilds of Alaska, heading unaware into the heart of a nightmare, because the truth is infinitely worse than they ever imagined.
©2010 Blake Crouch (P)2014 Blake Crouch
Horror Suspense
Recursión
Stars End: The Complete Series Box Set
Backyard Starship
Red Bounty
What listeners say about Snowbound
Da Savage
Had to turn it off
This has potential to be a great listen. It starts off great; very pacy, well read and suspenseful. However, about half way through when you realise what has been happening to these women it becomes too awful to enjoy. I stopped listening as the pregnant lady was about to get raped.
Good. worth a read. but not the best
would make good TV movie, but it's not feature film material. it's a good thriller, but nothing new in here. well read by Jeff Kafer, I love all his work.
Exciting right to the end !
Exciting and different, keeping you hooked to the very end.
Brutal and frightening too but I did enjoy it
horsestuff
Some problems in story but gripping anyway
The storyline was a little hard to swallow but I literally didn't put the 'book' down until it was over. A lot of 'aww come on now" moments when people bounced back from horrific assaults to their bodies, or ventured into life threatening situations w no apparent fear but overall a fun gripping read.
If you could sum up Snowbound in three words, what would they be?
Will he seemed like a real person facing real life situations.
What about Jeffrey Kafer's performance did you like?
I loved his performance it was great!!! I cannot wait to listen to something else he does
I could almost see the people and feel the cold and the heat and the fear. I enjoyed this story and story teller alot
Evergreen Soul
Better Than A Good Movie!
This audiobook is the best of Blake Crouch's I have listened to yet. The narration is outstanding as well. Very intense, suspenseful, yet realistic, you'll be entertained to the end - never ever dull or slow!
Did the plot keep you on the edge of your seat? How?
Crouch throws you curves you don't see coming even when you expect one! This is a great story, narrated very well.
I'm not able to tell you why Kafer is good - just that he IS. Narrators either make or break a good book...this is a "make."
It is the kind of story that you recall for days or weeks to come.
Listen & Enjoy Blake Crouch. He is now absolutely one of my all time favorite in his genre...thriller, suspense.
cynthia jones
Fast pace non stop action.
This book captured me from the start.. I love Blake Crouch but this one is my favorite. I did not want the action to end. This book kept you guessing trying to figure out who is really a good guy . This is my summer favorite
NOT THE PIECE OF COMFORT PIE YOU WERE LOOKING FOR
THE BEAUTIFUL THING ABOUT A 12 GAUGE, IS YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A GREAT SHOT.
Extremely entertaining from start to finish. A strong female lead who may or may not be a good guy. A few twists and a mystery that needs solved. This book starts in Arizona goes through Canada and ends up in the middle of nowhere Alaska. It involves a family man lawyer, a former FBI agent, a teenager with Cystic Fibrosis, a rogue special forces group that goes bad, a truck driver and the Alaskan Mob. What's not to like? The rating is a little low in this because some women who didn't read the reviews and who had absolutely no idea what they were getting into rated the book. This is a shoot-em up mystery that involves lots of sex and violence and I don't believe the author has tried to hide that at anytime. It is also written by Blake Crouch, who is famous for this type of book.
THE LEATHERING OF HER FACE
The book has flaws and is a little unbelievable in parts. A father taking his child into some very dangerous situations, one too many twists (as mentioned by other reviewers), people getting the crap beat out of them or frost bitten or chewed up by wolves and then coming back from the dead so to speak to kick ass (as mentioned by other reviewers). For me the entertainment value, the fast pace, the evil characters, and the real feeling of what it might be like to lose a loved one in this way, over shadowed the flaws and kept the book at a five star rating for me. I am really liking the books I have read by Crouch so far and will listen to more. I see too, I believe they have made a series on one of the channels about his Pines series. I hope to catch that.
Jeffrey Kafer does a great job and belongs in one of the top two tiers of narrators.
Wade Lancaster
One of his best
For me Crouch is hit or miss and this one is a definite hit. The characters are engaging and the story zips along with no dull moments. Everything about this novel hits the mark.
Jumped The Shark, But fun
Snowbound had gigantic plot holes, required a large amount of suspension of disbelief (such as why these criminals went to such enormous cost and effort for what was essentially a house of prostitution), and yet was totally fun as I just went along for the ride.
Too many "Huh?" to count, but with engaging characters, an excellent narrator and a fast-moving plot with a cool ending, I really enjoyed it.
This was a good story but parts reminded me of a fast action film, some parts are a little improbable, however, it was an interesting mystery with a surprising ending.
When a new lead in a very cold case arises a man and his daughter set out on a hopeful journey to find their missing wife and mother, who mysteriously disappeared five years earlier. I Think our society has far too many twisted people in it, the depths of human depravity are astounding.
Jeffrey Kafer's narration was done very well and it definitely helped to keep my attention on the story. Good well rounded characters with believable personalities. Fast moving, with thorough but not over done descriptions of places and surroundings.
Great, but one too many plot twists
This book starts fairly slow but picks up the pace rapidly. Once you start its hard to put down ( or stop listening). Having lost his wife and not sure she is dead or alive, Will Innis must run away because he assumes he will be the most likely suspects in his wife disappearance. (Just like the husband in Gone Girl). He is put on the hunt for his wife by a rogue FBI agent and then the action never stops. The plot is highly believable and keeps you guessing.
I would have given this one more star except for the ending. The author insists on one more plot twist (won't give away) that is unnecessary. If I had edited this book I would have cut last chapter. However, this is a great thriller and worth the credit. I would compare it to Gone Girl. Slightly more violent though. I can see this being a movie some day.
The Narration was 5 stars. Narrator handles both men's and women's voices quite well.
ElleOregon
Excellent novel..one of the best mysteries around
I very much enjoyed listening to this narration of a great mystery. This was one of those books that seem written to be narrated for an audio book and the narrator was the perfect choice for it.
Highly recommended for those who enjoy mysteries | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8 |
#
#
contents
Asia's Best-kept Culinary Secret 7
Essential Filipino Ingredients 12
[Cooking Utensils and Techniques 18
](../Text/cooking.xhtml)
20 Basic Recipes
Garlic Mayonnaise Dip 20
Vinegar Garlic Sauce 20
Sweet and Spicy Sauce 21
Pickled Green Papaya 21
Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce 21
Sweet Garlic Sauce 21
Sweet and Sour Sauce 21
Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce 22
Tomato and Salted Egg Salad 22
Salted Eggs 22
Crispy Fried Garlic 23
Liver Paste 23
Perfect Steamed Rice 23
24 Chapter 1
Appetizers and Snacks
Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips 26
Crunchy Fried Squid 27
Chicken Tamales 28
Chicken Empanadas 29
Pan de Sal Bread Rolls 30
Spring Rolls 31
Fresh Pork Salad Rolls 32
Crispy Fried Fishballs 33
Papaya Shrimp Fritters 33
34 Chapter 2
Soups
Fish Soup with Miso Dip 36
Wonton Soup 37
Sinigang Shrimp Soup 39
Macaroni Soup 39
Noodle Soup with All the Trimmings 40
Quick Eggdrop Chicken Noodle Soup 41
Chicken Soup with Green Papaya 42
Pork and Corn Soup 43
Pork Soup with Squash 43
44 Chapter 3
Meat Dishes
Roasted Marinated Pork 46
Sweet Soy Pork with Black Beans 47
Crispy Lechon Pork 48
Glazed Christmas Ham with Pineapple 49
Fiery Pork Stew with Coconut 49
Traditional Tocino Bacon 50
Pork and Tomato Stew 51
Filipino Beef Steak 53
Kaldereta Beef Stew 53
Marinated Morcon Stuffed Beef Roll 55
Oxtail Vegetable Stew 56
Stuffed Meatloaf with Cheese and Sausage 57
58 Chapter 4
Poultry Dishes
Chicken and Vegetables in Tangy Tomato Sauce 60
Barbecued Chicken Skewers 61
Coconut Chicken with Pineapple 62
Tangy Asado Chicken 63
Chicken Adobo 64
Filipino Fried Chicken 65
Chicken Stew with Vegetables 66
Classic Filipino Chicken Pot Pie 67
68 Chapter 5
Seafood Dishes
Sautéed Squid 70
Sautéed Marinated Clams 71
Fried Whole Fish with Eggs 73
Sautéed Shrimp with Long Beans 73
Fried Marinated Fish 74
Sweet and Sour Fish 75
Piquant Fish Stew 75
Stuffed Crabs 76
Filipino Ceviche 77
78 Chapter 6
Vegetables
Pinakbet (Mixed Vegetables with Anchovy Sauce) 80
Mung Bean and Spinach Stew 81
Braised Chayote with Shrimp 81
Banana Blossom with Shrimp 82
Stuffed Eggplant 83
Sautéed Corn with Shrimp 84
Filipino Spinach and Egg Salad 85
86 Chapter 7
Rice and Noodle Dishes
Cuban Rice with Ground Beef 88
Kapampangan Paella 89
Filipino–Style Seafood Paella 90
Fried Rice with Egg 91
Rice Porridge with Chicken 92
Fried Rice Noodles 93
Noodles with Shrimp and Tofu 94
Sautéed Bean Thread Noodles 95
96 Chapter 8
Desserts and Beverages
Sweet Coconut Milk Delight 98
Champorado (Chocolate Rice Porridge) 98
Sweet Purple Yam Pudding 99
Sweet Rice Cakes with Fried Coconut Topping 100
Pulburon (Toasted Butter Cookies) 100
Egg Yolk Treats 101
Sweet Banana and Jackfruit Rolls 102
Bibingka (Coconut Sponge Cakes) 103
Halo-halo (Mixed Fruits and Shaved Ice Parfait) 104
Filipino Hot Chocolate 105
Rice Cakes with Sweet Coconut Filling 105
Iced Tapioca Pearl and Jelly Drink 106
Sweet Mango Juice 107
Tangy Green Mango Juice 107
Healthy Ginger Tea 107
Filipino Leche Flan 108
Index 110
Resource Guide 112
#
Filipino Cooking:
Asia's Best-kept Culinary Secret
My adventure with Filipino cooking began when I lived in Manila and in rural Iba (in Zambales Province) for about a year in the 1990s. I had always loved the country and the people of these tropical islands; however, it was only after living there for several years that I discovered and grew to love the amazing variety of foods that the Philippines has to offer. When I met and later married my Filipino husband, my love of the cuisine was further strengthened since he was from the province
of Pampanga in Central Luzon, which is considered by most Filipinos to have some of the best cooking in the nation.
Kapampangans—as the people from Pampanga are called in Filipino—are skilled cooks and spend a great deal of their time preparing fine dishes and sharing sumptuous meals with relatives and friends. When not cooking, the Kapampangans are generally thinking about what to prepare for their next meal. This great passion for food and attention to detail means that my husband loves to spend time in the kitchen, and even when I am cooking he likes to interrupt me and often offers to take over, especially if he feels I'm not doing things correctly the "Kapampangan way." Due to this, I can truly say that his Kapampangan food culture has thoroughly rubbed off on me over the years.
Even though we have lived in many other countries of Asia and Europe and now live in America, I prefer to cook Filipino dishes whenever we entertain because I find that everybody loves the food. Over the years I have scribbled enough recipes to fill up several notebooks. For many years, I tried to find a cookbook of Kapampangan and other regional Filipino recipes that would satisfy the discriminating tastes of our Filipino friends and relatives, but I could never find one. I ended up asking my foodie friends and relatives for their favorite recipes, trying them out whenever I could, and, through trial and error, compiling a large collection of recipes that seem to exemplify the best dishes and flavors from all parts of the archipelago. Thus, this cookbook, the result of that effort, reflects the very best of Filipino cooking, and the recipes encompass a large selection of traditional and authentic dishes that can be enjoyed by anyone on any occasion and are accessible to Filipinos and non-Filipinos alike.
Filipino cuisine is one of the best-kept culinary secrets in Asia. Unlike Japanese, Chinese or Thai food, its dishes are not readily available in restaurants. Filipinos love to entertain in large groups and have a tradition of throwing large and loud parties at home. And so it is only in Filipino homes—wherever they are around the world—that can one find truly authentic Filipino cuisine.
Like other cuisines, Filipino cooking reveals a great deal about the history and geography of the place from which it sprang and the people who created it. The dishes were not developed in the kitchens of royal palaces or by wealthy aristocrats, and nor is there a long tradition of dining out in restaurants. The food is instead the creation of the common folk. In short, Filipino cuisine is the everyday "people's food." Its dishes are prepared to be enjoyed by everyone whenever there is a reason or occasion to gather and celebrate. Filipinos view food primarily as a means of connecting with family and friends rather than an end in itself.
One of the things I love about Filipino cuisine is its simplicity. By and large, the dishes do not require any special utensils, there are no complicated techniques, and it does not use many exotic or expensive ingredients. Most of all, preparation times are short since it's often too hot and humid in the Philippines to spend very much time in the kitchen!
The ingredients required to make Filipino dishes are, for the most part, very easy to find. Expatriate Filipino communities, and markets catering to their needs, have sprung up in many urban areas around the world. In addition, a large number of Filipino ingredients originally came from the New World (brought over by the Spanish from Mexico) and can now be found in most large and well-stocked supermarkets (see pages 12–17 for a list of Essential Filipino Ingredients).
The Filipino national cuisine is an amalgamation of many different regional styles from the various islands as well as many historical influences from abroad. The Filipinos themselves describe their cuisine as sari-sari (varied) and halohalo (mixed) because of the wide array of influences found even within a single meal. Filipino cooking can truly be considered a melting pot, deeply influenced by over 100 different island ethnic groups as well as by settlers from all parts of Asia, and by the Spanish and American colonizers.
The native inhabitants of the islands are known as Aetas, who still live in the mountains of Luzon and Mindanao. They are believed to share the same ancestry as the aboriginals of Australia and the Papuans of New Guinea. The arrival of the Malayo-Polynesian peoples from the Asian mainland via Taiwan 6,000 years ago drove them into the mountains, and Malayo-Polynesians are now the predominant inhabitants of the Philippines. Their cooking styles involve the preparation of foods by boiling, roasting and steaming using coconut milk and peanut oil. The roasting of a whole pig, known as Lechon, is believed to be an ancient Polynesian practice.
Regular contacts with the Chinese also influenced Filipino cuisine. Chinese traders, who visited and settled on the islands from the fifth century onward, brought their culinary techniques and ingredients. Fried Rice Noodles (page 93) and Spring Rolls (page 31) are two typical Filipino dishes with their roots
in China. Many of the typical Filipino sawsawan, or dipping sauces, are also of Chinese origin. Prior to the arrival of the Spanish, the islands were also visited by Arab, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese, Javanese, Cambodian, Indian and Portuguese traders. Each of these cultures subtly influenced the evolution of the local cuisine.
The Spanish colonization of the Philippines in the sixteenth century lasted for 300 years and brought significant Spanish and Mexican influence, via Spain's colonization of that country, to the food culture of the islands. Located on the vital sea routes of Asia, the Philippines became a lucrative trading port for the Spanish. In exchange for sugar and other local products, the Spanish brought chili peppers, tomatoes, corn, cacao and potatoes from the New World. It is said that as many as 80 percent of local Filipino dishes have some Spanish or Mexican influence, either because of their ingredients or because they are local adaptations of original Spanish or Mexican dishes.
Many Chinese dishes that were introduced during the Spanish colonial times were given Spanish names. For example, the ever-popular Chinese rice congee was given the name Arroz Caldo (Rice Porridge with Chicken, page 92), while Chinese-style fried rice was called Morisqueta Tostada— commonly known by its Tagalog name, Sinangag (Fried Rice with Egg, page 91). Spanish food and culture, and the Catholic religion, continue to define the modern-day Philippines even though Spanish colonial rule ended in 1898.
Following the Spanish-American War, these islands fell under the spell of American culture during a time of rapid modernization. American-made canned foods became widely available and people used them to create new dishes. Canned meats and sausages became popular staples as did canned fruit cocktails and condensed milk. Karne Norte, for example, is a popular dish consisting of canned corned beef sautéed with garlic and onions, and Halo-Halo is a delicious dessert of shaved ice with sweet syrups and canned evaporated milk. The Philippine-American experience gave the Filipinos many new ways of turning foreign food influences into something delicious and uniquely Filipino.
Regional Cooking Styles
In addition to these foreign influences, the geography of the Philippines has also contributed to the diversity of its cuisine. As an archipelago comprising of 7,107 islands and seventeen regions, 120 different ethnic groups and 170 different languages, the formation of regional cooking styles is inevitable. Regional traditions, preferences, and available ingredients can transform a dish into something entirely different as one travels from one end of the archipelago to the other. To give you a sense of the richness of Filipino diversity in its cuisine, this book includes the best recipes from these various regions—from the rugged north shores of the Ilocos region to the southern island of Mindanao.
On the northwest coast of Luzon, between the mountains and the sea, is the Ilocos region. Here, the land is rugged and dry. In this harsh climate, the Ilocano people survive by being frugal and hardworking. Ilocano meals include an abundance of vegetables with some type of meat as the main feature of the meal. Ilocanos prepare their vegetables by steaming or boiling them with a dash of sautéed fermented shrimp paste. Red meat dishes are not commonly found, but freshwater fish are featured prominently. Their signature vegetable dish, Pinakbet (Mixed Vegetables with Anchovy Sauce, page 80), includes plenty of locally grown vegetables like bitter gourd, okra, and eggplant served with a tasty anchovy sauce.
Pampanga has a well-earned reputation as the home to the most creative and refined cuisines found in the Philippines. Located in the central part of Luzon just east of Manila, Pampanga's fertile soils and fish-filled rivers give the region the necessary ingredients to build its well-deserved reputation. Spanish chefs provided the Kapampangans with just enough guidance on European cooking techniques to enable them to create their own unique and delectable native dishes. Soon these dishes would outshine their European equivalents on the tables of Spanish royalty (it was the Kapampangans who prepared the meal at the proclamation of the first Philippine Republic). Among the original Kapampangan recipes featured in this book are Kaldereta Beef Stew (page 53), Oxtail Vegetable Stew (page 56), Traditional Tocino Bacon (page 50), Chicken Tamales (page 28), Kapampangan Paella (page 89), and Filipino Leche Flan (page 108).
The Bicol region is located at the southern tail of the Luzon peninsula, and includes some of the surrounding small islands. A part of the "Ring of Fire," it has several volcanoes whose lava flows provide the region with its fertile and lush green landscape. Possessing an ideal climate for coconut trees, the region is one of the major coconut-producing provinces in the Philippines, and so their dishes often include coconut ingredients. Coconut milk, for instance, is cooked with virtually everything—vegetables, meat, and seafood. Their signature dish, Bicol Express (Fiery Pork Stew with Coconut, page 49) is pork simmered in coconut milk with a generous helping of spicy peppers (Bicolanos are famous for using hot peppers to liven up their regional dishes).
The Visayas region of the Philippines consists of a group of islands that draws upon the abundance of the sea to create its cuisines. I've included Visayan dishes like Filipino Ceviche (Kinilaw na Tanigue, page 77), which is fish marinated in vinegar and then eaten raw—a typically Visayan way to enjoy fresh seafood from the local waters. This is a region with a large population of Chinese settlers, so there is a range of Chinese-influenced specialties, such as Wonton Soup (page
37) and Noodle Soup with All the Trimmings (Batchoy, page 40), reflecting that influence.
At the southeastern end of the archipelago is the second largest Filipino island, Mindanao. It was here that Muslims from Indonesia and Malaysia converted the people to the religion of Islam. When the Spaniards arrived, they were unable to completely dominate the island due to the resistance of its recently established Muslim religion. This separatist attitude has flavored the development of Mindanao's culture and cuisine. Mindanao offers a wide range of exotic dishes, and, though Christians form the majority of the population of Mindanao today, the Islamic religion continues to be a dominant influence on this island's cuisines (pork dishes, for example, are hardly present). Their distinct chicken curry is simmered with taro roots in a very spicy sauce and served with rice. Mindanao food, especially the Sulu and Tawi-Tawi Islands, is renowned for its use of spices such as turmeric, cumin, lemongrass, coriander, and chilis. In this warm climate, spices help keep food from spoiling while lending richness to the dishes.
As one travels through the Philippines, each of the dishes encountered reflects the character and spirit of the people who live there. The Filipino people have a loyalty and devotion to their home regions matched only by a feeling of national pride borne from centuries of foreign rule.
Foods for Celebrations
Filipinos love to celebrate! Throughout the year they will find any excuse to hold a feast in order to prepare delicious foods and socialize with friends and family. Of all the annual events that are an occasion to celebrate, the most conspicuous event of the year is the town festival called fiesta in honor of the town's Catholic patron saint. As a result of almost four hundred years of work by Catholic missionaries, the Philippines is the largest Catholic country in Asia and Filipinos have embraced their Catholic beliefs and customs, especially the annual fiesta.
The day's festivities start at the crack of dawn, when a band plays music while walking the streets of the town, awakening the whole village. Richly embroidered tablecloths are spread and tables are set in preparation for the day's feast. The culinary centerpiece of the celebration is the beloved Lechon, a whole pig stuffed with rice and roasted slowly over a charcoal pit. The sight of this distinctly Filipino fiesta food will immediately conjure mouthwatering childhood memories for all adult Filipinos.
Another time for food and celebration is All Souls' Day when Filipinos visit cemeteries to pay respects to their deceased loved ones. All through the night of November 1st, Filipinos eat, sing, and gossip—while large amounts of food and drink are passed around and over tombstones. This same celebratory ethos applies to funerals, where refreshments are provided for everyone in attendance and there is a sense of communal gaiety. Typical meals eaten on these days are Pig Blood Stew (Dinuguan), Steamed Rice Cakes and Sautéed Bean Thread Noodles (page 95).
The biggest national Philippine celebration is Pasko, or Christmas. Filipinos do not confine the celebration to December but will start as early as September when they begin hanging Christmas lights and singing Christmas carols. They even continue the celebration past Christmas and make the first Sunday of January the official end to their holiday reveling. From the 16th of December through Christmas Eve, Filipinos celebrate Simbang Gabi, a Filipino version of Misa de Gallo (Mass of the Rooster), a nine-day celebration held at four in the morning on each day. An integral part of Simbang Gabi is the availability of refreshments from local street vendors. Sleepy and hungry churchgoers can enjoy Coconut Sponge Cakes (Bibingka, page 103), Purple Rice Cakes with Coconut Shavings (Puto Bumbong), Chicken Tamales (page 28), Filipino Hot Chocolate (page 105) and Healthy Ginger Tea (Salabat, page 107) as a part of the celebration. As Christmas Eve becomes Christmas morning, family members gather to share a festive Noche Buena meal of Glazed Christmas Ham with Pineapple (Hamon, page 49), cheese, lechon, Spring Rolls (Lumpiang Shanghai, page 31), Fried Rice Noodles (Pancit Guisado, page 93), Barbequed Chicken Skewers (page 61), Fruit Salad, Chicken Macaroni Salad, and other dishes.
Finally, New Year's Eve provides another chance for family to gather around a table of celebratory foods. This meal is called the Media Noche and is served just before midnight strikes. Filipinos believe that plenty of food on the table means a year of plenty for everyone in the family. Twelve different fruits, especially round ones like grapes and chicos (or sapodilla, a brown berry with a sweet and malty taste) that resemble money, are displayed to invite prosperity for the coming year. Other Filipinos believe that eating twelve grapes on New Year's Eve will ensure a year of good luck.
If all of this isn't enough, many Filipinos get married in the months of December and January providing yet one more reason to cook large amounts of food and gather together with family and friends for a celebration. Essentially, Filipinos love any reason to eat and enjoy each other's company!
How to Eat a Filipino Meal
Most Filipinos prefer to eat with their hands, especially in informal situations. Making sure their hands are clean, Filipinos always use the fingers of their right hand (even left-handed diners) to take a small portion of rice and to press it into a mound. A piece of meat, fish, or vegetable is placed on top of this mound and picked up with the fingers, and then brought to the mouth where the thumb is used to push the food into the mouth. It might take some practice, but this is the authentic way of eating Filipino food.
The Spanish introduced forks and spoons and, since then, their use has become widespread. The fork is normally held in the left hand and the spoon in the right hand. A knife is not normally needed since most foods are either pre-cut into bitesized pieces or tender enough to be cut using the spoon. The spoon is used to collect and then scoop up a mouthful of food while the fork keeps it from moving off the plate. Only in the most formal settings will you see a knife used. Although the Chinese left a lasting impression on Filipino food and culture, chopsticks are generally not used. Filipinos use a flat plate, making it impractical to pick up rice with chopsticks.
Another unique part of the Filipino dining experience is the use of patis (fish sauce) and bagoong (either sautéed shrimp paste or anchovy sauce) as condiments. These condiments (pampalasa) are used in soups, stews, and to accompany just about any dish on the Filipino table. Even when a dish is flavorful and well seasoned, a Filipino will still want to add patis or bagoong. So remember to put a small saucer or patis or bagoong on the table during mealtime if you want to keep your Filipino guests happy.
Meals are served family style—that is, they are placed in the center of the table with individual serving spoons, allowing each diner to take only the desired portion. Viands —the dishes that accompany rice—mostly have bite-sized slices of meat and vegetables.
Filipinos are easygoing and hospitable. They love to share their food! If you are visiting a Filipino home, you will definitely be offered helpings of local specialties—and if it's fiesta time, you'll enjoy even more.
Guests are treated with respect, but don't start to eat until the host says so. Don't hesitate to take a second or third helping as your host will be delighted that you're enjoying the dishes. If you don't like the food, try to eat a little bit out of courtesy. It is always important for guests to accept food offered by the host or fellow guests—never decline! Make sure you finish everything on your plate; otherwise the hostess will think you didn't appreciate her cooking. Above all, enjoy the hospitality of family and friends while sampling the variety of textures and tastes found in Filipino cuisine.
#
Essential Filipino Ingredients
Filipino ingredients can be found in Asian or Latin American grocery stores. If there are Filipino eateries in your neighborhood, it is worth checking with them to find out where they get their supplies. Chinatowns are also good places to look. Many hard-to-find fresh vegetables, such as bitter gourd, can be found frozen, canned, or bottled. Also, a wide variety of Filipino products are now available from online businesses (see Resources, page 112).
Agar-Agar is a thickening agent made from seaweed that is used to make desserts and jellies. It is flavorless and dissolves when boiled in water and sets to a gelatinous form when left to cool. It is similar to gelatin although gelatin is made from animal by-products and easily dissolves in hot water. Agar-agar gels more firmly than gelatin too. Known as gulaman in the Philippines, agar-agar is sold as dried white or colored bars or packed as flakes or powder. Look for them in Asian or health food stores.
Anchovy Sauce, or bagoong isda, is fermented fish sauce—anchovies are commonly used—that is popular either as an ingredient or condiment. Anchovy sauce is very salty, has a strong, pungent smell, and varies in appearance, color, and flavor. No need to sauté or cook the sauce when used as a condiment. Asian groceries sell bottles of gray-colored anchovy sauce either as bagoong monamon or bagoong balayan, and may contain whole anchovies. Do not confuse with regular fish sauce or patis. See also Sautéed Shrimp Paste.
Annatto Seeds are tiny, dried reddish-brown seeds used as natural food coloring. They have little flavor and are mainly added to impart a tinge of red color to dishes. The seed is usually soaked and squeezed in warm water or fried in oil to extract the reddish orange color (see How to Make Annatto Water, page 19). The seed is from the annatto fruit, originally brought from Mexico to the Philippines. It is sold in packets or bottles in Asian or Latin American grocery stores. Mixing paprika with ground turmeric powder is a good substitute. Red food coloring may also be used, or you can simply omit the coloring agent altogether.
Bananas Among many varieties, saba bananas are widely cultivated in the Philippines. They are shorter in length but stouter than regular bananas. The skins are thick and green when unripe, yellow when ripe. In a typical Filipino dish, unripe or semi-ripe saba bananas are used. Semi-ripe or ripe saba bananas are fried, grilled, and boiled for desserts and soups. Saba bananas are usually cut into four pieces when used in soups. Thinner slices are called for in desserts such as Sweet Coconut Milk Delight (page 98) and Mixed Fruits and Shaved Ice Parfait (Halo-halo, page 104). Frozen saba bananas are available in Asian grocery stores. Plantains or unripe regular bananas may be substituted (use about half of a plantain for every saba banana.)
Banana Blossom Also known as banana flower or banana heart (puso ng saging is the term commonly used in the Philippines, puso is Filipino for heart), this vegetable is an edible bud from the banana plant and is actually several layers of reddish fibrous skins. Fresh, bottled, or canned banana blossoms are sold in Asian grocery stores. When using a fresh blossom, remove several layers of the hard outer sheets to reveal the lighter-colored inner layers, cut into thin circles or quarters, and soak them in salted water before cooking. Artichoke hearts or zucchini flowers may be used as substitutes.
Banana Ketchup looks just like regular ketchup and is made from bananas, tomatoes, sugar, vinegar, and spices. It has a sweet-and-sour taste and doesn't taste like bananas at all. The red coloring is added so it looks like tomato ketchup. Banana ketchup is cheaper than tomato ketchup in the Philippines, and is also commonly found in Hawaii and the West Indies. It is often used as a dip for fried chicken, hotdogs, and other fried dishes. It is readily available in Asian grocery stores. Tomato ketchup is a good substitute.
Banana Leaves are sold either as large sheets folded up, or pre-cut to smaller sizes. These versatile leaves can be baked, grilled, used as a cooking sheet, a plate, or a wrapper for steamed dishes. The banana leaf gives the food a nice texture, color, and taste. Leaves should be rinsed, cut, and held over an open flame for a few seconds or scalded with boiling water to "wilt" them and make them easy to fold without cracking. The leaves can also make a beautiful and exotic background when used as serving plates and party platters. Frozen leaves are often sold in large sizes and can be sut down to smaller sizes. Leftover leaves can be simply wrapped in plastic and stored in the freezer. They are available either fresh or frozen in Asian or Latin American grocery stores. Aluminum foil can be used as a substitute.
Bitter Gourd, or bitter melon, is a very nutritious vegetable—it controls blood sugar levels—but has a warty exterior and bitter taste that can be off-putting to some. To remove the bitter taste, slice the gourd in small pieces and then soak them in warm salted water, or lightly boil in salted water before cooking. The skin is edible but you need to discard the spongy interior and seeds. When it is ripe, it becomes more bitter; the skin turns yellowish and the seeds become red. With its distinct taste, it is difficult to find a substitute. Fresh, frozen, canned, and bottled bitter gourd is available in Asian and Latin American grocery stores. Canned or bottled bitter gourd is widely available at online grocery stores (see Resources, page 112).
Calamansi Limes are smaller than regular limes. They are round and grow on small bushes all over the Philippines. The juice has a milder and more fragrant taste than regular lime juice. Calamansi limes are halved and usually squeezed over noodles or just about any dish, and are used in marinades or in dipping sauces mixed with soy sauce and chili. Bottled calamansi concentrate can be found in Asian grocery stores, but it is normally sweetened and used mainly for drinks. If fresh calamansi is not available, substiture lime or lemon.
Cane Vinegar (suka) is a very important ingredient of Filipino cooking. Along with salt, vinegar was used to keep food from spoiling without refrigeration in hot and humid Philippines so most, if not all, dishes are salted and use vinegar. Throughout this cookbook, mild cane vinegar is used. It is often labeled sukang maasim or "sour vinegar." Any Philippine-made palm vinegar (sukang paombong) or coconut vinegar (sukang niyog) can be substituted. Filipino vinegar is less acidic than most vinegars used in the West. The best substitutes are white vinegar, white wine vinegar, or cider vinegar. However, if you use these vinegars they should be diluted with water (use 3 parts vinegar to 1 part water).
Chayote is a light green pear-shaped vegetable that comes from Mexico. It belongs to the squash family and the taste is like zucchini or summer squash. It should be peeled and deseeded. When buying, try to find chayotes that are firm and without spots. It is often a substitute for green papaya in dishes such as Chicken Soup with Green Papaya (page 42).
Chili Peppers Bird's-eye chilies, or siling labuyo, refer to the small, hot peppers that are usually finely chopped and mixed with vinegar and soy sauce to make dipping sauces. Finger-length green chilies, or siling mahaba, are long, thin and flat and are commonly used in stews and soups. Siling bilog refers to bell peppers.
Chinese Cabbage (Napa cabbage) is also known as snow cabbage, pak choi, or Peking cabbage. Unlike European cabbage, it has an elongated head with white stalks and green leaves. It is rich in Vitamin C, fiber, and folic acid, and widely available in supermarkets.
Chorizo de Bilbao are dried sausages that originally came from the Basque province of Spain. The Philippine version of chorizo is more like a Chinese sausage—spicy, firm, and dry-cured. It is similar to salami with a salty-and-sweet flavor. It is more popular than fresh sausages because it stores well for a longer period at room temperature. It is available in vacuum packs in the unrefrigerated sections of Asian or Latin American grocery stores. A good substitute is any dried, sweet sausage or Chinese lap cheong sausages, which are found in vacuum packs in the frozen section. Chorizo de Bilbao should be refrigerated after opening.
Coconut Sport Strings are the sliced meat of a variety of coconut palm fruit called macapuno that does not contain water inside the shell. It looks exactly the same as a regular coconut, but the meat is softer, making it ideal for desserts. It can be used as toppings for Sweet Purple Yam Pudding (page 99) or Mixed Fruits and Shaved Ice Parfait (Halo-halo, page 104). Jars and cans of it are sold in Asian grocery stores.
Grated Coconut is sold fresh in markets in Asia, and you can buy bags of it frozen in some Asian grocery stores. You can also buy brown husked coconuts, crack them open, remove the flesh and grate it in a blender although it's a lot of work. Another solution is to use unsweetened dried grated coconut and add water to reconstitute it.
Coconut Milk comes in two types: thick and thin. To obtain thick coconut milk, place about 3 cups (600 g) of fresh grated coconut (the amount that one coconut yields) and 1/2 cup (125 ml) of warm water in a bowl, knead for 3 minutes, place in a cloth and squeeze. Thick milk is best for desserts. To obtain thin coconut milk, add 1 cup (250 ml) of water to the same grated coconut, place in a cheesecloth and squeeze. Thin milk is used for general cooking. Use fresh coconut milk immediately as any leftover gets spoiled easily. Canned coconut milk is widely available and the thickness varies depending on the brand. Once opened, coconut milk should be kept refrigerated and stored only for a couple of days; otherwise, it begins to sour. You can freeze it but thaw fully before cooking.
Fermented Black Beans (tausi) Also called "salted black beans," tausi has a pungent, bitter, and salty flavor. Tausi is sold in jars in most Asian grocery stores.
Filipino Cane Vinegar See Cane Vinegar
Fish Sauce (patis) is a very salty, translucent, amber-colored, fermented sauce that is usually available in tall bottles under various brand names. It is very salty so it does not require refrigeration and will keep indefinitely. As an essential ingredient in Filipino dishes, fish sauce is either used as a seasoning when cooking or used as a dipping sauce. Fish sauces made in Vietnam, Thailand and China are very similar and may be used in place of Filipino fish sauce.
Fried Pork Rinds (chicharon) are crunchy, deep-fried and seasoned pork skins that are dipped in spicy vinegar, crushed and used as toppings or as an ingredient in soups and stews. There are different types of chicharon available from various Spanish-speaking countries. Look for Filipino chicharon if you can, or buy the thin pork cracklings without flavoring. They are sold in bags in Asian or Latin American grocery stores.
Green Papaya is the unripe papaya fruit. It has a green skin, white meat, and tiny white seeds that is most often used like a vegetable. If not available, chayote is a good substitute.
Glutinous Rice (malagkit) in the Philippines is used for kakanin— sweet rice desserts like Sweet Rice Cakes with Fried Coconut Topping (page 100) or Rice Cakes with Sweet Coconut Filling (page 109) or for Kapampangan Paella (page 89). This type of rice turns sticky when cooked. It is sold in bags in Asian food stores and many supermarkets.
Jackfruit (langka) is native to India, and is the largest tree-borne fruit in the world. The tree itself reaches up to 60 feet (18 m) in height and the fruit can weigh up to 80 pounds (32 kg). Unripe jackfruits are cooked as a vegetable in some countries but ripe jackfruits are very popular in the Philippines as an ingredient in desserts. Green and prickly on the outside, the bright yellow fruit inside is soft and sweet and encases many hard, black seeds. You can normally buy the fruit already peeled, which is better because it is messy and time-consuming to peel it yourself. Look in Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern grocery stores. Frozen, bottled, and canned jackfruits are also widely available. Other sweet fuits like pear and mango may be used in place of jackfruit.
Noodles (pancit) Pancit is the general Filipino term for noodles. Noodles symbolize prosperity, long life, and good luck, making them a popular birthday fare. Filipinos believe the longer the noodles the better, so noodles are usually not cut when cooked. There is a wide range of noodles, and each type has a different texture and taste. Always follow the package instructions when cooking noodles.
Cornstarch Noodles (luglug) Often labeled pancit luglug, these round, thick, white-colored noodles are sold dried. After being cooked, they should be drained under running water to wash away excess starch. If the noodles are not rinsed after cooking, they will stick together.
Mung Bean Thread Noodles (sotanghon) These dried and white-colored noodles go by several names: "cellophane noodles," "Chinese vermicelli," "glass noodles." Mung bean thread noodles need to be soaked in water before they are added to the pan. The noodles turn transparent when cooked. They can be stir-fried or cooked in soups (no need to soak them then).
Rice Vermicelli (bihon) Also known as "rice thread noodles," are thin, dried noodles that do not turn transparent when cooked. Rice vermicelli is first soaked in water to soften before being added to the pan.
Wheat Noodles are commonly available in four types:
Canton Noodles These dried, round noodles are yellow-colored—either from eggs, which they are often made with, or from the addition of yellow food coloring. Canton noodles may be quickly dunked in hot water to soften or added at the last minute to a pan, as these noodles cook easily, despite their thick girth. This noodle is a good choice for stir-fried dishes.
Mami Noodles are normally made of wheat flour and egg. They are thin, often dried, and yellow-colored. Try to avoid using the imitation mami noodles that use yellow food coloring rather than eggs to obtain their yellow coloring. One popular story tells of the origin of mami. A Chinese entrepreneur named Ma Mon Luk promoted his noodle soup by calling out "Mami!" ("Ma" is his name and mi or mee is Chinese for noodles). Hence, mami has come to be associated with any type of hot noodle soup.
Miki Noodles are thick, wide and normally flat noodles that are yellow colored. They are a perfect noodle for soups. They are sometimes also called "Shanghai noodles."
Misua, also spelled mee sua or miswa, is a dried, thin, white-colored noodle with a silky smooth texture. They cook quickly and are a good choice for soups. They are also known as "angel hair pancit" or "Chinese vermicelli."
Long Beans (sitaw) are also known as "yardlong beans," "snake beans" or "runner beans" and can grow to about 18 inches (45 cm). Like green beans, they are typically sliced and sautèed or boiled, although they are not as juicy as green beans. They don't store well, so use them within a few days of purchase. Green beans make a good substitute.
Miso Paste (miso) is made from fermented ground soybeans and is used for sauces and soups. Miso comes in brown, white, or black. Look for it in Asian or health food stores. Use fermented black beans or bean paste if you cannot find miso.
Mung Beans (monggo) are tiny green beans that are best known as the basis for common bean sprouts. Sweetened and dried mung bean paste is used for cakes and snacks while mung bean starch is used to make mung bean thread noodles. Dried mung beans are available in Asian or Indian grocery stores.
Purple Yam (ube) Powder The purple yam, or ube, is very different from regular yams. This root crop is bigger, has a darker, rougher-looking skin, and a distinct purple flesh. Its dried and ground purple yam powder is used in a wide variety of desserts either for flavoring or color. It is sold in plastic packages in Asian grocery stores or online stores. Frozen ube and bottled ready-made ube pastes are available too.
Rice Flour is milled rice that is usually sold in packets or boxes in Asian grocery stores. Rice flour can be made into galapong, or rice balls, and is also called mochiko. It can be used to thicken sauces. You can also substitute all-purpose flour but the texture will be different. Glutinous rice flour, on the other hand, is normally used for desserts and steamed snacks.
Sautéed Shrimp Paste, or bagoong alamang, is a salty fermented paste made from baby shrimp. Bagoong means "fermented" in Filipino. This popular ingredient has a strong, pungent smell and varies in appearance, color, and flavor. Ginisang bagoong refers to ready-to-eat sautéed fermented shrimp paste sold in jars in Philippine supermarkets and Asian grocery stores. Filipinos love to spoon the bagoong over vegetable and meat dishes, even on food that may already be well seasoned. Bottled bagoong products are sold in Asian stores, look for those imported from the Philippines.The Indonesian terasi, Malaysian belachan, Thai kapi, and Vietnamese mam tom are good substitutes.
Spring Roll Wrappers (Fresh) The round, white-yellowish, crepelike, wafer-thin wrappers are about about 8 inches (20 cm) and usually frozen. They are made of wheat flour, water, coconut oil, salt, and eggs (sometimes without eggs). They are also called "pastry wrappers," "lumpia wrappers" or "lumpia skins" (balat ng lumpia). Look for the packet that has a picture of fresh spring rolls. Before using, thaw the wrappers fully. Leftover wrappers should be stored in a tightly sealed plastic bag before putting them back into the freezer; otherwise, they will become dry and unusable. Dried rice paper wrappers used to wrap Vietnamese spring rolls and usually found in the dried noodle section, are not advisable for the Filipino fresh spring roll version.
Spring Roll Wrappers (Fried) These are square wrappers and are slightly thicker than the fresh spring roll ones. They are also labeled "spring roll pastry" and are available frozen. They are made from wheat flour, water, coconut oil, and salt and sometimes eggs. The sizes vary, so cut the large ones before serving. Thaw the wrappers completely before using. If you wish to store the leftover wrappers, place them in a tightly sealed plastic bag. Look for the packet that has a picture of deep-fried spring rolls. Either the Filipino or Chinese spring roll wrappers may be used.
Tamarind (sampalok) fruit ripe tamarind is sweet and is great for jams and candies, unripe tamarind is great for sour sinigang soups. The inside is green and very sour. To make the base for sinigang, the shelled tamarind is boiled, mashed, strained, and mixed with the soup. Frozen tamarind fruits and ready-to-use tamarind paste are sold in bags. If not available, look for the tamarind sinigang concentrate in powder or cubes in Asian grocery stores.
Tapioca Pearls are made from the cassava plant. They have a similar appearance and taste as sago pearls, which are made from the piths of sago palms that are widely grown in the Southern Philippines. To cook the dried pearls, bring to a boil four parts of water and one part of uncooked pearls. Add brown sugar (according to desired sweetness) and simmer for 20 minutes. Dried tapioca pearls are sold in various sizes and colors. Dry sago is sold in packages, and cooked sago is in jars. They can be found in Asian and Latin American grocery stores.
Taro Root (gabi) is a traditional staple in many tropical countries. It has a brown, coarse skin and gray- or purple-tinged flesh with a nutty flavor. The size of taro roots varies, but the Filipino variety is about the size of an orange. Taro is prepared like a potato. Peeled, sliced and cooked, taro is a basic ingredient for sinigang soups as well as for desserts. Firm taro root will keep for about a week at room temperature. Look for them at Asian markets and natural foods store. Jerusalem artichokes, sometimes called "sunchoke," or potatoes may be substituted.
Toasted Rice (pinipig) is toasted, pounded glutinous rice. Upon harvest, the still-green glutinous rice is pounded flat in a mortar and pestle, and then toasted. Pinipig smells great and is used as a topping for desserts or can be actually eaten like a cereal. Sold in a plastic packages, pinipig looks like crispy rice cereal (which can be a substitute for pinipig).
Tofu (tokwa) There are many varieties of tofu (bean curd). In the Philippines, soft tofu is rarely used and the most common form is the tokwa, which is pressed tofu, sold in cakes. Fried tokwa has a crisp, brown exterior but firm, white inside. Tokwa lasts longer— for about two weeks—than regular tofu when refrigerated. Look for it in the frozen section of Asian or vegetarian/health food stores. Deep-fried tofu, pressed tofu, or extra-firm tofu can be used in its place.
Water Chestnuts are root tubers that are similar to chestnuts in color and shape. When using, cut off the top, peel the skin using a vegetable peeler, and then slice them. The small and round root has a crispy white flesh that retains its crispiness even when cooked. The flavor is bland with a hint of sweetness. It is widely cultivated in paddy fields and marshes in the Philippines. Look for firm water chestnuts with unwrinkled skins. Unpeeled fresh water chestnuts can be stored up to three weeks in the refrigerator. Jicama is a good substitute, but canned water chestnuts are widely available.
Water Spinach (kangkong) also called "convolvulus," is a nutritious leafy green vegetable that grows in water—making it important to wash the greens thoroughly before cooking. The edible stems are hollow and the pointed leaves are long and thin. Try to use them as soon as they are bought because they do not keep well. Spinach can be used as a substitute.
Wonton Wrappers, or "wonton skins," are 4-inch (10-cm) squares made from wheat flour, water, eggs, and salt. The thickness varies depending on the brand. Choose thinner ones for use in wonton soup dumplings as the thicker wrappers are for frying.Once filled with ground meat, wonton wrappers can be easily folded and sealed. They have a soft and silky texture when boiled. They are found in the frozen section, next to the tofu or fresh noodles. There are also round dumpling wrappers in the frozen section but these don't have the same melt-in-the-mouth texture when cooked. Leftover wrappers should be stored in a tightly sealed plastic bag before putting them back into the freezer; otherwise, they will become dry and unusable.
#
Cooking Utensils and Techniques
One of the best features of Filipino food is that it is simple to prepare and does not require special skills or exotic cooking utensils. Even rather complicated-looking dishes, such as tamales, can be prepared in any kitchen.
On Filipino Cooking Techniques Filipino dishes do not require elaborate preparations, special cooking methods or presentations. Cooking the Filipino way seems to be a natural extension of the lifestyle of everyday home cooks. Though modern short-cuts and conveniences are used in Filipino kitchens today, the simple roots of the cuisine are evident in the no-fuss recipes that comprise the cooking of the Philippines.
Early Filipinos boiled, steamed and roasted their food until Chinese migrants taught them the art of stir-frying and deep-frying and brought the indispensable soy sauce and other condiments to the wok and dining table. The next wave of innovation to Filipino cooking came when the Spanish colonizers brought with them chili peppers, tomatoes sauces, corn, potatoes and the method of sautéing. In the mid-twentieth century, Americans introduced convenience foods, such as canned meats and canned fruit cocktail, to the country, leading to new Filipino dishes using existing cooking techniques.
Herbs or spices do not feature heavily in Filipino cooking, though black peppercorns and bay leaves (or "laurel") are used. Instead, fish sauce and shrimp paste are the popular and common ways to add flavor to dishes, similar to the way Westerners use salt, pepper, or ketchup. Further, vinegar adds tang; calamansi, a bright, tart accent; and tamarind, a sour counterpoint.
Chef's Knife or Cleaver A good cleaver is essential because Filipino dishes are mainly chopped into bitesize pieces prior to cooking. Also known as Chinese cleaver, it is a large, heavy knife with a square blade about 3 inches (7 cm) wide. It is useful for cutting through bones; mincing meat, fish, and vegetables; and crushing garlic cloves. Its wide blade is also useful for transporting chopped food from the cutting board into the pan.
Cutting Board Most wooden cutting boards in the Philippines are made of narra. Good quality wooden boards can be passed down from generation to generation and have advantages over plastic ones. Wood possesses anti-microbial properties, shallow cuts will close up on their own. Wooden cutting boards don't dull knives but they are not dishwasher friendly, so choose a cutting board that fits your sink. You don't need to have several cutting boards but a small one can be very useful for quick tasks.
Mortar and Pestle A mortar and pestle set can be found in every Filipino kitchen. This fundamental tool is used to crush garlic, peanuts, and other spices and to extract shrimp juice. It is also used to crush a little bit of chocolate, or break down any hard food into smaller pieces.
Saucepans and Skillets The majority of Filipino cooking is done in saucepans (or pots) and skillets with lids. The most common sizes are a 9- or 10-inch (23 or 25-cm) skillet, a 1- to 2-quart (1 liter to 1.75-liter) saucepan, and a 4-quart (3.75-liter) saucepan.
Wok Locally known as kawali or talyasi and made from cast iron, woks are amazingly versatile for stir-frying, deep-frying, steaming, and braising. The traditional woks with round bottoms can be used only on gas ranges, but they are useful for deep-frying as they require less oil than other cookware. You can find various types of woks including carbon steel ones. Non-stick woks coated with Teflon are popular but susceptible to scratches and are not suitable for cooking at high heat. Woks come in various sizes but a 12-inch (30-cm) wok will serve much of your cooking needs. If you are getting one, it is a good idea to make sure it will fit in your sink because traditional woks are not dishwasher friendly.
How to Deep-Fry The trick to achieving properly deep-fried food with a crisp exterior and delicious (not greasy!) interior is heating the frying oil to the correct temperature of between 350 and 375°F (175 to 190°C) and maintaining that temperature when frying food in batches. Here are a few helpful tips:
• You can use a specially designed deep-fryer, but any deep pot that is roomy enough will do.
• Use an oil with a high-smoke point, such as canola, grape seed oil or corn oil. Do not use olive oil.
• Use enough oil to completely submerge the food (this amount will depend on the size of the food and the dimensions of the pot), but do not fill the deep-fryer or pot more than half-way full. The latter is important to avoid spillovers or splatters.
• Test the oil temperature before adding the food with either a deep-fryer thermometer or by inserting a wooden chopstick or skewer. (If it is hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick.)
• If you have a large amount of food, deep-fry it in batches so as not to crowd the pan.
• Remove fried food with slotted spoon or a skimmer and drain in single layers on paper towels.
• To reuse the oil, allow it to cool, strain through a fine-mesh sieve lined with cheesecloth, and store in the refrigerator. If the oil develops a rancid or "off" smell, or if it smells like the foods you've deep-fried in it, discard it.
How to Stir-Fry
This method of fast, high-heat cooking is typically done in a wok, but a large skillet can also be used. The advantage of using a wok is that you can push the food that is already cooked to the cooler sloping sides of the wok, leaving the food that is not yet cooked in the center of the wok that is directly over the heat source. Here are some helpful tips for stir-frying with success:
• Prepare all the ingredients you plan to stir-fry before you begin cooking, and have all sauces or condiments at the ready. Once the stir-frying begins, the process goes very quickly, so it's important to have all prep work completed beforehand.
• For the best appearance, cut all ingredients to approximately the same size. If not all ingredients cook at the same rate, you will need to add them sequentially, starting with the longest cooking ingredients. On the other hand, if you don't mind that the ingredients are cut into different sizes, you may cut the longest-cooking ingredients into the smallest size and cut the quickest-cooking ingredients into the largest size. This will enable you to add all the vegetables and meat to the wok at the same time, space allowing.
• Heat the wok or skillet over high heat and then add oil. When the oil is hot, add any aromatics you may be using, such as ginger and garlic, and stir-fry for a few seconds, or until they become fragrant. Then quickly add another ingredient.
• Do not overcrowd the wok. If crowded, food will steam rather than stir-fry. If you have too much food for the size of the wok or skillet that you are using, stir-fry the food in batches, starting with the meat (after the aromatics, of course). Then remove the meat, add the vegetables, and return the meat just before the vegetables are done. Sauce or liquids (such as soy sauce) added for flavoring and seasoning are added near the end of cooking.
How to Make Annatto Water Annatto seeds are little red seeds that, when mixed with warm water, produce a natural red food coloring. The red coloring is used in Filipino, Latin America, and Caribbean dishes. It has a bland taste with a hint of nutmeg. Annatto water is commonly used for the shrimp sauce in Noodles with Shrimp and Tofu (page 94) and the base for the Oxtail Vegetable Stew (page 56) as it gives these dishes an appetizing red-orange color. Use a spoon when extracting the color from the seeds or you'll end up with reddish fingers.
1 tablespoon annatto seeds
1/2 cup (125 ml) warm water
Place the seeds and warm water in a bowl, preferably a glass bowl. Let stand for 2 minutes or more. Press the seeds with the back of a spoon for about 5 minutes or until the water becomes reddish in color. Strain the liquid and reserve. Discard the seeds.
How to Crush Garlic
Many Filipino recipes call for garlic to be crushed whether it is used whole or then chopped or minced. Crushing garlic before chopping or mincing it releases more flavor and aroma, and it's a very expedient way to peel it as well. I prefer to use a mortar and pestle when crushing several cloves of garlic at once.
Using a knife:
1. Place a garlic clove on a chopping board.
2. Place the wide side of the knife on top of the clove and whack the area that is directly over the cloves with your fist (the side opposite the thumb), smashing the garlic.
3.The skin should come off easily. Discard the skin, and then chop, if necessary.
Using a mortar and pestle:
1. Place the cloves of unpeeled garlic in the middle of the mortar. An average mortar will comfortably hold 3 to 5 cloves. Crush the cloves by smashing them with the pestle. It takes some practice to not make the cloves jump out from the hollow of the mortar.
2. The skin should come off easily. Discard the skin, and then chop, if necessary.
#
Basic Recipes
A Filipino meal is often accompanied with several sawsawan, or dipping sauces. Filipinos like to adjust and intensify the flavors of their food to fit their personal taste. They do this with a little bit of soy sauce, fish sauce, shrimp paste, vinegar, hot peppers or garlic. In this section are popular Filipino sauces that are usually drizzled over meats or used as dips and condiments, such as Liver Paste (page 23), Crispy Fried Garlic (page 23), Tomato and Salted Egg Salad (page 22) and Pickled Green Papaya (page 21), that are mixed with rice. It's worthwhile learning how to make them because they go along with any fried food. The centerpiece of every Filipino meal is steamed rice, so the easy and foolproof Filipino way to cook steamed rice on stovetop is also included.
##
Garlic Mayonnaise Dip
This all-purpose dipping sauce goes well with Crispy Fried Fishballs (page 33) or Crunchy Fried Squid (page 27). It keeps for a week if stored in an airtight container in the refrigerator.
Makes about 1/2 cup (75 g)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
1/2 cup (125 ml) mayonnaise
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl, and mix thoroughly.
##
Vinegar Garlic Sauce
Simple yet essential, this sauce goes well with Fried Marinated Fish (page 74), Filipino Fried Chicken (page 65) and Roasted Marinated Pork (page 46). Keep in an airtight container and use the dip within a week.
Makes about 1/2 cup (125 ml)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
1/2 cup (125 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 teaspoon pepper
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl, and mix thoroughly.
##
Sweet and Spicy Sauce
This sauce is perfect for seafood. Serve with Crispy Fried Fishballs (page 33), Stuffed Crabs (page 76) or Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips (page 26). If stored in an airtight container in the refrigerator, it can keep up to a week.
Makes about 1/3 cup (80 ml)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
1 tablespoon olive oil
4 tablespoons banana ketchup or tomato ketchup
1 tablespoon sugar
1 finger-length green chili pepper, deseeded and minced
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl, and mix thoroughly.
##
Pickled Green Papaya
Achara
This Indian-influenced side dish— achar means "pickle" in many Indian languages—is a delicious accompaniment to anything, and is a regular item on every Filipino table. It goes particularly well with Fried Marinated Fish (page 74) or Barbequed Chicken Skewers (page 61). It keeps well for a couple of months in the refrigerator.
Makes about 3 cups (450 g)
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
3 cloves garlic, minced or crushed
One 2-inch (5-cm) piece fresh ginger, peeled and thinly sliced
1 cup (250 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
4 tablespoons sugar
1 tablespoon salt
1 unripe papaya (1 1/3 lbs/600 g), peeled, deseeded, and grated to yield 2 cups (400 g) grated papaya
1 carrot, peeled and grated
1/2 cup (50 g) raisins
1 cup (100 g) chopped pineapple
1 fresh bell pepper, deseeded and thinly sliced
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Combine the garlic, ginger, vinegar, sugar, and salt in a saucepan, and bring to a boil. Cook over medium-high heat, uncovered, for 5 minutes.
Add the rest of the ingredients. Cover and cook over medium-low heat for 15 minutes. Set aside to cool.
Transfer to a jar with a tight lid. Store in the refrigerator.
##
Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce
This sauce can be served as a dressing for Filipino Spinach Salad (page 85) or as a dipping sauce for Fried Marinated Fish (page 74). Consume the sauce the same day.
Makes about 1/3 cup (80 ml)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1 clove garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1/2 teaspoon sugar
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1 1/4 teaspoons bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
1 tablespoon freshly squeezed lime juice
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl, and mix thoroughly.
##
Sweet Garlic Sauce
Dip the Fresh Pork Salad Rolls (page 32) or the Crispy Fried Fishballs (page 33) in this sauce. Store in an airtight container in the refrigerator and it keeps for a week.
Makes about 1 cup (250 ml)
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 5 minutes
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
3 tablespoons brown sugar
1 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoons soy sauce
1 tablespoon Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1 cup (250 ml) water
1 tablespoon cornstarch dissolved in 2 tablespoons of water
Combine the garlic, sugar, salt, soy sauce, vinegar, and water in a saucepan, and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to low and add the cornstarch mixture. Stir until thickened, and remove from the heat.
##
Sweet and Sour Sauce
This versatile sauce may be served with Crispy Fried Fishballs (page 33), Spring Rolls (page 31), Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips (page 26) or Crunchy Fried Squid (page 27). It can be stored in an airtight container in the refrigerator for about a week.
Makes about 1 cup (250 ml)
Preparation time: 10 minutes
1 teaspoon sugar
1 cup (250 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
2 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 finger-length red chili pepper, minced
1 teaspoon cornstarch dissolved in 1 tablespoon of water
1 teaspoon salt
1 tablespoon ketchup
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl, and mix thoroughly.
##
Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce
This flavorful sauce is typically served with Papaya Shrimp Fritters (page 33), Spring Rolls (page 31), Crunchy Fried Squid (page 27), Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips (page 26) or Roasted Marinated Pork (page 46). It is best to consume the sauce the same day.
Makes about 1/2 cup (125 ml)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
1/2 cup (125 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 finger-length green chili pepper, deseeded and minced
Combine all ingredients in a small bowl, and mix thoroughly.
##
Tomato and Salted Egg Salad
Salty eggs, juicy ripe tomatoes, and tart lime juice can be a refreshing combination. You can also add lettuce, chopped green onion, and marinated olives to augment the combination.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes
3 hard-boiled Salted Eggs (see recipe, right), shelled and diced
2 ripe tomatoes, diced
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon freshly squeezed calamansi juice (or lime juice)
Combine the egg, tomato, pepper, and lime juice in a mixing bowl. Mix thoroughly.
##
Salted Eggs
Itlog na Maalat
Salted egg, known as itlog na maalat, is a common fixture on every Filipino table. In tropical countries like the Philippines, this is one way to preserve eggs. Salted eggs are often dyed a deep red to distinguish them from fresh eggs. Filipinos love to combine chopped salted eggs with tomatoes (see Tomato and Salted Egg Salad on this page) or have them with Fried Marinated Fish (page 74) or Roasted Marinated Pork (page 46). Salted eggs are also used to garnish pastries and as a topping or filler for steamed buns (siopao). Because of their bigger, richer yolks and thicker shells, duck eggs are traditionally used but chicken eggs work fine too. To make salted eggs, eggs are soaked for about three weeks or more in a brine solution and keep them in a dark and dry place—preferably your cupboard. The eggs do not cure as quickly at cooler temperatures and the length of the curing period depends on the temperature. In the Philippines, the eggs cure after three weeks—but may take longer if you live in a cooler climate.
Preparation time: Minimum 3 weeks curing period
Cooking time: 30 minutes
8 fresh duck or chicken eggs
4 cups (1 liter) water
1 1/2 cups (300 g) salt
Place the eggs in a wide-mouthed jar with a lid.
Add the water to a saucepan and bring to a boil. Add the salt gradually. Stir until the salt is totally dissolved. Set aside to cool.
Pour the cooled saltwater over the eggs. The eggs should be completely submerged. Add more of the brine solution if needed.
Cover and store the jar in a dark place for at least 3 weeks. To test the egg's saltiness, take out one egg after 3 weeks, and boil it over high heat for 30 minutes (salted eggs take more time to cook than regular eggs). Let cool for a few minutes. Peel the shell and taste. If the saltiness is to your liking, take out the other eggs, boil, and store in the refrigerator. If you want a "saltier" salted egg, leave the eggs for another 2 weeks.
##
Crispy Fried Garlic
Fried garlic is a popular topping in Filipino cuisine, typically sprinkled on Rice Porridge with Chicken (page 92). It is also a perfect topping for pasta or salads. If you go to an Asian store, you can find precooked bottles or packets of fried garlic, but it's easy to make your own
at home. You can store fried garlic in an airtight container or bottle for a couple of months without refrigeration.
Makes about 1/3 cup (70 g)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 10 minutes
1/2 cup (125 ml) oil
10 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
Add the oil to a skillet or wok and set over high heat. When hot, add the garlic and stir-fry until brown and crispy. Perfectly fried garlic should be crisp and golden brown on the outside and be slightly moist on the inside. Be careful not to burn the garlic (quickly remove the pan from the heat once it begins to brown). Strain the garlic and place on a paper towel to absorb the excess oil.
##
Liver Paste
This rich paste adds flavor to stews (I use it on Kaldereta Beef Stew, page 53) and is also the base for the popular Filipino sauce called Lechon Sauce that is served with Crispy Lechon Pork (page 48). It keeps refrigerated for a couple of days. Ready-made canned versions of liver paste are widely available in supermarkets.
Makes about 1 cup (200 g)
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
4 cups (1 liter) plus 3 tablespoons water
1/2 lb (250 g) liver (chicken, pork or beef), sliced
1 tablespoon salt
1 small onion, chopped
Pour the 4 cups (1 liter) of water into a saucepan and bring to a boil. Add the liver and salt and cook over high heat for 20 minutes. Drain and set aside to cool. Roughly chop the liver.
Place the chopped liver, the onion and the 3 remaining tablespoons of water into a food processor or blender. Blend until the mixture becomes spreadable. If it is too thick, add a little more water.
##
Perfect Steamed Rice
Non-Filipinos often find Filipino food a bit salty. (If you live in the tropics, you always perspire and your body craves for salt!) The neutralizer for this "saltiness" is steamed rice. Two parts steamed rice and one part main dish (or "viand") is usually the correct combination to strike a balance.
Most Filipinos say that steamed rice is the main dish and that the goodness of the meal depends on the goodness of the steamed rice. A general rule of thumb is that one person consumes about three cups of steamed rice per meal—and one cup of uncooked rice makes three cups of cooked rice.
Today, many people use rice cookers but in the rural areas of the Philippines, it is still common to cook rice using a kaldero, a special pot made of cast iron specifically designed to cook rice on the stovetop. It is thick enough to avoid the rice being burnt.
Cooking perfect steamed rice on the stovetop takes a little practice. To create fluffy rice, one needs to use the right amount of water, the right level of heat, a heavy-bottomed pot, and a tight lid to trap the steam (steam finishes the cooking during the "resting" period).
Different types of rice need different amounts of water. As a general rule though, the ratio of water to long-grain white rice should be a bit less than double. You may need to experiment to find out the best ratio for the specific rice you are using. New crop rice, or rice harvested in the same year that it is sold, is not as dry as old rice so it needs slightly less water. In general, too much water results in softer and stickier rice (and may even resemble porridge), less water results in hard (sometimes uncooked) steamed rice. The best way to produce perfectly steamed rice is to use the same kind and brand of rice and the same saucepan, and experiment until you get it right.
Serves 4 to 6
Cooking time: 25 minutes
4 cups (800 g) white long-grain rice (jasmine rice)
Approximately 7 cups (1.75 liters) water
Place the rice in a heavy-bottomed saucepan, cover with water and wash the rice thoroughly in order to remove the excess starch. (Some mills use talc powder as a milling aid, so it's important to rinse the rice thoroughly.) Swish the rice around with your fingers and discard the milky water(or use it to make Fish Soup with Miso Dip, page 36) without pouring any rice out of the saucepan. Add water again and wash the rice 2 more times, or until the water runs clear. Drain well.
Add the water to the pan and level the rice by rocking the pan so the rice settles evenly at the bottom. Measure the level of the water by lowering your hand—palm open and fingers stretched down, and touching the bottom of the pan—and noting where the level of the rice is against the level of the water. The level of the water should be almost twice as high as the level of the rice.
Place the saucepan over high heat and bring to a boil. When the rice starts bubbling, turn the heat down to the lowest setting, cover with a tight-fitting lid, and leave for about 20 minutes. Do not lift the lid while cooking as this will interrupt the steaming process.
Turn off the heat and let stand for another 20 minutes with the lid still on. (Leave for another 10 more minutes or longer if cooking more than 4 cups of rice.) The steam inside the pot will finish the cooking. When cooked, transfer the rice to a serving bowl and place on the middle of the table. Serve hot.
#
chapter 1 appetizers and snacks
Although there is a word in Tagalog for appetizers (pampagana), a more accurate translation would be "small bite." In the Philippines, appetizers are not served separately during mealtime. Rather, all of the prepared dishes, including fruits and some desserts, are placed on the table at the same time, including fruits and some desserts, buffet style. There are no rules as to what food should be eaten first; you can have a bite of your favorite banana fritters before eating your vegetables!
One of the Spanish habits that the Filipinos adopted as their own is enjoying snacks at various times of the day, called merienda. In the Philippines, it is not uncommon to have two meriendas in a day, where everyone enjoys a simple snack between meals to help them refuel until the next large meal. Ubiquitous street vendors and roadside stalls offer various delicacies—fishballs, rice cakes, spring rolls and all sorts of palamig (coolers) to hungry and thirsty clients. Merienda may seem like just another excuse to snack all day long, but it's an integral part of Filipino culture. In a sweltering country like the Philippines, you'll look for a regular break from whatever you are doing for that tall glass of refreshing mango juice or some delicious tamales at a reasonable price. Besides being an excuse to eat, merienda is also another way to bond with the family and friends and to socialize and gossip.
Many of the recipes in this section, such as Fresh Pork Salad Rolls (page 32), Spring Rolls (page 31), and Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips (page 26), are popular finger foods (pica pica) that are also meals in themselves, especially when served with hot steamed rice. Feel free to serve any of these dishes as a first course, a party snack, or along with several other dishes as a main course.
##
Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips
Camaron Rebosado
In this dish, fresh shrimp are dunked in batter, deep-fried to golden perfection, and typically served with Sweet and Sour Sauce. This is one of several Filipino staples with Spanish names that are actually Chinese in origin. Many Chinese immigrants came to the Philippines and settled here. When the Spanish arrived, Chinese eateries were already flourishing and Chinese dishes were soon given Spanish names.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
3 tablespoons all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 cup (125 ml) water
1 egg, beaten
2 cups (500 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
1 lb (500 g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined (leave the tails on)
Sweet and Sour Sauce (page 21), Sweet and Spicy Sauce (page 21), or Garlic Mayonnaise Dip (page 20), for dipping
Combine the flour, salt, baking powder, and water in a mixing bowl. Mix thoroughly until smooth. Add the egg into the mixture and stir well.
Heat a small saucepan or wok over high heat and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready.) Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn.
Holding a shrimp by its tail, dip it in the flour mixture and gently drop it directly into the oil. Repeat the process with the rest of the shrimp, dropping the shrimp into the oil one by one. Deep-fry the shrimp until lightly browned. Do not overcrowd the pan. Drain on paper towels. Serve with Sweet and Sour Sauce, Sweet and Spicy Sauce or Garlic Mayonnaise Dip.
##
Crunchy Fried Squid
Calamares
This is everybody's favorite pulutan, or finger food, which goes especially well with cold beer or wine. Calamares are one of the quickest and easiest Filipino seafood dishes to prepare. I usually cook this dish for parties. Simply squeeze lemon juice over the fried squid and then dip them in any of the dips listed in the recipe. Frozen squid can be used, but fresh squid tastes better.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1 lb (500 g) medium-sized fresh squid or pre-cleaned frozen squid (instructions on how to clean fresh squid on page 70)
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 cup (60 g) flour
1 egg, beaten
2 cups (500 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
Sweet and Sour Sauce (page 21), Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce (page 22), Garlic Mayonnaise Dip (page 20) or banana ketchup, for dipping
Clean the squid and cut them into rings (you may include the head). Pat dry with paper towels. Mix the salt and flour thoroughly in the mixing bowl. Dredge each ring in the egg then coat it with the flour mixture.
Heat a medium saucepan or wok over high heat and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready.) Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn.
Deep-fry the squid for about 7 minutes or until lightly browned. Do not overcrowd the pan. Drain on paper towels. If you fry the squid for too long, they become tough. Transfer to a serving platter. Serve immediately with Sweet and Sour Sauce, Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce, Garlic Mayonnaise Dip or banana ketchup.
##
Chicken Tamales
Tamales, or tamal in Spanish, are a traditional Mexican snack, made with steam-cooked corn filling wrapped in cornhusks, that the Spanish introduced to the Philippines. The Filipinos modified the dish by using a mixture of finely ground rice, chicken, egg, that is then wrapped in banana leaves instead of cornhusks. Once boiled, the tamale is unwrapped and the sweet rice filling is spooned out and eaten. The cooked ground rice turns jellylike and has the sweet, subtle aroma of banana leaves. Although the process of making tamales is simple, it does take some practice to perfect the wrapping part. It's important to double-wrap the filling and secure it properly so that it does not open during boiling.
Heat a skillet over high heat and add the uncooked rice. Lower the heat to medium and toast the rice until lightly browned, stirring constantly. Remove the rice and pound with a mortar and pestle, or use a food processor to grind it into a fine powder. If using rice flour, toast in the skillet until lightly browned. Set aside.
In a saucepan, simmer the ground rice, 2 cups (500 ml) of water, coconut milk, sugar, salt and pepper over low heat until the mixture thickens, stirring regularly.
Heat the chicken and annatto water in a separate saucepan over medium heat, stirring constantly for 5 minutes, or until the chicken becomes orange. Drain and set aside.
Cut each banana leaf into 10-inch (25-cm) squares. Soften each banana leaf square over an open flame or scald it for about 5 seconds with boiling water, then drain. The leaf will soften and makes wrapping easier.
Place a banana leaf, lighter side up, on a clean surface and place about 1 1/ 2 tablespoons of the rice mixture, a piece of chicken, 3 peanuts, and a slice of egg on top.
Fold the left and right sides of the leaf over the mixture, then fold the bottom and top of the leaf to form a square. Place the wrapped mixture in the center of another banana square. Fold it in the same way and tie it with kitchen twine. If using foil, wrap the mixture first in parchment paper and then in aluminum foil.
Pour the 10 cups (2.5 liters) of water into a stockpot and bring to a boil. Drop the tamales into the boiling water and cook over high heat for 30 minutes. Remove the tamales with a slotted spoon and let cool to room temperature.
Yields about 10 tamales
Preparation time: 30 minutes
Cooking time: 45 minutes
2 cups (400 g) uncooked long grain rice (or rice flour)
2 cups (500 ml) water
One 13 1/2-oz (400-ml) can coconut milk
1 teaspoon brown sugar
1 teaspoon table salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 boneless, skinless chicken breast, cooked and sliced
1/2 cup (125 ml) annatto water (page 19)
10 sheets 10-in (25-cm) squares banana leaves
1/4 cup (50 g) roasted peanuts
2 hard-boiled eggs, thinly sliced
Kitchen twine, for tying the tamales squares
10 cups (2.5 liters) water
##
Chicken Empanadas
Empanadas (meaning "wrapped in bread") are found around the world. These half-moon pastries are typically filled with potato, chicken, onion, and raisins, but each of Spain's colonies have created their own version. Ground pork or beef may be substituted for the chicken.
To make the Dough, mix the flour, baking powder, butter, salt, and sugar in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly. Add the water, 1 tablespoon at a time, until the dough can be gathered into a ball. Wrap it in plastic wrap and store in the refrigerator for 1 hour. While the dough is chilling, make the Filling.
To make the Filling, pour the water into a saucepan and bring to a boil. Add the chicken and boil for about 10 minutes, or until done (the flesh should appear opaque). Remove the chicken from the water with a slotted spoon, and set aside.
Boil the potatoes in a separate saucepan for 10 minutes or until done. Remove and drain the potatoes, then mash them in a bowl and add the thinly sliced cooked chicken.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. When hot, add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the bacon and sauté for about 5 minutes or until lightly browned. Add the sautéed bacon, garlic, and onion as well as the raisins, butter, parsley, salt and pepper to the potato and chicken mixture. Mix thoroughly and set aside to cool completely. (It's important to let the filling cool off before making the pastries or the crust will get soggy.)
Preheat the oven to 375°F (190°C). Remove the chilled dough from the refrigerator. Take a piece of dough about the size of a golf ball (about 1-inch/2.5-cm in diameter) and, on a floured surface, flatten it with a rolling pin into a 1/ 8-inch (3-mm)-thick disk.
Place about 1 tablespoon of the Filling in the center of the disk. Fold the Dough over the Filling to form a half-moon shape. Press and seal the edges by running the prongs of the fork over the edges. Continue forming the Empanadas with the rest of the Dough and Filling.
Place the Empanadas on a lightly greased baking sheet. Brush the top of Empanadas with the egg and bake for about 30 minutes or until lightly browned.
Makes 15 empanadas
Preparation time: 30 minutes + 1 hour to chill dough
Cooking time: 30 minutes
Filling
3 cups (750 ml) water
1 boneless, skinless chicken thigh, thinly sliced
2 potatoes, peeled and diced
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, minced
3 strips bacon, thinly sliced
1/2 cup (100 g) raisins
1/2 cup (100 g) butter, melted
1 bunch fresh parsley, minced
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 egg, beaten
Dough
3 cups (375 g) all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon baking powder
2 tablespoons butter, melted
1/2 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoons sugar
1/2 cup (125 ml) water
##
Pan de Sal Bread Rolls
Despite its name (Pan de Sal literally means "salt bread"), Pan de Sal Bread Rolls actually taste more sweet than salty. Originally made with just yeast, flour, water, and salt, the recipe has been improved over the years by adding sugar and breadcrumbs. Baking bread from scratch may seem a little daunting at first, but these rolls are very quick and easy to make (plus the smell of freshly baked bread in your kitchen makes it all worthwhile). These rolls are especially delicious when served with butter, or you can use them for making sandwiches—something that Filipinos love to do! I like eating them with Sweet Purple Yam Pudding (page 99) or Chicken Adobo (page 64).
Makes about 15 to 20 bread rolls
Preparation time: 20 minutes + 3 hours rising time
Baking time: 20 minutes
1/2 cup (125 ml) lukewarm water
1/4 oz (1 envelope) active dry yeast
1 teaspoon plus 1/2 cup (100 g) sugar
1 cup (250 ml) water
3 tablespoons oil
1 tablespoon salt
5 cups (625 g) all-purpose flour
3 tablespoons breadcrumbs
Pour the lukewarm water (about 110° F/45°C) in a large mixing bowl, and add the yeast. Add 1 teaspoon of the sugar to activate the yeast, and stir gently to dissolve. Let stand in a warm place for 15 minutes.
Add the water, oil, 1/ 2 cup (100 g) of sugar, salt, and flour little by little and mix thoroughly. Knead the dough on a floured surface until smooth and pliable.
Place the kneaded dough in a large, lightly greased bowl. Cover with a clean kitchen cloth or hand towel and let rest in a warm place for 2 hours or until dough doubles in size. The ideal room temperature for bread dough to rise is about 75°F (24°C).
When the dough has doubled in size, place it on a floured surface. Punch the dough down and then divide it into 15 to 20 pieces. Form each roll into a ball with your hands.
Place the balls on a lightly greased baking sheet and sprinkle the breadcrumbs on top. Make sure to leave a little space between the rolls. Let them stand in a warm place for 1 hour or until they double in size.
Bake the rolls for about 20 minutes in a pre-heated oven (325°F or 160°C), or until lightly browned. To test if they are done, gently press the top of one of the rolls; if it springs back, it is done.
Tips for baking bread:
• Each oven bakes differently, so take time to get to know your oven. For instance, electric ovens tend to get hotter and cook faster than gas ovens.
• Sometimes it is difficult to find a warm place to let the yeast or dough rise. Try putting it inside a preheated oven set to the lowest setting (and turn the oven off halfway through the rising process to make sure it doesn't cook the dough).
• When dissolving the yeast in the lukewarm water, the temperature should be about 110°F (45°C). If the water is too hot or too cold, the dough will not rise.
• Make sure to use fresh yeast. The dough will not rise properly if the yeast is expired.
• It is tempting to add too much flour when kneading, but that will result in stiff bread.
• Overbaked bread will turn hard after some time even if it looks fine right out of the oven.
##
Spring Rolls Lumpiang Shanghai
Spring rolls are a great finger food that everybody loves. Filipinos know them as lumpia, which is derived from the Hokkien word meaning "mixed vegetables and meat rolled up." This version, Lumpiang Shanghai, refers to a spring roll stuffed with ground pork and then fried, but ground chicken, shrimp or crab can also be used. I always make some extra spring rolls and store them in the freezer for a quick meal later (frozen spring rolls don't need to be defrosted before deep-frying them). When frying, use medium heat to be sure that they cook through completely but be careful not to burn the outside. Use smaller 6-inch (15-cm)-square wrappers make perfect-sized rolls; if you use larger wrappers, simply cut the cooked spring rolls in half before serving.
Combine all the Filling ingredients in a bowl and mix thoroughly.
Place a wrapper on a flat surface and spread about a tablespoon of the Filling all along the bottom third of the wrapper. Roll the wrapper over the Filling, tuck in both ends, and roll it up tight. Moisten the edges of the wrapper with the egg white and press to seal.
Heat a medium saucepan or wok over high heat and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready). Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn.
Deep-fry until brown and crispy. Do not overcrowd the pan. Serve hot with Sweet and Sour Sauce or Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce. For a light meal, serve with hot steamed rice.
Serves 5
Preparation time: 20 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour
One 8.8-oz (250-g) package spring roll wrappers
1 egg white
2 cups (500 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
Sweet and Sour Sauce (page 21) or Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce (page 22), for dipping
Filling
1/2 lb (250 g) ground pork
2 water chestnuts, minced
1 medium onion, minced
1 small carrot, peeled and minced or grated
1 egg yolk
2 tablespoons soy sauce
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1/4 tablespoon salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Fresh Pork Salad Rolls
Lumpiang Sariwa
This variety of lumpia is the Filipino version of Chinese salad rolls. Unlike Lumpiang Shanghai, these rolls are not deep-fried. Instead, the filling rests on a lettuce leaf inside a spring roll wrapper. These spring rolls can make a substantial snack on their own but most Filipinos prefer to eat them with rice.
Make the Sweet Garlic Sauce, following the recipe on page 21.
Add 1 tablespoon of oil to a skillet over medium heat. When hot, add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the pork and sauté for about 5 minutes, or until cooked (it becomes lighter in color). Add the salt, fish sauce, and pepper. Transfer the mixture to a large bowl and set aside.
Add the remaining tablespoon of oil to the same skillet over medium heat, and sauté the bamboo shoot, carrot, and cabbage for 5 minutes or until cooked. Add to the reserved pork mixture and stir to combine. Set aside to cool.
Set a wrapper on a flat surface and place a lettuce leaf in the top center of it, allowing about 1 1/2 inch (3.75 cm) of the lettuce leaf to extend beyond the top of the wrapper. Place about 1 to 2 tablespoons of the pork and vegetable mixture in the middle of the lettuce. Fold the bottom part of the wrapper over half of the filling and then fold the ends toward the middle. Secure the roll using chive stalks (or insert a toothpick). To serve, pour Sweet Garlic Sauce on a roll and top with crushed peanuts.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 25 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
Sweet Garlic Sauce (page 21)
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, minced
1/4 lb (125 g) pork loin or belly (also called "side pork"), diced
1/4 teaspoon salt
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1/2 cup (130 g) finely chopped bamboo shoots (about one 10-oz (285-g) can)
1 carrot, peeled and cut into thin strips
1/4 lb (125 g) cabbage, thinly shredded
1 head green leaf lettuce
One 16-oz (500-g) package frozen spring roll wrappers (about 8 in/20 cm), thawed
Garlic chives or toothpicks, to secure the rolls
2 tablespoons crushed peanuts
##
Crispy Fried Fishballs
Everybody in the Philippines loves deep-fried fishballs! They're so popular that there is a street vendor on every corner selling skewers of them with dipping sauces. Their ready availability means that most people don't think of them as something to make at home. I never thought of making fishballs when I was in the Philippines, but since there are no fishball vendors where I live now, the only solution was to try make them. I'm glad I did, because they're fun and easy to make besides being delicious.
Yields about 20 fishballs
Preparation time: 20 minutes + 30 minutes chilling time
Cooking time: 15 minutes
1/2 lb (250 g) white fish fillets (deboned)
1 small onion, minced
1/2 cup (60 g) flour
1 teaspoon salt
1 egg, beaten
2 cups (500 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
Sweet and Spicy Sauce (page 21), Sweet and Sour Sauce (page 21), Sweet Garlic Sauce (page 21) or Garlic Mayonnaise Dip (page 20), for dipping
Carefully check the fish for small bones and then slice it. Place the sliced fish and the onion in a blender or food processor and grind to a paste.
Combine the fish paste with the flour, salt, and egg in a mixing bowl and mix well. Cover and store in a refrigerator for 30 minutes to set.
Scoop out about 1 tablespoon of the fish mixture and shape it into a small ball about 1 in (2.5 cm) across. Continue forming balls with the remainder of the fish mixture.
Heat a small saucepan or wok over high heat and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready.) Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn. Deep-fry the fishballs over medium heat for about 5 minutes, or until browned. Do not overcrowd the pan. Drain on paper towels. Serve immediately with any of the dips that you like.
##
Papaya Shrimp Fritters Ukoy
Filipinos eat Ukoy for a snack or combine them with rice for a complete meal. You may substitute cassava, sweet potato, or bean sprouts for the papaya.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 20 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1 medium unripe papaya (1 1/3 lbs/600 g), peeled and grated to make 3 cups (450 g)
2 cups (500 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
1/4 lb (125 g) small fresh shrimp, shell and head on
Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce (page 22), for dipping
Batter
1 cup (112 g) cornstarch
1 cup (125 g) all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/2 cup (125 ml) annatto water (page 19)
2 eggs, beaten
Combine the ingredients for the Batter and mix thoroughly. Add the papaya and coat it with the Batter.
Heat a medium saucepan or wok over high heat and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready.) Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn.
Place about 1 1/2 tablespoons of the mixture on a small flat plate or saucer and flatten it into a pancake. Place 2 to 3 small shrimp on top. Gently press the shrimp halfway into the papaya mixture so it doesn't fall off.Carefully slide the pancake into the hot oil. (You can use a round piece of banana leaf to slide the whole mixture into the pan.) Deep-fry until crispy and browned. Repeat the process, sliding the papaya and shrimp into the hot oil one by one. Serve with Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce. Add hot steamed rice for an extra hearty snack.
#
chapter 2 soups
In the Philippines, soup, or sabaw, isn't used to start the meals but is normally served as a main dish together with other dishes and steamed rice. That is why Filipino soup dishes are more hearty and never just a plain broth. Sometimes noodles or pasta are added to the soup, such as Noodle Soup with All the Trimmings (page 40) and Macaroni Soup (page 39).
Making Filipino soups is an easy one-step, one-pot process. The most common method to create a stock is to boil chicken or pork in a pot of water (although using bouillon cubes is now common also) and to then add other ingredients and seasonings such as ginger, garlic, tamarind, or fish sauce to form the soup base. In this tropical country, the practice of preparing soup stock beforehand is not common because it takes up valuable space in the refrigerator.
The Philippines is a tropical country with two distinct seasons: wet and dry. From December to February the weather is cooler than usual, though it is still around 68 degrees Fahrenheit (20°C). This is the time of year when soups make a regular appearance on Filipino tables. Soup is a comfort food that warms the body and soothes the soul. When it is scorching hot—as it is much of the time in the Philippines—a light, clear soup like Sinigang Shrimp Soup (page 39) is the more popular choice. Its sour, refreshing taste stimulates the appetite as well as energizes the body. This tamarind-based soup—famous for the variety of different ingredients used to make it, vegetables, shrimp, pork, or beef—is the national soup of the Philippines.
Soup is normally served in a large family-style serving bowl, but it can also be served in individual bowls. Filipinos always eat with a flat plate of steamed rice on the table, so a tasty way to enjoy soup is to spoon it over the rice as a flavoring.
##
Fish Soup with Miso Dip
Pesang Isda sa Miso
Although whole fish (traditionally dalag or snakefish) is used for this dish in the Philippines, any firm-textured white fish fillets or steaks may be used. The fish is boiled with ginger and garlic, and served with an appetizing miso dip. Try using the water from rinsed rice instead of plain water for this soup— Filipinos believe the milky water left over from washing rice contains various nutrients and adds a subtle flavor to the dish.
Cut the fish into 2-inch (5-cm) pieces.
Heat the oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent.
Bring the water to a boil in a saucepan. Reduce the heat to medium and add the fish, ginger, salt, peppercorn and sautéed garlic and onion. Cover and cook for 10 minutes. Add the cabbage and cook for 5 minutes, or until soft.
To make the Miso Dip, heat the oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly brown. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the tomato, miso, fish sauce, and water. Stir over medium-low heat for 5 minutes. You can serve the dip either at hot or at room temperature.
Serve the soup with the Miso Dip and steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1 lb (500 kg) white fish fillets or steaks
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, sliced
5 cups (1.25 liters) water (preferably rice washing water)
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and sliced
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
1 teaspoon whole black peppercorns
4 cups (400 g) chopped cabbage (from about 1/2 head cabbage)
Miso Dip
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 small onion, sliced thinly
1 tomato, chopped
3 tablespoons miso paste
1 tablespoon fish sauce
4 tablespoons water
##
Wonton Soup Pancit Molo
Chinese in origin, Pancit Molo is one of the best-known dishes in the Visayas region of the Philippines. Though the word pancit suggests noodles, here Chinese dumplings or wontons are added to a delicious chicken broth. If you don't feel like making the dumplings, you can buy them frozen or just use noodles and bits of chicken meat instead. Wonton wrappers are versatile: You can cut them into small squares and deep-fry them to make delicious chips or you can make ravioli with them.
To make the Dumplings, mix together the pork, shrimp, water chestnuts, salt, and fish sauce in a large bowl. Set a wrapper on a floured flat surface. Place a teaspoon of the pork mixture in the center of the wrapper. Use your finger to moisten the inner edges of the wrapper; this will seal the wonton wrapper together. Gather the four corners of the wrapper toward the center. Make sure there is no air between the wrapper and its filling. Squeeze the corners tightly together to ensure the dumpling stays closed—if the wrapper is loose, the mixture will come out when boiled. Continue filling the other wrappers until all of the pork mixture is used up. You should be able to make about 20 dumplings.
Add oil to a skillet over medium heat and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Set aside.
Add the water and salt to a stockpot, and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to medium and simmer for 10 minutes. Add the fish sauce, chicken, pepper, garlic, and onion to the broth. Bring to a boil again, and reduce heat to medium. Gently add the wontons to the broth and simmer for 15 minutes.
Ladle the soup and wontons into individual serving bowls. Garnish with the chopped scallions. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 20 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, minced
8 cups (2 liters) water
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
1 chicken thigh, preferably bone-in, sliced 2 tablespoons fish sauce
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
3 green onions (scallions), finely chopped, for garnish
Dumplings
One 16-oz (454-g) package wonton wrappers
1 lb (500 g) ground pork
1/4 lb (125 g) shrimp, shelled, deveined and sliced
3 water chestnuts, minced
1 teaspoon salt
1 tablespoon fish sauce
4 green onions (scallions), chopped
##
Sinigang Shrimp Soup
There are so many ways to prepare this popular dish. The sour taste comes from unripe or young tamarind pods, but the soup can also be made with guavas, pineapples, unripe tomatoes, or calamansi limes instead. Leave the shrimp heads on because they add flavor and aroma to the soup. If you can't find whole fresh or frozen shrimp with the heads still on, opt for shrimp with shells and tails still on. Unlike other soups that warm your body, Sinigang is meant for scorching summer days because the sour taste awakens your tastebuds and stimulates your appetite. This soup is similar to the Thai Tom Yam Kung, but is clear, sweeter, and not as spicy. Shrimp is often used as the main ingredient, but pork, beef, fish, vegetables, or almost anything can be used to make an equally delicious soup.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 25 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
10 unripe tamarind pods, shelled (or 2 tablespoons tamarind concentrate or 1 packet sinigang powder, page 16)
12 cups (3 liters) water
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1/4 lb (125 g) daikon radish, chopped
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and sliced
1/4 lb (125 g) taro root (or potato), peeled and cubed
1/4 lb (125 g) okra, trimmed and sliced diagonally
1 tomato, sliced
1 lb (500 g) fresh shrimp, heads and shells on
1/2 lb (250 g) Chinese (Napa) cabbage or bok choy (or spinach), chopped
1 teaspoon salt
5 tablespoons fish sauce (plus extra for dipping if desired)
Boil the shelled tamarind in a saucepan with 4 cups (1 liter) of the water for about 20 minutes until soft. The tamarind has to be submerged. Add more water if necessary. Using a fine-mesh strainer, strain the mixture into a bowl, mashing the pulp with the back of a spoon to force it through the strainer. Discard the pulp and seeds. Set aside the tamarind liquid.
Pour the remaining 8 cups (2 liters) of water into a stockpot, and bring to a boil. Add the garlic, radish, ginger, taro root, and tamarind liquid (or the tamarind concentrate or the sinigang powder) and cook over medium heat for 15 minutes.
Add the okra, tomato, shrimp, Chinese cabbage, and salt, and 5 tablespoons fish sauce and cook for 15 more minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice and fish sauce, if using.
##
Macaroni Soup
Sopa de Conchitas
This soup uses shell or elbow macaroni and is a Filipino version of minestrone. Popularly known as sopas, this comforting home-style soup has a milky pasta broth with chicken, carrots, cabbage, and Vienna sausages added. A fixture on Filipino tables, it can be served as a snack or as a main course with rice or Pan de Sal Bread Rolls (page 30).
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 45 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife 1 onion, sliced
6 cups (1.5 liters) water
2 chicken thighs, preferably bone-in, sliced
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
1 carrot, peeled and diced
2 cups (250 g) elbow or shell macaroni
3 Vienna sausages, thinly sliced
1/4 lb (125 g) cabbage, thinly sliced
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon unsalted butter
1 cup (250 ml) milk
4 green onions (scallions), sliced
Heat the oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Set aside.
Add the water to a stockpot and bring to a boil. Add the chicken, salt, and carrot and cook over medium-high heat for 15 minutes, or until the meat is tender. Take the chicken out and tear the meat off the bones using two forks—one to hold the bone and one to tear the meat. Discard the bones. Put the meat back into the stockpot. Add the macaroni, sausages, cabbage, pepper, butter, sautéed onion, and garlic. Simmer over medium-low heat for 15 minutes, or until the macaroni is tender. Pour in the milk and simmer for 5 more minutes.
Ladle the soup into individual bowls, garnish with the green onions and serve immediately.
##
Noodle Soup with All the Trimmings
Batchoy
This is another signature dish from the Visayas, a group of islands scattered between the main islands of Luzon and Mindanao. Though this rich noodle soup—made with pork, chicken, and shrimp and topped with crushed pork rind—is enjoyed all across the country, the authentic version is found in La Paz, Iloilo Province. This Iloilo version includes egg noodles, whereas other regions leave the noodles out, making a less hearty but nevertheless satisfying meal.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 30 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
8 cups (2 liters) water
1/3 lb (150 g) bone-in or 1/4 lb (125 g) boneless pork butt or loin
1/4 lb (125 g) pork or chicken liver
1 chicken breast, preferably bone-in
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, finely sliced
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and finely sliced
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined
1 teaspoon salt
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1 tablespoon bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
1/4 teaspoon sugar
8 oz (240 g) fresh Chinese egg noodles or fettucine or 4 oz (100 g) dried ramen noodles
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Garnishes
4 green onions (scallions), finely sliced
4 tablespoons Fried Garlic (page 23)
1/2 cup (70 g) fried pork rinds, coarsely crushed
Bring the water to a boil in a stockpot. Add the pork, liver, and chicken then cook over high heat for 15 minutes. Skim off the fat.
Using a slotted spoon, remove the pork, chicken, and liver. Reserve the broth. Shred the meat using two forks—one to hold the meat secure on a cutting board and the other to pull the meat into shreds. Slice the liver thinly. Set aside the shredded meat and sliced liver.
Heat the oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the ginger and sauté for 3 minutes. Turn off the heat and carefully remove them from the skillet, keeping as much oil in the skillet as possible, and set aside.
In the same skillet, sauté the shredded pork and chicken over medium heat for about 5 minutes, or until lightly browned. Add the shrimp and sauté for 5 minutes more. Set aside.
Add the sautéed garlic and ginger to the broth in the stockpot. Bring to a boil and add the salt, fish sauce, sautéed shrimp paste and sugar. Reduce the heat to medium and add the noodles. Simmer until the noodles are soft— about 10 minutes for dried noodles and 2 to 3 minutes for fresh noodles. Add the pepper.
Ladle the broth and noodles into individual bowls. Top with the sautéed pork and chicken and sliced liver. Sprinkle on the scallions, fried garlic and fried pork rinds. Serve hot.
##
Quick Chicken Eggdrop Soup
Misuang Manok
This noodle soup is perfect for chilly weather or for alleviating the effects of a cold. It's quick and easy with relatively few ingredients, but a heartier version could include meatballs, prawns, or mushrooms. Misua is a very fine white Chinese noodle made from wheat flour. Unlike other noodles, misua does not require soaking, but it does cook very quickly, so be careful not to overcook it.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, sliced thinly
8 cups (2 liters) water
1 chicken breast or thigh, preferably bone-in, sliced
3 tablespoons fish sauce
1 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
2 eggs, beaten
4 oz (100 g) dried white wheat noodles (misua)
3 green onions (scallions), minced
Heat the oil in a large saucepan over medium heat and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the water and bring to a boil. Add the chicken, fish sauce, salt and pepper and cook over medium heat for 15 minutes.
Add the egg slowly while stirring the soup. Add the noodles and simmer over medium-low heat for 3 minutes, or until soft.
Ladle the soup into individual bowls and garnish with the green onions. Serve immediately.
##
Chicken Soup with Green Papaya
Tinolang Manok
The fragrant broth of Tinola is the ultimate comfort food that Filipinos crave. This simple, hearty and soothing soup with tender chicken, ginger, papaya, and moringa leaves makes a tasty and healthy meal. Moringa leaves, or malunggay, are native to India and contain beta-carotene, vitamin C, and iron. The leaves are used like spinach. Pluck the leaves from the branches just before you cook them. Use baby spinach leaves instead if you cannot find moringa leaves.
Heat 1 tablespoon of the oil in a skillet over medium heat and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and ginger and sauté for 10 minutes. Remove from the skillet. Set aside.
Rub the chicken with the salt. To the same skillet, add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil and set over medium heat. Add the chicken and sauté for 10 minutes, or until lightly browned.
Add the water to a pot and bring to a boil. Add the sautéed chicken, papaya and fish sauce and continue to cook over medium heat for 20 minutes until the papaya is tender. Add the pepper and moringa leaves or spinach. Cover and cook for 5 more minutes.
Serve hot with steamed rice and fish sauce, if using.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 45 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, thinly sliced
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and sliced into strips
4 chicken thighs or breasts, preferably bone-in, cut in halves
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
8 cups (2 liters) water
1 green papaya (or chayote), peeled, deseeded, and cut into bite-size pieces
2 tablespoons fish sauce (plus extra for dipping if desired)
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1/2 cup (50 g) moringa leaves or baby spinach leaves
##
Pork and Corn Soup
Nilagang Baboy
You can find this soup of succulent pork, corn, banana, and spinach in a garlic-infused broth on any Filipino table and as a part of the Christmas celebration or on cold, rainy days. It's simple to make and involves a slow cooking process that ensures the meat is tender and the broth is flavorful.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour 15 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, sliced
8 cups (2 liters) water
1 lb (500 g) bone-in or 3/4 lb (750 g) boneless, lean pork (such as chops, loin, center loin roast, loin blade chop), chopped into pieces
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
1 tablespoon whole black peppercorns
2 fresh or frozen ears corn, cut into 2-in (5-cm) lengths
1 potato, peeled and sliced
2 slightly ripe saba bananas (or 1 plantain or 2 unripe regular bananas), sliced
1/2 head green cabbage, roughly chopped
1/4 lb (125 g) spinach, chopped
1 teaspoon sugar
5 tablespoons fish sauce (plus extra for dipping, if desired)
Heat the oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Set aside.
Bring the water to a boil in a stockpot. Add the pork (and any bones), corn and the salt and cook over medium-high heat for 15 minutes. Skim the fat off the broth using a large spoon or ladle.
Add the sautéed garlic and onion, peppercorns, potato, and banana and cook over medium heat for 20 minutes. Add the cabbage, spinach, sugar and fish sauce and cook for 5 more minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice and fish sauce, if using. Remove the cobs before serving, if desired. (Filipinos leave them in for a rustic look!)
Tip: If you're using a bone-in cut of pork, ask your butcher to cut it into pieces for you. Or, if the bone is too daunting to cut through at home, simply cut the meat off the bone and add the bones to the soup during cooking. When cooked, the meat will nearly fall of the bones.
##
Pork Soup with Squash
Sopas de Upo
For this soup, the pork is first boiled to render the fat, and then sautéed to add a distinct flavor to the meat (this is called "twice cooking"). The garlic and peppercorns give it a surprisingly delicious taste. The vegetable upo belongs to the squash family and is also called "long gourd," "upo squash," or "long squash." Native to Africa but widely grown in the tropics and in some European countries, it tastes mostly bland and watery. Zucchini, summer squash, white gourd, chayote, or winter melon make good substitutes. Upo cooks quickly and has a high nutritional value.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 55 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, sliced
8 cups (2 liters) water
2 lbs (1 kg) bone-in or 1 1/2 lbs (750 g) boneless pork loin or pork belly (also called "side pork")
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
3 lbs (1.5 kg) long gourd (upo) or other squash or gourd (see suggestions, above), peeled, deseeded, roughly chopped into bite-size pieces
1 tablespoon whole black peppercorns
5 tablespoons fish sauce (plus extra for dipping, if desired)
Heat 1 tablespoon of the oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Set aside.
Add the water to a stockpot and bring to a boil. Add the pork and salt and cook over medium-high heat for 15 minutes. Skim the fat off the top of the broth. Take the pork out of the water using a slotted spoon. Reserve the broth.
Heat the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil in a skillet over medium heat. Add the pork and sauté for 10 minutes, or until lightly browned.
Return the pork to the stockpot. Add the squash, peppercorns, fish sauce and the sautéed garlic and onion. Cook over medium heat for 30 minutes. Serve hot with rice and the fish sauce, if using.
#
chapter 3 meat dishes
Filipinos love pork, or baboy, as much as the Chinese and Spanish do. In fact, many Filipino households in rural areas raise pigs solely for the purpose of selling them to the local butcher or for personal consumption. No part of the pig goes unused—the lungs, heart, face and blood are used to make a variety of delicious dishes while the skin is turned into chicharon, or fried pork rinds (page 14). And then there's the iconic whole roasted pig (Litson Baboy) with the famous lechon sauce that's served on holidays and other special occasions. I've included the easier-to-prepare Crispy Lechon Pork (Litson Kawali, page 48) that is also served with the lechon sauce.
The Spanish brought domesticated cattle to the Philippines, but it was the Americans who made beef, or baka, popular when they introduced their favorite beef dishes, including steaks and the famous American hamburger. Before the arrival of cows, the traditional beast of burden and source of red meat in the Philippines had been the water buffalo. Still seen pulling plows and carts in the countryside, its meat can be delicious, especially in sausages and corned beef.
Goat meat (kambing) is not so common in the Philippines, but in a few regions such as western Mindanao where the Muslim religion prohibits eating pork, it's used more often. Kaldereta Beef Stew (page 53) is a popular way to prepare goat meat.
Regardless of the type of meat used, Filipinos generally marinate their meat to tenderize it and enrich the overall flavor. Make sure you allow enough time to properly marinate your meat, as this is the secret to preparing flavorful meat dishes.
##
Roasted Marinated Pork
The aroma of grilled pork is always amazing, especially when the pork has been marinated overnight in soy sauce, vinegar, black pepper, sugar and garlic. Grilling the pork gives the dish the distinctive flavor you'll find in Filipino homes. However, grilling isn't always practical or possible, so I often roast the meat in the oven, as this recipe indicates, to get a similar affect. Whichever way you decide to cook it, it's really the marinade that makes this pork so delicious, so plan ahead and marinate the meat the night before.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes + overnight marinating time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) meaty pork spareribs
Vinegar Garlic Sauce (page 20) or SpicyGarlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce (page 22), for dipping
Marinade
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 cup (250 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
2 tablespoons sugar
1 teaspoon salt
3 tablespoons soy sauce
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a mixing bowl. Stir until the sugar is dissolved. Arrange the meat in a large casserole dish and pour the marinade over the meat. Cover the dish and keep overnight in the refrigerator.
Preheat the oven to 425°F (220°C). Remove the meat from the marinade. Discard the marinade. Roast the meat for 15 minutes or until browned on top. Turn the meat and continue cooking until it is done (about 15 minutes more).
If you're grilling the ribs, set up a grill for indirect grilling and preheat to medium. Grill the ribs until browned, about 15 minutes, with the grill lid closed. Turn the ribs over and grill for 15 minutes more, with the lid closed.
Slice into serving portions and serve hot with steamed rice and the Vinegar Garlic Sauce or Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce.
##
Sweet Soy Pork with Black Beans
Humba
Once again, the marinade is the key to this delicious pork recipe. This Visayan dish uses marinated pork belly, which has great flavor and texture, but ham hocks or pork neck will also work. The marinated meat is simmered for nearly an hour until all the liquid is gone making the meat melt-in-the-mouth tender. This dish is also called Adobong Visaya or Humb a, derived from the Chinese word meaning "red braised meat." Adding the fermented black beans to the sauce brings an additional pungency to the pork.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes + overnight marinating time
Cooking time: 1 hour
2 lbs (1 kg) pork belly (also called "side pork") or shoulder, cut into serving pieces
3 tablespoons bottled or canned fermented black beans or black bean sauce
Marinade
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1/2 cup (125 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1/2 cup (100 g) brown sugar
3 tablespoons soy sauce
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon whole black peppercorns 2 cups (500 ml) water
1 bay leaf
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a mixing bowl. Stir until the sugar is dissolved. Pour the Marinade over the meat. Cover and keep overnight in the refrigerator.
Transfer the meat and marinade to a saucepan and bring to a boil over high heat. Reduce the heat to medium-low and simmer until the meat is tender, for about 50 minutes. Add the black beans and simmer until most of the liquid has evaporated, about 10 minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice.
##
Crispy Lechon Pork
Litson Kawali
While Litson (or Lechon) Baboy refers to the whole roasted pig that is served for fiestas and special occasions, Litson Kawali is an everyday dish that Filipinos love to cook and eat. The pork is first simmered for twenty minutes and then it is flash-fried in oil to give it a crunch. Sometimes, I'll fry it the day before I serve it and then fry it one more time just before it's served to make it even crunchier. It's the Lechon Sauce that makes this dish a Filipino favorite.
Place the pork and water in a large saucepan, bring to a boil. Add the garlic, bay leaf, pepper and salt and cook over medium heat for 20 minutes or until the meat is done. Drain the pork and discard the water and discard the water. Pat the pork dry with paper towels, and cut into serving pieces.
Heat a small saucepan or wok over high heat and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready.) Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn. Add a couple of pieces of pork at a time and deep-fry until brown and crispy. Do not overcrowd the pan. Blisters should appear on the skin. Remove the pork and drain on paper towels.
Make the Liver Paste for the Lechon Sauce, following the recipe on page 23.
To make the Lechon Sauce, heat a saucepan or skillet over medium heat and add the oil and garlic. Sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the Liver Paste, sugar, vinegar, water, soy sauce, salt and pepper and simmer over medium heat for 10 minutes or until the sauce thickens. Serve the pork with the Lechon Sauce and hot steamed rice.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 20 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) pork belly (or "side pork") or shoulder, preferably with skin on
8 cups (2 liters) water
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 bay leaf
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper 1 teaspoon salt
2 cups (500 ml) oil, for deep-frying
Lechon Sauce (Makes about 1 1/2 cups/375 ml)
1 cup (200 g) Liver Paste (page 23)
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 tablespoon sugar
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
3 tablespoons water
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Glazed Christmas Ham with Pineapple
Hamon
An elegant roasted ham, or hamon, is the centerpiece of a Filipino family's Christmas Eve dinner. Hamon is simple to make and impressive in its presentation—especially when garnished with fresh pineapple slices. After everyone has had their fill, the leftovers can be used in other dishes like Chicken Stew with Vegetables (page 66) or in delicious sandwiches made with Pan de Sal Bread Rolls (page 30).
Serves 8
Preparation time: 25 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour 25 minutes
5 lbs (2.25 kg) smoked bone-in ham leg
8 cups (2 liters) pineapple juice
2 cups (400 g) brown sugar
1/2 cup (125 ml) water
1/2 lb (250 g) peeled, cored and sliced fresh pineapple (from about 1/2 pineapple) or one 20-oz (567-g) canned pineapple slices, for garnish
Place the ham, pineapple juice, and 1 cup (200 g) of the brown sugar in a stockpot. The ham should be submerged in the juice. Add more juice or some water to cover, if necessary. Bring to a boil and then reduce the heat to medium and cook for 1 hour. The skin should come off easily when the ham is done. Drain and set aside to cool.
Preheat the oven to 400°F (200°C).
To make the glaze, place the remaining 1 cup (200 g) of brown sugar and the water in a small saucepan. Bring to a boil over medium heat and cook for 3 minutes while stirring constantly.
Place the ham on a baking tray, score the top of the ham in a crisscross pattern using a knife. Brush on the glaze and bake for 20 minutes or until browned.
Garnish with the pineapple pieces and serve.
##
Fiery Pork Stew with Coconut
Bicol Express
This is the signature dish of the Bicol Province in the Southeastern part of Luzon, a cuisine known for its generous use of hot chili peppers and coconut milk. One teaspoonful of this spicy recipe will send you running for a glass of water like an "express train." Reducing the amount of chili peppers will lower the "heat" if you're not into spicy food, but if you like your food hot then this is the perfect dish for you. Filipino farmers love this dish because it gives them an energy boost before they spend the day under the scorching Philippine sun.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, sliced
1 tomato, sliced
2 lbs (1 kg) pork butt or belly (also called "side pork"), cut into bite-size pieces
1/2 teaspoon salt
One 13 1/2-oz (400-ml) can coconut milk
4 to 6 finger-length green chili peppers, deseeded and thinly sliced
1 tablespoon bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
Heat a skillet over high heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and tomato, and sauté until the onion is translucent.
Add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil, the pork and salt, and sauté over medium heat for 10 minutes, or until lightly browned. Add the coconut milk and bring to a boil. Lower the heat to medium and cook for 15 minutes. Add the chili peppers and cook 5 minutes more. Remove from the heat and stir in the sautéed shrimp paste. Serve hot with steamed rice.
##
Traditional Tocino Bacon
It takes a full week for this bacon to cure, but the results are amazing. In this Kapampangan version of the dish, all you need is salt and sugar, and then let time do its work in curing the pork into a sweet-tasting, heavenly dish. Tocino is one-third of the Filipino popular breakfast meal called Tosilog —an acronym for Tocino, Sinangag (fried rice), and Pritong Itlog (fried egg). Placing the meat in the freezer until it's partially frozen will make it easier to cut.
Combine the salt and sugar in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly. Dredge each meat slice in the mixture. Place in an airtight container and store in the refrigerator for about 1 week.
To cook the meat, place the water and cured meat in a large skillet, and bring to a boil. Stir the meat over medium heat until the water evaporates, about 10 minutes. Add the oil and fry over low heat to your liking. Serve hot with Fried Rice with Egg (page 91) and 1 fried egg per person.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes + 1 week storing time
Cooking time: 15 minutes
1 tablespoon salt
1/2 cup (50 g) sugar
2 lbs (1 kg) boneless pork belly or shoulder, sliced 3 cups (750 ml) water
1 tablespoon oil
Fried Rice with Egg (page 91)
4–6 fried eggs (1 egg per person)
##
Pork and Tomato Stew Menudo
Some Filipinos believe that Menudo will cure a hangover, and whether that is true or not, this hearty dish will definitely satisfy a craving for meat. Menudo means "small" and so the pork in this dish is sliced into bite-size pieces. Unlike the spicy Mexican Menudo, this version is milder and sweeter.
Rinse the pork and liver and cut into bite-size cubes. Place the cubed meat in a saucepan, cover with water, and bring to gentle boil over medium heat. Boil for 10 minutes and then drain the meat well (discard the cooking liquid).
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly brown. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the meat and liver and fry until lightly brown. Add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil, carrot, potato, fish sauce, and cook over medium heat for 15 minutes, stirring frequently.
Add the green and red bell pepper, chickpeas, tomato, tomato sauce, paprika, water, and soy sauce. Cover and cook over medium heat for 20 minutes or until the meat is tender. Stir occasionally.
Add the raisins, salt and pepper, and simmer for 5 more minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 35 minutes
Cooking time: 45 minutes
1 lb (450 g) bone-in, pork belly (also called "side pork") or loin, rinsed and cut into cubes
1/4 lb (110 g) pork or chicken liver, rinsed and cut into cubes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, diced
1 carrot, peeled and diced
1 potato, peeled and diced
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1 green bell pepper, deseeded and diced
1 red bell pepper, deseeded and diced
One 15-oz (420-g) can chickpeas, drained
1 tomato, chopped
One 8-oz (227-g) can tomato sauce
1/2 teaspoon paprika
1 tablespoon water
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1/2 cup (70 g) raisins
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Filipino Beefsteak
This dish is called Bistek in the Philippines, which comes from the Spanish word bistec or "beefsteak." The recipe calls for first marinating the meat in soy sauce, lime juice and black pepper, and then sautéeing it with garlic and onion, which tenderizes the meat and adds a delicious aroma and flavor. Because Filipinos do not use a knife at the table, Bistek is not served as a large slab of steak but is always thinly sliced. This luscious and quick meal is always a big hit with my friends and family.
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a large mixing bowl. Stir until the sugar is dissolved. Add in the meat, and toss to coat. Marinate the meat in the refrigerator for at least 3 hours or overnight. Reserve the marinade.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté for 2 minutes. Remove half of the onion and set aside to be used for garnish later. Add the meat and sauté for about 10 minutes. Pour in the reserved marinade and simmer over medium heat for another 10 minutes.
Place the beef on a serving platter and garnish with the reserved onion and pineapple, if using. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes + marinating time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) beef sirloin or London broil, sliced
2 tablespoons oil
7 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, cut into rings
1/2 lb (250 g) peeled, cored and sliced fresh pineapple (from about 1/2 pineapple) or one 20-oz (567-g) can pineapple slices or chunks (optional), for garnish
Marinade
1 tablespoon sugar
1/2 cup (125 ml) freshly squeezed calamansi or lime juice
1/2 cup (125 ml) soy sauce
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Kaldereta Beef Stew
A specialty of Pampanga province, this rich beef stew has potatoes, green peas, carrot, and bell pepper simmered in a flavorful tomato sauce. The sauce-thickening agent is liver paste which adds a distinctive flavor to the dish. This stew is traditionally made with goat meat and served during fiesta time when a whole goat is slaughtered to feed a large number of people. It is equally delicious prepared with lamb, pork, or chicken. Whichever meat you choose, this makes a great one-pot meal.
Make the Liver Paste, following the recipe on page 23.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add the oil and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the meat and sauté for about 10 minutes.
In a large saucepan over medium heat, add the sautéed meat, garlic, onion, as well as the water, salt, pepper, and vinegar. Cook for about 10 minutes, stirring frequently.
Add the chili pepper, bay leaf, bell pepper, potato, carrot, green peas, tomato, sugar, tomato sauce and Liver Paste. Bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to medium-low and simmer for 1 hour or until the meat is tender.
Place on a serving bowl and top with grated cheese, if using. Serve with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour 30 minutes
1 cup (200 g) Liver Paste (page 23)
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife 1 onion, sliced
1 lb (500 g) beef shank or chuck, cut into bitesize pieces
2 cups (500 ml) water
1/2 tablespoon salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1 finger-length green chili pepper, deseeded and minced
1 bay leaf
1 small bell pepper, deseeded and sliced
1 potato, peeled and diced
1 small carrot, peeled and diced
1/2 cup (75 g) fresh or frozen green peas
1 tomato, sliced
1 teaspoon sugar
One 8-oz (227-g) can tomato sauce
1/2 cup (50 g) grated cheddar cheese (optional)
##
Marinated Morcon Stuffed Beef Roll Morcon
In Spain, cured sausage is used to stuff this dish, but people of the Philippines make it with carrots, pickles, Vienna sausages, cheese, and eggs. The filling of this dish is rolled into a large sheet of marinated flank steak (about 1/4-inch or 6-mm thick) and tied with twine before being simmered in a flavorful tomato-based sauce. Your butcher can cut the flank steak to the right size, or if you can't find one large piece of meat, then use two pieces at least 8 inches (20 cm) wide.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 20 minutes + marinating time
Cooking time: 55minutes
About 2 lbs (1 kg) flank steak, depending on the size of the steak cut into one large 1/4-in (6-mm)-thick sheet or multiple smaller sheets at least 8 in (20 cm) wide
One 5-oz (142-g) can Vienna sausages
1 carrot, peeled and cut into 1/2-in (1.25-cm) strips
1/4 cup (100 g) sweet gherkin pickles, sliced into strips
2 thin slices cheddar cheese (about 1/8-in/3-mm thick)
2 hard-boiled eggs, quartered
2 tablespoons all-purpose flour
2 tablespoons oil
Kitchen twine
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 small onion, minced
1 cup (250 ml) water
1 bay leaf
One 8-oz (227-g) can tomato sauce
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper 1 teaspoon salt
4 tablespoons soy sauce
Marinade
2 tablespoons soy sauce
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1/2 cup (125 ml) freshly squeezed calamansi or lime juice
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a small bowl. Place the beef in a casserole dish and pour the marinade over the meat, turning the beef to coat evenly. Marinate the beef in the refrigerator for at least 1 hour. Reserve the marinade.
Form the beef roll following the steps shown below.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the beef roll and brown it on all sides, about 5 minutes. Remove the meat and set aside.
Heat a large skillet over medium heat and add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the reserved marinade, water, bay leaf, tomato sauce, pepper, salt, and soy sauce and cook over medium heat for 5 minutes, stirring occasionally. Add the beef roll and cover. Simmer over medium-low heat for about 45 minutes—remember to turn the beef roll occasionally—or until it is cooked. Remove the beef roll.
Remove the twine and slice the beef roll into several disks. Place the sliced beef roll on a serving platter and spoon the sauce over it. Serve hot with steamed rice.
How to make the Stuffed Beef Roll
##
Oxtail Vegetable Stew
Kare-Kare
This thick stew makes a hearty meal with an unusual combination of flavors. Eggplant and green beans in a savory peanut butter sauce accent the meaty goodness of delectable oxtails. Oxtails might be hard to find, or rather expensive, in which case you can substitute beef shank or short ribs, or even pork. Some people use unsweetened peanut butter, but I like the tang of the more common sweetened peanut butter. Serve it with rice and some bagoong for dipping.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 20 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour
1 1/4 lbs (600 g) oxtail (or beef shank or ribs)
6 cups (1.5 liters) water
2 teaspoons salt
2 tablespoons uncooked white rice (or store-bought rice flour)
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, sliced
1/2 cup (125 ml) annatto water (see page 19) (optional)
4 tablespoons bottled peanut butter
1/2 lb (225 g) green beans, trimmed and cut into 2-in (5-cm) lengths
1 lb (400 g) eggplant, trimmed and sliced
1 head Chinese (Napa) cabbage), chopped, or 2 bunches spinach, rinsed and trimmed
2 tablespoons bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
Slice the oxtail into 1/ 2 -inch (1.25-cm) pieces or cut the beef into cubes. Place the meat in a saucepan. Add the water and 1 teaspoon of the salt and bring to a boil. Cook over medium heat for 15 minutes or until the meat becomes tender. Skim the fat from the top of the broth. Set aside and reserve the broth.
Place the rice in a small skillet and stir over medium heat for 10 minutes or until lightly browned. Place toasted rice in a mortar or food processor and grind to a flourlike consistency. If you're using pre-ground rice flour, place the flour in small skillet and lightly brown over medium heat, about 5 minutes, stirring frequently. Set aside.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the meat and the remaining 1 teaspoon of salt. Cook until lightly browned.
In a saucepan, add 4 cups (1 liter) of the reserved broth, the annatto water, if using, peanut butter, toasted rice flour, green beans, and eggplant and cook over medium heat for 20 minutes or until tender, stirring occasionally. Add the Chinese cabbage and simmer over medium-low heat for 5 minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice and sautéed shrimp paste.
##
Stuffed Meatloaf with Cheese and Sausage
Embutido
The Filipino version of Embutido, which means "sausage" is a steamed meatloaf made with ground pork, bell peppers, raisins, hardboiled eggs, and cheese. (The original Spanish version of this dish is really a kind of sausage and more like the Filipino longganisa.) You can make these colorful meatloafs over the weekend, keep them in the refrigerator, and serve a few days later, or even a week later if you freeze them. They taste delicious chilled or fried.
Serves 6
Preparation time: 30 minutes
Cooking time: 1 1/2 hours
2 lbs (1 kg) ground pork or beef
1 carrot, peeled and grated
1 bell pepper, deseeded and grated
1/2 cup (70 g) raisins
1 cup (100 g) grated cheddar cheese
1 tablespoon salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 teaspoon cornstarch
6 sheets heavy duty aluminum foil, each about 12 x 15 in (30 x 38 cm)
3 hard-boiled eggs, cut into wedges
One 5-oz (142-g) can Vienna sausages
Banana ketchup or tomato ketchup, for dipping
Mix the ground pork or beef, carrot, bell pepper, raisins, cheese, salt, pepper, and cornstarch in a large bowl. Mix thoroughly with a wooden spoon. Divide the mixture into 6 equal portions.
Spread one portion of the meat mixture on a sheet of heavy duty aluminum foil and flatten. Place 2 or 3 egg wedges and a Vienna sausage in the middle of the mixture. Roll up the mixture by bringing up the foil and pressing the mixture. Make sure that the meat mixture covers the eggs and sausage. Be careful not to roll the foil inside the meat when rolling it up. Tightly twist both ends to seal them shut (like the ends of a Tootsie Roll). If not tightly wrapped, the meat will crumble when the foil is opened.
Arrange the meatloafs in a steamer and cook for 1 hour. Set aside to cool for at least 20 minutes before unwrapping and slicing the rolls.
Slice across into 1/ 2 -inch disks and arrange onto a serving platter. Serve with steamed rice and banana ketchup or tomato ketchup on the side.
#
chapter 4 poultry dishes
When in the Philippines, one is almost always awakened by the crowing of early-rising roosters. Clucking hens and chirping chicks provide an auditory backdrop to a typical day in the Filipino countryside. Chickens are found roaming all over the Philippines providing their owners with a fresh eggs and meat. Like the pig, no part of the chicken, or manok, goes to waste. Street vendors offer a broad and unusual selection of colorfully named chicken parts: grilled chicken heads (Filipinos nickname this street food the "helmet"), grilled chicken feet (called "adidas"), and grilled intestines (or "IUD").
Chicken is a great vehicle to absorb the flavors of spices and seasonings, and it cooks relatively quickly. Specific cuts of chicken are used in different dishes; however, most are bone-in pieces for the additional flavor that the bones provide.
One of the all-time favorite Filipino dishes is Chicken Adobo (page 64). Because it uses a great deal of vinegar, it keeps for a couple of days without refrigeration, and the taste gets better and better the longer it is kept as the sauce and spices penetrate the meat. One whiff of this familiar dish will make any Filipino expatriate nostalgic for his or her homeland.
Another classic chicken dish is Pochero (Chicken Stew with Vegetables, page 66). It is a one-pot stew that uses any kind of meat—chicken, ham, chorizo, beef, or pork—and vegetables, although chicken is the most common main ingredient. This is usually prepared on Sundays for lunch in many Filipino households.
Also included in this chapter is Barbecued Chicken Skewers (page 61), which are always served at parties and family get-togethers. The chicken is marinated in limejuice and a lemon-lime soda pop, providing a subtle, sweet flavor that also tenderizes the meat.
##
Chicken and Vegetables in Tangy Tomato Sauce
Afritadang Manok
In this dish, juicy chicken is first stir-fried and then slow-braised with bell peppers and potatoes in a tomato-based sauce. Fritada means "fried" in Spanish and manok is "chicken" in Tagalog. Variations of this dish are found throughout the Philippines. Any part of the chicken can be used but Filipinos generally prefer to cook with bone-in meat as it is more flavorful. This recipe works great with pork, beef or fish.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 50 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 onion, minced
2 lbs (1 kg) skinless bone-in chicken pieces (breasts, thighs or drumsticks)
1 teaspoon salt
1 potato, peeled and diced
1 cup (250 ml) water
1 bay leaf
1 tomato, diced
One 8-oz (227-g) can tomato sauce
1/2 cup (75 g) fresh or frozen green peas
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1 bell pepper, deseeded and diced
1 teaspoon sugar
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Heat a large skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Remove the garlic and onion, and reserve.
Rub the chicken pieces with the salt. Add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil to the same skillet over medium heat and sauté the chicken until lightly browned, about 15 minutes.
Place the potato and water in a saucepan and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to medium. Add the sautéed chicken, garlic, onion, bay leaf, tomato, tomato sauce, green peas, fish sauce, bell pepper, and sugar. Cover and simmer over medium to low heat for 30 minutes, or until tender. Add ground black pepper and simmer for 3 more minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice.
##
Barbecued Chicken Skewers
Inihaw na Manok
Marinated chunks of chicken are threaded on bamboo skewers and grilled over an open fire or under a broiler in the oven or oven-roasted. In this recipe, the meat is usually seasoned with a sweet garlic marinade before grilling. Soda pop added to the marinade gives the meat a sweet flavor and tenderizes it too. When I cook this dish, I always make double portions. The leftovers are perfect for the next day's lunch box and because it freezes well, it makes a great "instant meal." Also try it using pork, any vegetable or seafood.
Serves 6
Preparation time: 10 minutes + 3 hours marinating time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) boneless, skinless chicken breasts or thighs
12 to 15 bamboo skewers, soaked in water for 30 minutes prior to grilling or roasting
Vinegar Garlic Sauce (page 20) or Sweet and Spicy Sauce (page 21), for dipping
Marinade
1 cup (250 ml) soy sauce
1/3 cup (80 ml) freshly squeezed calamansi or lime juice
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, minced
One 12-oz (355-ml) can Sprite or 7-Up
1 tablespoon sugar
1 tablespoon salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Cut the chicken into 1-inch (2-cm) cubes. Combine the Marinade ingredients in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly. Add the chicken pieces and coat them well, then place in the refrigerator for at least 3 hours or overnight. Reserve the liquid to use as basting sauce.
Thread 5 or 6 pieces of meat onto each skewer. To grill the skewers, set up a grill for direct grilling and preheat to medium to high heat. To broil the skewers in the oven, turn the broiler to high and set the oven rack 3 to 5 inches (7.5 to 12.75 cm) from the heat source. Grill or broil the chicken for a total of about 10 minutes, turning frequently and basting with the leftover Marinade.
To oven roast the skewers, preheat the oven to 400°F (200°C). Cook the chicken for about 20 minutes, turning frequently and basting with the leftover Marinade. The chicken is done when it has turned golden brown and crispy at the edges, but be careful not overcook it. Serve hot with Vinegar Garlic Sauce or Sweet and Spicy Sauce and steamed rice.
##
Coconut Chicken with Pineapple
Pininyahang Manok
Filipino children love this dish. The tender pieces of chicken and the sweet pineapple chunks float in a creamy bath of coconut milk. This savory and sweet combination produces a dish that people of all ages will love. This recipe demonstrates the flexibility of pineapple, a fruit that is used for a main dish as well as a part of a dessert. Evaporated milk can be a convenient substitute for coconut milk.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Remove the sautéed garlic and onion, and set aside.
Toss the chicken cubes with the salt. To the same skillet over medium-high heat, add the remaining 1 tablespoon of the oil. Stir-fry the chicken for about 15 minutes or until lightly browned. Add the garlic and onion.
Add the tomato, coconut milk and pineapple and simmer over medium-low heat for 10 minutes. Season with the fish sauce. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, sliced
1 1/2 lbs (750 g) boneless, skinless chicken breasts, thighs or drumsticks, cut into cubes
1 teaspoon salt
1 tomato, diced
One 13 1/2-oz (400-ml) can coconut milk
2 1/2 cups (250 g) fresh or canned pineapple, cubed
1 tablespoon fish sauce
##
Tangy Asado Chicken
With a beautiful contrast of textures and colors, this Filipino Asado is a moderately spicy chicken dish simmered in tomatoes and Filipino cane vinegar. Its origins are Chinese, and it highlights the best of Comida China in Philippine cuisine. The pork or beef version is used as a filling for steamed buns, called siopao, another Chinese legacy.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Remove from the skillet and set aside.
Rub the chicken with the salt. To the same skillet over medium heat, add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil and sauté the chicken until lightly browned, about 10 minutes. Set aside.
In a large saucepan, add the tomatoes, chili pepper, bay leaf, vinegar, and water and bring to a boil. Reduce heat to medium. Add the sautéed chicken, garlic, onion, paprika, pepper, and soy sauce and cook for 20 minutes, or until tender. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 35 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed
1 onion, finely sliced
2 to 2 1/2 lbs (1 to 1.25 kg) bone-in chicken pieces (breast, thighs, and/or drumsticks)
1 teaspoon salt
2 tomatoes, sliced
1 finger-length green chili pepper, minced 1 bay leaf
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1/2 cup (125 ml) water
1 tablespoon paprika
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon soy sauce
##
Chicken Adobo
Adobo is, hands down, the most popular dish in the Philippines. The local favorites are Chicken Adobo and Pork Adobo, although Adobo can also be made using seafood, beef, or vegetables. Marinating the meat overnight in the vinegar marinade results in a rich flavor and smooth texture. Prepare the dish a day before and then reheat it the next day for a thicker sauce and a more robust flavor. Served with a large bowl of steamed rice, Adobo's soy sauce and vinegar combination can be addictive. Vinegar inhibits spoilage, so Adobo can be kept for a few days without refrigeration. (Avoid using an aluminum saucepan when cooking Adobo as the vinegar will react chemically with the aluminum and change the taste of the dish. Cast iron, enameled cast iron, or stainless-steel pans are better choices.)
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes + overnight marinating time
Cooking time: 1 hour
2 1/2 lbs (1.25 kg) bone-in chicken breasts, thighs or drumsticks
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 teaspoon whole black peppercorns
1 teaspoon brown sugar
1 bay leaf
1 large onion, sliced into rings
Adobo Marinade
1 cup (250 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1/4 cup (65 ml) freshly squeezed calamansi or lime juice
1 cup (250 ml) soy sauce
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly. Add the chicken and store overnight in the refrigerator.
Remove the chicken from the Marinade. Reserve the Marinade. Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the chicken and sauté for 10 minutes.
Add the Marinade, peppercorns, sugar, and bay leaf. Cover the pan and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to medium-low. Simmer until the meat is tender, 45 minutes or more. Add the onion and simmer 5 minutes more. Serve hot with steamed rice.
##
Filipino Fried Chicken
Pritong Manok
This Filipino–style fried chicken is crispy on the outside and juicy and moist on the inside. What brings out the flavor in this otherwise common dish are the spices and vinegar that seep into the chicken when they are simmered together. Frying the chicken locks the juice inside. This classic is really tasty when served with banana ketchup or a vinegar-based dipping sauce—try Vinegar Garlic Sauce (page 20).
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1/2 cup (125 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
4 cups (1 liter) water
5 cloves garlic, crushed
1 bay leaf
1/2 cup (125 ml) soy sauce
1 tablespoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon salt
2 lbs (1 kg) bone-in, skin-on, chicken breasts, thighs, drumsticks or wings
1 cup (125 g) all-purpose flour
3 cups (750 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
Vinegar Garlic Sauce (page 20) or banana ketchup, for dipping
In a saucepan, place the vinegar, water, garlic, bay leaf, soy sauce, pepper and 1/ 2 tablespoon of salt. Bring to a boil and then add the chicken. Cook over high heat for 10 minutes. Drain and pat dry with paper towels.
Place the flour and remaining 1/ 2 tablespoon of the salt in a mixing bowl. Add the chicken and coat the pieces evenly.
Heat a saucepan or wok over high heat, and add the oil. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° and 190°C when ready.) Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature so that the oil doesn't burn.
Deep-fry the chicken pieces for about 15 minutes or until lightly browned. Do not overcrowd the pan. Serve hot with steamed rice and banana ketchup or Vinegar Garlic Sauce.
##
Chicken Stew with Vegetables
Pochero
Filipino Pochero is similar to Spanish Cocido, a stew of chicken, sausage and vegetables. The Filipino version, however, uses a delicious garlic and eggplant sauce that sets it apart. This is a regular Sunday meal and, in some households, it is made right after Christmas when there are plenty of leftovers. Variations are found all across the country. Adding beef or pork creates a wonderfully meaty stew.
To make the Eggplant Sauce, boil the eggplant over high heat for 5 minutes or until soft. Cut off the stem end, peel the skin and mash the flesh. Combine the mashed eggplant, garlic, vinegar, salt, and pepper in a saucepan and simmer over medium-low heat for 3 minutes. Set aside.
Place the chicken, chorizo, ham, salt and 5 cups (1.25 liters) water in a saucepan and bring to a boil. Reduce heat to medium and cook for 30 minutes, or until the meat is tender. Remove the meat with a slotted spoon. Set the saucepan and broth aside.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Set aside.
Add the chickpeas, potato, banana, and garlic to the saucepan with the chicken and ham broth. Cook over medium-high heat for about 10 minutes, or until soft. With a slotted spoon, remove the chickpeas, potato, and bananas, and set aside. Add the cabbage and cook over medium heat for 5 minutes. Add the fish sauce and pepper. Remove the cabbage. Arrange all vegetables, meat and broth into a large serving bowl. Serve hot with the Eggplant Sauce and steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 25 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour
3/4 lb (750 g) bone-in chicken pieces, cut into serving sections
3 chorizo de Bilbao or Chinese sausages, sliced
1/4 lb (125 g) ham, sliced
1 teaspoon salt
5 cups (1.25 liters) water
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
One 15-oz (420-g) can chickpeas, drained
1 potato, peeled, cubed and boiled
2 unripe saba bananas (or 1 small plantain or 2 unripe regular bananas), sliced
1/2 small head cabbage (about 1 lb/500 g), sliced
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
Eggplant Sauce (Makes about 1 cup/150 g)
1 Japanese or Italian eggplant or 1/2 globe eggplant (about 1/2 lb/250 g)
2 cloves garlic, crushed and minced
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Classic Filipino Chicken Pot Pie
Pastel de Pollo
In this scrumptious pot pie recipe, originally from Spain, chicken complements potatoes, carrots, green peas, and shiitake mushrooms. The earthy flavor is from the shiitake mushrooms—called "fragrant mushrooms" in Chinese— and either fresh or dried mushrooms can be used. The pies can be cooked in small pots or in ovenproof cups and baked in individual portions, which is what I usually do when I invite friends over. Whether served family style or individual servings, with or without steamed rice, this pie is simply irresistible. For a fancier presentation, you can create a decorative lattice on the crust.
If using dried shiitake mushrooms, soak them in warm water for 15 minutes. Remove and discard the mushroom stems and slice the mushroom caps.
Combine the soy sauce and lime juice in a mixing bowl. Add the chicken and marinate for 1 hour in the refrigerator.
In a saucepan, add the chicken, water, salt and pepper and cook over medium heat for 15 minutes. With a slotted spoon, remove the chicken and set aside. Reserve the broth.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and melt the butter. Add the chicken and Vienna sausages and sauté for 5 minutes. Remove from the skillet and set aside.
To the same skillet, add the reserved broth, potato, carrot, celery, and green peas and cook over medium heat for 15 minutes, or until cooked. Add the mushrooms, sautéed chicken, and Vienna sausage and cook for 5 minutes more. Transfer to a 9-inch (22-cm) deep-dish pie pan or four 7-ounce (200-ml) heatproof cups.
Pre-heat the oven to 375°F (190°C).
To make the pie crust, place the flour, cold water, oil, and salt in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly to make a thick dough. Form the dough into a ball, if using a pie pan, or into 4 equal-size balls if using individual cups. On a floured surface, roll out the dough with a rolling pin into either one large circle, about 12 inches (30 cm) across, if using a pie pan; or, into four 3-inch (7.5 cm) circles, if using individual cups. Note: If you want to make a latticed upper crust, cut the dough into long strips and place them over the chicken mixture in alternating strips to form a lattice pattern, and seal the edges. To make a solid top crust, simply transfer the dough to the pie pan or cups and cover the chicken mixture. Seal the edges by pressing down with fingers. Cut off the excess dough around the edges with a knife. If using a solid crust, make slits on the dough to let off steam. Brush with the beaten egg.
Bake for 20 minutes or until golden brown. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes + 1 hour marinating time
Cooking time: 1 hour
1/2 lb (250 g) boneless, skinless chicken breasts or thighs, diced
3 tablespoons soy sauce
3 tablespoons freshly squeezed lime juice
3 cups (750 ml) water
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon unsalted butter
One 5-oz (142-g) can Vienna sausage, sliced
1 potato, peeled and diced
1 carrot, peeled and diced
1 stalk celery, diced
1/2 cup (75 g) fresh or frozen green peas
5 fresh or dried shiitake mushrooms
1 egg, beaten
Pie Crust
1 cup (125 g) all-purpose flour 3 tablespoons cold water
3 tablespoons oil
1/2 teaspoon salt
#
chapter 5 seafood dishes
The Philippines is an archipelago of 7,107 islands with more than 21,000 miles (33,000 km) of shoreline. It has numerous tropical seas, rivers, and lakes. With geographic features like these, it means that fresh seafood is abundantly available and a Filipino staple. In fact, the waters around these islands contain more than 2,000 species of fish—such as grouper (lapu-lapu), sea bass (apahap), tuna, and mackerel—and that's just from the ocean!
Popular freshwater species include mullet (banak) and freshwater crabs. Commercial fishponds provide a constant supply of tilapia, mudfish, catfish, squid, prawns, and milkfish (bangus). The milkfish is the national fish of the Philippines and is widely exported in frozen, smoked, or canned form. With so much bounty from the seas and rivers, Filipinos have traditionally always eaten more seafood and reserved meat only for special occasions.
Local seafoods are preserved by either smoking (tinapa) or sun-drying (daing). A third method is to debone and marinate them in vinegar and garlic and then freeze them. Boneless preserved bangus from the province of Pangasinan has become popular all over the country.
Aside from being a main ingredient in several dishes, fish and shrimp are also fermented to make fish sauce (patis), anchovy sauce (bagoong isda) and shrimp paste (bagoong alamang). These indispensable seasonings provide a strong, pungent smell and a salty taste. If you are new to patis and bagoong, it may take some time to get accustomed to the taste, but they actually do make foods taste better—just as soy sauce enhances food in Chinese or Japanese cooking. Use them like you would use salt in your cooking or as a condiment or dip.
If the thought of handling fresh fish makes you squeamish you can have the fish scaled, cleaned, and trimmed by a fishmonger. Fish bought from a fishmonger tends to be fresher than fish from a supermarket.
##
Sautéed Squid Guisadong Pusit
Squid is a popular ingredient in the Philippines and is an excellent source of protein. For this dish, tender squid is sautéed in a spicy and sweet tomato-based sauce to create a hearty meal. It's important not to overcook the squid as it not only toughens, but it loses its flavor and texture as well. I've provided instructions on how to clean a squid correctly.
Prepare fresh squid, if using, by following the steps below. Cut into rings and set aside.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sautè until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the squid and sauté over medium heat for 3 minutes, or until cooked, while stirring frequently. The meat will turn opaque. Add the tomato, chili pepper, soy sauce, fish sauce, and sugar and simmer over medium heat for another 3 minutes. Season with the pepper. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes + 15 minutes to clean fresh squid
Cooking time: 10 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) fresh or frozen squid
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, chopped
1 tomato, diced
1 finger-length green chili pepper, minced
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1/2 teaspoon sugar
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
How to Clean Fresh Squid
##
Sautéed Marinated Clams
Estofadong Tulya
Clams are popular everywhere in the Philippines, where they are harvested along reefs or even farmed to provide grocery stores and restaurants with fresh clam meat. This delicious clam dish uses a vinegar marinade. The clams are then sautéed in soy sauce and brown sugar, creating a savory and sweet combination. It's a simple dish with only a few ingredients making it ideal for a quick weekday meal.
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a mixing bowl. Add the clams and marinate for 1 hour.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent.
Add the clams. Cook over medium heat for 5 minutes, or until tender. Add the breadcrumbs, salt and brown sugar and cook for 5 more minutes, stirring occasionally. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes + 1 hour marinating time
Cooking time: 15 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife 1 onion, thinly sliced
1 lb (500 g) canned or fresh clam meat (from about 4 lbs/2 kg fresh soft-shelled clams)
1/2 cup (45 g) breadcrumbs
1/2 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon brown sugar
Marinade
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 bay leaf
##
Fried Whole Fish with Eggs
Sarsiadong Tilapia
This delicious Kapampangan dish calls for a whole tilapia that is crisp-fried and then topped with scrambled eggs, tomato and spinach. My husband loves this dish, so he normally does the cooking. He loves the fish crispy and brown. When the vegetable and egg mixture is poured over the fish it makes for a colorful presentation. Tilapia is a fish you can easily find at the grocery store or fish market and is a good source of protein that is low in calorie and fat content. Snapper or catfish are good alternatives but try to use a whole fish (rather than fillets or steaks) for a crispier and better texture.
Wash the fish thoroughly. Pat dry and rub the outside with the salt (if using fish fillets or steaks, reduce the amount of salt to 1/2 teaspoon).
Heat a large skillet over medium heat, and add 2 tablespoons of the oil. Add the fish and fry each side for 10 minutes or until lightly browned. If you're using fillets or steaks, the cooking time will be less (10 minutes per inch is a good general rule). While the fish is browning, begin cooking the eggs and vegetables, but remember to check back on the fish time and again so as to not burn it. The fish flesh will appear opaque and be flaky when done.
Heat a separate skillet over medium heat, and add the remaining 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the spinach, tomatoes, and black pepper and cook for 5 minutes. Add the water and eggs, and cook for 3 minutes, stirring frequently.
Transfer the crispy tilapia to a serving platter, and pour the scrambled egg and vegetable mixture over it. Serve hot with steamed rice.
##
Sauteéd Shrimp with Long Beans
Guisadong Sitaw
When I was living in the Philippines, I could go out to my backyard and pick sitaw, or long beans, whenever I wanted to use them for this dish. These tasty beans, which can be substituted with regular green beans, make a wonderful backdrop for the sautéed shrimp and sautéed shrimp paste (bagoong) that give this dish its salty and robust flavor.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the beans and tomato and sauté for 10 minutes or until the beans are tender. Add the shrimp and sauté for 5 minutes, stirring frequently.
Add the shrimp paste and pepper, and simmer over medium-low heat for about 5 minutes to settle the flavor. Taste and add another teaspoon or two of shrimp paste if desired. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) whole tilapia, snapper, or catfish, scaled, gutted and cleaned, or 1 1/2 lbs (750 g) fish fillets or steaks
1 teaspoon salt
3 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, chopped
1 bunch spinach (about 1/2 lb/250 g), destemmed and chopped
2 tomatoes, diced
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper 1 tablespoon water
3 eggs, beaten
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, thinly sliced
1/2 lb (250 g) long beans or green beans, sliced into 2-in (5-cm) lengths
1 large tomato, diced
1 lb (500 g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined
1 tablespoon bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16) or more to taste
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Fried Marinated Fish
Daing na Bangus
The traditional method of preserving fish—salting and sun drying—is time-consuming and labor-intensive. By marinating the fish in vinegar with plenty of garlic overnight you'll get the same great taste without the time and labor. When I was in the Philippines, I especially enjoyed this dish when it was made with fresh milkfish caught in a nearby pond. Milkfish is traditionally used for this dish but rainbow trout, sea bass, or mackerel are good substitutes. This dish goes wonderfully well with Pickled Green Papaya (page 21) and a vinegar-based dip of your choice.
Combine the Marinade ingredients in a bowl and stir until the salt is dissolved. Open the fish like a book and place it skin-side up in a large casserole dish. Pour the Marinade over it and let marinate in the refrigerator overnight.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Fry the fish for about 15 minutes on each side or until brown. Serve hot with and hot steamed rice, Pickled Green Papaya (page 21) and Vinegar Garlic Sauce (page 20) or Vinegar and Sauteed Shrimp Paste Sauce (page 21).
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes + overnight marinating time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 lbs (1 kg) whole milkfish, rainbow trout, sea bass or mackerel, scaled, gutted and cleaned, or 1 1/2 lbs (750 g) fish fillets
3 tablespoons oil
Pickled Green Papaya (page 21)
Vinegar Garlic Sauce (page 20) or Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce (page
21), for dipping
Marinade
1 cup (250 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 tablespoon salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Sweet and Sour Fish
Escabeche
To make this delicious dish, a whole fish—preferably a lapu-lapu, but any grouper will do—is marinated, fried, and simmered in a heavenly sweet-and-sour sauce. Bell peppers add color to the dish and enhance the flavor. Lapu-lapu is a red grouper indigenous to the Philippines and is also the name of the king of Mactan Island who valiantly fought and vanquished the Spanish explorer Ferdinand Magellan in 1521.
Combine the lime juice and salt in a small bowl and stir until the salt is dissolved. Place the fish in a large casserole dish and pour the salted lime juice over the fish. Let stand for 30 minutes.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add 1 tablespoon of the oil and fry the fish for 10 minutes on each side, or until cooked. The fish should be flaky when done. Transfer to a serving platter and set aside.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add 1 tablespoon of the oil and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the ginger, bell pepper, and carrot and sauté for 3 minutes. Stir in the vinegar, water, soy sauce, sugar and banana ketchup. Bring to a boil, stir in the cornstarch mixture and simmer over medium-low heat until it thickens. Pour the sauce over the fish. Serve with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes + 30 minutes marinating time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
4 tablespoons freshly squeezed lime juice
1 tablespoon salt (use 1 1/2 teaspoons if using fish steaks or fillets)
2 tablespoons oil
2 lbs (1 kg) whole fish, scaled, gutted, and cleaned, or 1 1/2 lbs (750 g) fish steaks or fillets (grouper, red snapper, carp, cod, or bass)
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 onion, sliced
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, finely sliced
1 bell pepper, deseeded and finely sliced
1 carrot, peeled and finely sliced
3 tablespoons Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
4 tablespoons water
1 tablespoon soy sauce
3 tablespoons brown sugar
1 tablespoon banana ketchup
1 tablespoon cornstarch dissolved in 2 tablespoons water
##
Piquant Fish Stew
Paksiw na Isda
The city of Dagupan in Pangasinan organizes a yearly festival to celebrate their production of milkfish, and this Paksiw dish is one of the popular dishes served at the festival. In the old days, freshly caught fish were immediately soaked in vinegar to preserve them; this recipe evolved from this method of preserving fish. This is a slightly spicy version that I like to prepare for weekday meals (the leftovers keep well in the refrigerator). Any fresh fish will do, although milkfish and galunggong, a type of mackerel popular in the Philippines, are favorite choices.
Combine the water, vinegar, garlic, bitter gourd, if using, and ginger in a saucepan. Add the fish and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to medium-low and add the fish sauce, salt and chili peppers. Simmer for about 20 minutes, or until cooked. Fish should flake easily with a fork. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1 1/2 lbs (750 g) fish fillets (milkfish, rainbow trout, sea bass or mackerel)
1 cup (250 ml) water
2 cups (500 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife
1 bitter gourd (about 1 lb/500 g), cut in half lengthwise, deseeded and sliced into half-moons (optional)
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and finely sliced
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1 teaspoon salt
3 finger-length green chili peppers
##
Stuffed Crabs Rellenong Alimasag
This dish is time-consuming but the result is worth it. I find that some crabs don't have much meat, so I buy an extra crab or two to make sure the crabs I serve are nicely stuffed.
Wash the crabs thoroughly under running water. Bring the water and 1 teaspoon of the salt to a boil in a saucepan. Submerge the crabs and boil for 5 to 10 minutes. Take the crabs out and set aside.
To remove the crabmeat, break the crab legs and claws off with your fingers. Place the crab with their underside facing up on a cutting board. Use a small knife to pry up the end of the crab's "apron" (this is a small tab) and pull it off. Pry the hard shell off the body (you can use your hands to do this or a small knife inserted at the rear of the crab where the apron has been removed). With a small knife, scrape off the gills—a grayish white matter—and discard. Break the body in two to make it easier to remove the meat (you can do this with your hands or with kitchen shears). If the legs and/or claws look meaty, use kitchen shears to cut them in half and remove the meat. Discard the body cavity and legs after removing the meat. Set the crabmeat aside. Clean and reserve the outer shell of 8 of the small crabs or 4 or the medium-size crabs. Discard the remaining shells.
Add 1 tablespoon of the oil to a skillet over medium heat. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the tomato and potato and sauté for 10 minutes, or until soft. Add the crabmeat, soy sauce, remaining 1/ 2 teaspoon of salt and the pepper. Cook for another 5 minutes, stirring frequently. Remove from the heat and let the mixture cool to room temperature.
Fill each crab shell with the mixture, pressing lightly with a spoon. Brush egg over the mixture. Lightly drizzle the cornstarch mixture over the filling (use the back of a spoon to spread it around). Then sprinkle and lightly press the breadcrumbs on top of the cornstarch.
Add the remaining 1 tablespoon of the oil to a skillet over medium heat. Place the shells stuffing-side down and fry for about 15 minutes, or until lightly browned. Alternatively, bake in a preheated oven at 425°F (220°C) for 15 minutes stuffing side up. Serve with steamed rice and banana ketchup or Sweet and Spicy Sauce (page 21).
Serves 4
Preparation time: 1 hour
Cooking time: 1 hour
5 lbs (2.25 kg) fresh crabs (about 10 small fresh crabs or 5 medium ones)
8 cups (2 liters) water
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of knife and minced
1 small onion, minced
1 small tomato, diced
2 potatoes, peeled and diced
1 teaspoon soy sauce
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 egg, beaten
1 tablespoon cornstarch dissolved in 2 tablespoons water
1 tablespoon breadcrumbs
Sweet and Spicy Sauce (page 21) or banana ketchup
##
Filipino Ceviche
Kinilaw na Tanigue
Filipinos from the central Visayan islands are especially good at making kinilaw —a method of marinating raw seafood in vinegar and spices. Freshly caught fish are typically used, though the Ilocanos from the northern part of Luzon even prepare this dish using goat meat! Spanish mackerel is popular for this dish but any other fish or shrimp, oysters or squid will do just as nicely. Make sure that you use very fresh fish and serve the dish immediately. If you are concerned about the freshness of the fish, look for sashimi-grade tuna or salmon.
Pour the vinegar into a mixing bowl, add the fish and marinate for 1 hour. Drain. In a serving bowl, combine the calamansi juice, ginger, onion, chili, salt and pepper. Mix thoroughly. Add the fish. Chill in the refrigerator for 1 hour to allow the flavors to mingle. Serve immediately with hot steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes + 2 hours marinating time
1/2 cup (125 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (or white vinegar or cider vinegar diluted with water, page 13)
1 lb (500 g) Spanish mackerel, sea bass, tuna or salmon fillets, washed, skinned and cut into cubes
4 tablespoons freshly squeezed calamansi or lime juice
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and thinly sliced
1/2 onion, thinly sliced
1 finger-length green chili pepper, thinly sliced
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
#
chapter 6 vegetables
In the tropics, vegetables are abundant and nearly everyone has a garden in his or her backyard, though Filipinos are not known for their consumption of vegetable-only dishes. Sadly, vegetable dishes are often associated with a poor person's diet. Filipinos, however, love to mix vegetables with bits of pork or beef or slices of chicken or fish and add vegetables to soups and stews for extra color or flavor. Some common local vegetables are water spinach (kangkong), white gourd (upo), long beans (sitaw), eggplant (talong), moringa leaves (malunggay) and chayote (sayote). Tendrils or shoots of some vegetables (called talbos) are very popular as well. Young unripe papaya is also cooked like a vegetable.
The king of Filipino vegetables is probably the bitter gourd (ampalaya), a native of the tropics that is used in a wide variety of dishes in the Philippines. It has a bitter taste, as its name suggests, but it is rich in iron, betacarotene, and other nutrients that boost the body's immune system. Fresh bitter gourd is sometimes hard to find outside of the Philippines, but frozen, bottled, or canned varieties are available from Asian supermarkets or online grocery stores.
The prudent Ilocano people from the northern part of Luzon are particularly known for their love of vegetables. Their signature dish is Pinakbet, a mixed vegetable dish consisting of bitter gourd, eggplant, tomato, okra, long beans, and shrimp paste. Variations on this dish can be found in almost all regions of the country and each cook often seems to have his or her own version.
Western-style salads are seldom found on Filipino dining tables, but are served at restaurants. Filipino-style "salads"—served with almost every meal—are made with local vegetables that are either steamed or boiled and seasoned with a distinct Filipino dressing made of fish sauce, shrimp paste and calamansi lime. Pickled vegetables, like Pickled Green Papaya (page 21), are also very popular.
##
Pinakbet
Mixed Vegetables with Anchovy Sauce
In this healthy Ilocano dish, bitter gourd, eggplant, okra and long beans are simmered in a tasty fish sauce—though some Filipinos prefer sauteed shrimp paste as in the photograph above. I have tasted different versions of Pinakbet but no one makes it like the Ilocanos. My Ilocano friends, Vilma and Regina, always make impeccable Pinakbet, so I'm giving their recipe here. Ilocanos discovered long ago that stirring bitter gourd makes it even more bitter. Do not stir the bitter gourd while it is cooking, just let the steam cook the vegetables. If you have some fried pork rinds in your cupboard, use them as a topping.
Place the bitter gourd in the bottom of a large saucepan, and then add the ginger, long beans, onion, okra, tomato, eggplant and sauteed shrimp paste, if using. Pour the water and anchovy sauce into the saucepan and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to medium and cover. Leave for 20 minutes or until vegetables are tender and cooked. Do not stir, but instead, shake the pan once or twice. Garnish with the crushed fried pork rinds, if using, and serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1 small bitter gourd (about 1/2 lb/255 g), cut in half lengthwise, deseeded and sliced
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and sliced
1/4 lb (125 g) long beans or green beans, trimmed and sliced into 2 in (5 cm)
1 onion, chopped
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh or frozen okra, trimmed 1 tomato, diced
1 Japanese or Italian eggplant or 1/2 globe eggplant (about 1/2 lb/250 g), cut in half lengthwise and sliced
1/2 cup (125 ml) water
3 tablespoons bottled anchovy sauce (page 12) or bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
One 3-oz (75-g) bag fried pork rinds (chicharon), crushed (optional)
##
Mung Bean and Spinach Stew
Guisadong Munggo
This dish is popular on Fridays, when Catholic Filipinos traditionally go without meat. Mung beans don't require pre-soaking but soaking them does make them more tender and allows them to cook more evenly. Filipinos always associate mung beans with talbos ng kamote (sweet potato tendrils) and chicharon (fried pork rinds) in this simple but tasty stew. If it's not Friday, or if you're not Catholic, including chicharon adds texture and taste to the dish. Pork rind is a versatile ingredient that can be eaten as a snack, with rice, or crumbled over a stew or soup. Once it gets wet it becomes soft and chewy.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add the oil and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the shrimp and cook for 3 minutes or until they become opaque. Remove from the heat and set aside.
Place the beans and water in a saucepan. Bring to a boil and cook over medium heat for about 20 minutes or until soft. Add the fish sauce, sautéed shrimp paste, and pepper. Add the sautéed shrimp, garlic, onion and simmer over medium-low heat until the beans are soft. Add more water if needed.
Add the spinach and simmer over low heat for 1 more minute. Before transferring to a serving dish, add the chopped pork rind, if using. Top with the crushed fried pork rinds, if using, and serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes + overnight soaking time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife
1 onion, thinly sliced
1/4 lb (125g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined
1 cup (200 g) dried mung beans, soaked in water overnight and drained
2 cups (500 ml) water
2 tablespoons fish sauce
1 tablespoon bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 bunch (about 1/2 lb/225 g) fresh spinach (or any other fresh leafy green vegetable), chopped
One 3-oz (75-g) bag fried pork rinds (chicharon), crushed (optional)
##
Braised Chayote with Shrimp
Guisadong Sayote
Green juicy chayote contrasts beautifully in color and texture with the savory shrimp used in this dish. Inexpensive chayote is common in the Philippines; it is native to Mexico, and is a member of the gourd family. The tropical Philippine climate makes chayote available throughout the year. This is another simple weekday dish that is simple to make and satisfying. If you can't find chayote then zucchini, green papaya, or summer squash make excellent substitutes.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add the oil and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the shrimp and sauté for 3 more minutes, or until the shrimp becomes opaque. Remove from the heat and set aside.
In a separate saucepan, bring 4 cups (1 liter) of the water to a boil. Add the chayote and cook over high heat for 15 minutes or until soft. Drain well and set aside.
To the skillet with the sautéed shrimp mixture, add the cooked chayote, the remaining 1/ 2 cup (125 ml) of water and the sautéed shrimp paste. Simmer over medium-low heat for 5 minutes. Add the salt and pepper. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 15 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife
1 onion, diced
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined
4 1/2 cups (1 liter plus 125 ml) water
1 chayote (about 1 1/2 lbs/750 g), peeled, deseeded and thinly sliced
1 tablespoon bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Banana Blossom with Shrimp
Kilawing Puso ng Saging
The banana blossom is reddish-purple on the outside and heart-shaped, which is why it is also known as a "banana heart." Soaking the blossom in salted water makes the slices less sticky and prevents discoloration as well. Canned banana blossom or fresh artichoke or zucchini blossoms make acceptable substitutes.
Prepare the fresh banana blossom, if using, by following the steps below. Canned banana blossom needs no soaking. Marinate the fresh or canned blossom in the vinegar for 1 hour. Reserve the vinegar.
Twist and pull the heads off the shrimp. Set the shrimp aside. Mash the shells and heads in a mortar. Pour the 1/ 2 cup (125 ml) of water into the mortar. Discard the shells and head and reserve the liquid.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the shrimp and sauté for 3 minutes. Add the banana blossom, the reserved vinegar and the shrimp liquid, and simmer over medium-low heat for 20 minutes, or until soft and tender. Add the pepper, sautéed shrimp paste, and sugar. Simmer for 5 more minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 25 minutes + marinating time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1 banana blossom, fresh or canned
4 cups (1 liter) water plus 1 tablespoon salt
1 cup (250 ml) Filipino cane vinegar (page 13)
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh shrimp with heads on, shelled and deveined
1/2 cup (125 ml) water
1 tablespoon oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed
1 onion, finely sliced
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 tablespoon bottled sautéed shrimp paste (page 16)
1/2 teaspoon brown sugar
How to Prepare Fresh Banana Blossom
##
Stuffed Eggplant
Rellenong Talong
Filipino eggplants, or talong, are perfect for stuffing. Similar in size to Japanese eggplants, these purple-skinned eggplants are just the right size to accommodate a layer of cooked ground meat, providing a wonderful texture and taste to the meat mixture. After the meat is stuffed into the eggplant, it's then dipped in egg and fried or baked.
Pierce the eggplant(s) with a fork, place in a large pot of boiling water, and cook for about 10 minutes or until just tender (the larger globe eggplant will take longer to become tender). Holding the eggplants by their stalks, slice them lengthwise to open them like a book—do not slice all the
way through—leaving the stalks intact. Place the eggplant(s) on a clean surface and flatten with a pestle or a back of a large spoon. Set aside.
Heat a large skillet over medium heat, and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and tomato, and sauté for 3 minutes. Add the beef and sauté for 5 minutes. Add the salt, pepper, and sugar, and stir to combine. Remove the meat mixture from the skillet and divide into four portions. Set aside.
Beat the eggs in a large bowl. Submerge each eggplant in the egg, and place cut-side up on a large plate or a clean flat surface. Top each eggplant with one portion of the meat mixture and spread it evenly, pressing firmly. Pour the remaining egg over the stuffed eggplants.
To the same large skillet, add the remaining 2 tablespoons of oil and set over medium heat. Fry the stuffed eggplants, stuffed-side up first, until browned. Fry the other side. If baking, place the eggplants, stuffed-side up, on a sheet pan and bake in a pre-heated 400°F (200°C) oven for 30 minutes. Serve hot with banana ketchup and steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
4 Japanese or Italian eggplants or 1 large American "globe" eggplant
3 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, minced
1 tomato, minced
1 1/2 lbs (750 g) ground beef
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
1 teaspoon sugar
4 eggs
##
Sautéed Corn with Shrimp
Guisadong Mais
The Spanish colonizers introduced corn to the region from Mexico and it is now the Philippines' second leading staple after rice. It is often planted in areas unsuitable for growing rice and has become a rice substitute for many Filipinos. In this dish, the natural sweetness of corn is added to juicy fresh shrimp and tender spinach. Remember not to overcook the shrimp or they will lose much of their sweetness.
Heat a skillet over medium heat, add the oil and garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion until translucent. Add the shrimp, corn, and spinach, and sauté for 10 minutes.
Add the fish sauce, salt and pepper. Sauté over medium-low heat for 5 more minutes. Serve hot with steamed rice.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 15 minutes
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, diced
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined
3 cups (350 g) corn kernels (fresh or frozen)
1/4 lb (125 g) spinach, trimmed and chopped
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1/4 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
##
Filipino Spinach and Egg Salad
Ensaladang Kangkong
This salad is traditionally made with water spinach, or kangkong, which is available anywhere in the Philippines and is sold worldwide in Vietnamese or Thai markets. Regular spinach or talbos ng kamote (sweet potato greens) can be substituted instead. Serve with Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce (page 21).
Wash the water spinach well and remove the leaves. Cut the stems into short lengths.
Boil the stems for 5 minutes. Add the leaves and boil for another 3 minutes. Rinse with cold water and drain well.
Combine the water spinach, tomato, onion, and potato in a mixing bowl. Mix thoroughly.
Place the vegetables on a large serving platter or divide them among four individual salad bowls. Garnish with the egg slices. Drizzle Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce (page 21).
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 15 minutes
1 lb (500 g) water spinach (or regular spinach or sweet potato greens)
1 tomato, cut into bite-size pieces
1 onion, thinly sliced
1 potato, peeled, diced and boiled
3 hard-boiled eggs, sliced
Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce (page 21), for garnish
#
chapter 7 rice and noodle dishes
Rice is so important to the Filipino diet that no meal is ever complete without it. A typical day may start with a simple meal of steamed rice and a tasty sun-dried salted fish, called tuyo, dipped in vinegar with sliced tomato on the side. Filipinos appreciate such simple delicacies accompanied by a heaping mound of white steamed rice, or kanin. Hot, fluffy rice goes well with just about any dish and is eaten at any time— breakfast, lunch, dinner and even merienda (snack). For a Filipino, a simple sarsa (sauce) or sabaw (soup) can turn kanin (steamed rice) into a full meal.
Traditions relating to rice abound in the Philippines—throwing rice confetti at a newlywed couple brings them good fortune; the kitchen rice container must be full at the end of the year to welcome in a prosperous new year; and when moving into a new home, rice should be the first item brought into the house. Aside from being the star of any meal, rice is used to make wine, flour, vinegar and noodles.
Noodle dishes, either stir-fried or added to soup, are an outstanding contribution from Chinese immigrants. Locally known as pancit, noodle dishes are served on birthdays to wish the celebrant a long and healthy life, while noodles in a broth are given to a sick child as a nutritious home remedy. The word pancit is a play on the Hokkien Chinese word pian i sit, which means "rushed" or "hurried"—a fitting description for the quick and easy noodle recipes in this chapter.
There are many kinds of noodles available in the Philippines but the one most associated with birthday celebrations, or any occasion for that matter, is rice vermicelli, or bihon, which is great for Fried Rice Noodles (page 93). And because pancit dishes—whether stir-fried or soup-based—include a panoply of ingredients from seafood, meat to vegetables, they also make nourishing main dishes to hot steamed rice.
##
Cuban Rice with Ground Beef
Arroz a la Cubana
This "Cuban-style" rice is originally a Latin American dish found in most of Spain's former colonies, including the Philippines. It is simple and inexpensive to make—steamed rice, fried egg, fried bananas and sautèed beef are served together on a platter, or separately for diners to combine as they please. The sweet smell of this dish comes from the bananas.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
4 tablespoons oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, minced
1 lb (500 g) ground beef (or pork)
1 potato, peeled and diced
1/3 cup (40 g) fresh or frozen green peas
3 tablespoons raisins
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
4 unripe saba bananas (or 2 plantains or 4 unripe regular bananas), cut in half lengthwise
4 eggs
4 cups (720 g) cooked rice
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the ground beef and cook over medium heat for 5 minutes, or until cooked, stirring frequently. Transfer the meat to a bowl and set aside.
To the same skillet over medium heat, add another 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the potato and sauté for 10 minutes. When cooked, add the meat mixture, green peas, raisins, soy sauce, salt and pepper and cook for 5 more minutes. Spoon the meat mixture onto a serving platter and cover with foil to keep warm.
To the same skillet over medium heat, add 1 tablespoon of the oil and fry the bananas on each side for 5 minutes or until lightly browned. Add the bananas to the platter with the meat mixture and cover again with the foil.
To the same skillet over medium heat, add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil and fry the eggs, sunny side up. Set aside.
Arrange the hot steamed rice, fried bananas, beef, and fried eggs on a large platter or serve individually. Serve hot with banana ketchup.
##
Kapampangan Paella
Bringhe
Kapampangan Paella, locally known as Bringhe, is similar to Spanish Paella. However, glutinous sweet rice and turmeric are used instead of regular rice and saffron. The Kapampangan version uses coconut milk and is often cooked in banana leaves for an aroma that is sure to make guests hungry. Bringhe is a very popular dish for parties.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes + 1 hour soaking time
Cooking time: 40 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, finely chopped
1 lb (500 g) boneless, skinless chicken breasts or thighs, cut into bite-size pieces
3 cups (600 g) uncooked glutinous rice, washed, soaked in water for at least 1 hour and drained
1 bell pepper, deseeded and sliced
One 13 1/2-oz (400-ml) can coconut milk
3 chorizo de Bilbao or Chinese dry sausages, thinly sliced
2 cups (500 ml) water
1 tablespoon ground turmeric
1 teaspoon salt
1/4 cup (50 g) raisins
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
2 hard-boiled eggs, peeled and cut into wedges
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Remove from the heat and set aside.
To a large skillet or sauté pan with a lid, add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil and sauté the chicken over medium-high heat for about 5 minutes. Add the rice and sauté for about 3 minutes.
Add the bell pepper, coconut milk, sausage, water, turmeric and salt, and mix well. Bring to a boil. Then reduce the heat to medium-low heat and cover. Simmer for about 20 minutes or until the rice is cooked. Add the raisins and sautéed garlic and onion. Increase the heat to medium and cook for 5 minutes, stirring frequently. Add the black pepper and stir to combine. Transfer the rice to a serving platter and garnish with the eggs. Serve hot.
##
Filipino-Style Seafood Paella
Along with Kapampangan Paella (page 89), this version of paella is extremely popular and considered a typically Filipino dish despite its Spanish origins. This version is thought of as a rich person's paella since relatively expensive ingredients are used. This elegant and impressive meal is actually quite simple to make once you have prepared the ingredients. Many people love to serve this brightly colored paella at Christmas.
Add a bit of water to a pot and steam or boil the mussels over medium to high heat for about 5 minutes, or until the shells open. Discard any mussels that are not open. Set aside.
Add 1 tablespoon of the olive oil to a large skillet over medium heat. Add the shrimp and squid, and sauté for 3 minutes, or until cooked. Remove the shrimp and squid from the pan and set aside.
To the same skillet over medium heat, add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Remove the garlic and onion from the pan and set aside.
Add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil to the same large skillet over medium-high heat and sauté the rice for about 5 minutes. Add the water and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to low and add the ginger, tomato, tomato sauce, paprika, salt and fish sauce. Add the sautéed garlic and onion. Mix thoroughly. Cover with a lid or aluminum foil and simmer over low heat for 20 minutes, or until the rice is cooked. Add the pepper and stir to combine.
Place the rice on a serving platter and top with the olives, shrimp, mussels and squid. Garnish with slices of lime. Serve hot.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 20 minutes
Cooking time: 45 minutes
12 fresh mussels in their shells, cleaned
3 tablespoons olive oil
1/2 lb (250 g) fresh shrimp with shells on
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh squid, cleaned and cut into rings (instructions on how to clean fresh squid on page 70) or frozen squid, defrosted and cut into rings
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, finely chopped
3 cups uncooked long-grain white rice, washed and drained
3 cups (750 ml) water
One 2-in (5-cm) piece ginger, peeled and thinly sliced
1 tomato, diced
One 8-oz (227-g) can tomato sauce
1 tablespoon paprika
1 teaspoon salt
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper 1 cup (150 g) olives, pitted and sliced
3 limes, cut into segments, to garnish
##
Fried Rice with Egg Sinangag
Fried rice is a staple in all Asian countries where rice is eaten daily. It is the perfect way to use up cold leftover rice and other leftover ingredients. The Filipino version known as Sinangag, commonly eaten as a breakfast dish, is often accompanied with Filipino sausages (longganisa), hotdogs or Traditional Tocino Bacon (page 50). It is a starchy meal and a bit garlicky but everyone in the Philippines eats something substantial in the morning for energy and stamina. Warm, freshly cooked rice doesn't fry well. If you don't have any leftover rice, cook the rice and then chill it in the refrigerator before frying it.
Add 1 tablespoon of the oil to a skillet or wok over medium heat and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the remaining 1 tablespoon of oil and increase the heat to high just before adding the rice. Stir-fry for 5 minutes, stirring constantly.
Pour the eggs over the rice and quickly stir-fry for 3 minutes, stirring vigorously.
Add the soy sauce, salt and pepper. Cook over medium to high heat for 5 minutes or until the rice becomes evenly browned. Garnish with Crispy Fried Garlic or green onions, if using. Serve hot.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 10 minutes
Cooking time: 15 minutes
2 tablespoons oil
5 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, minced
4 cups (750 g) cooked (and cooled) long-grain rice, grains gently separated with a fork or your fingers
3 eggs, lightly beaten
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
2 tablespoons Crispy Fried Garlic (page 23), to garnish (optional)
3 green onions (scallions), thinly sliced, green parts only, to garnish (optional)
##
Rice Porridge with Chicken
Arroz Caldo
Depending on the region, this porridge may be called Goto, Pospas, Lugaw, or Arroz Caldo (meaning "hot rice" in Spanish). This is actually a light, warm and nutritious Chinese congee adopted by the Spanish settlers. Traditionally, it is served to the elderly, the ill and toddlers because it's fortifying and easy to the digest. This version calls for Crispy Fried Garlic (page 23) on top—use a spoonful and you'll be amazed at the resulting taste!
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the 3 cloves of garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Rub the chicken with the salt and add to the skillet. Sauté for 15 minutes, or until lightly browned. Add the ginger and cook 1 more minute while stirring occasionally. Remove from the heat and set aside.
Add the uncooked rice and water to a stockpot and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to low and add the sautéed garlic cloves, chicken and ginger mixture, Add the fish sauce. Cover and simmer over low heat for about 30 minutes or until the rice and chicken are cooked. If the rice gets too thick, add a little water.
Ladle the porridge into individual serving bowls. Squeeze some fresh lime juice over top and garnish with the green onion, Crispy Fried Garlic, and lime segments. Serve with soy sauce and fish sauce on the side.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour
1 tablespoon oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife
2 lbs (1 kg) bone-in chicken breasts, thighs or drumsticks, cut into pieces
1 teaspoon salt
One 2-in (5-cm) piece fresh ginger, peeled and finely sliced
2 cups (400 g) uncooked rice, washed and drained
7 cups (1.75 liters) water
3 tablespoons fish sauce
4 green onions (scallions), thinly sliced
5 fresh calamansi or regular limes, cut into segments
4 tablespoons Crispy Fried Garlic (page 23)
Soy sauce and fish sauce, to serve
##
Fried Rice Noodles
Bihon Guisado
When Filipinos think of noodles they think of the ubiquitous Bihon Guisado. Noodles symbolize longevity and good health, so this dish is a must-have on birthdays and special occasions. Chinese egg noodles also work well with this recipe.
Soak the rice vermicelli (bihon) in warm water for 5 minutes, drain and cut into desired length. Set aside.
Bring the water to a boil in a large saucepan. Add the chicken and salt and cook over high heat for 5 minutes or until cooked. Remove the chicken from the pan and set the broth aside (do not discard the broth). Tear the meat off the bones using two forks—one to hold the bone in place and one to tear the meat off the bone. Set the meat aside. Discard the bones.
Heat a large skillet over medium heat, add the oil and sauté the garlic until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the shrimp, carrot, snow peas and celery and sauté for 5 minutes. Increase the heat to medium-high, add the cabbage, soy sauce, chicken and pepper, and sauté for 5 minutes. Add 1/ 2 cup of the reserved chicken broth and the drained rice vermicelli and stir-fry for 3-5 minutes. Add more of the reserved broth if rice vermicelli is too dry, stirring frequently. Transfer to a serving plate and serve hot with the calamansi or regular limes.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes + 10 minutes soaking time
Cooking time: 35 minutes
8 oz (225 g) rice vermicelli
3 cups (725 ml) water
1 bone-in chicken thigh
1/2 tablespoon salt
2 tablespoons oil
4 cloves garlic, crushed and minced
1 onion, thinly sliced
1/4 lb (125 g) fresh shrimp, shelled and deveined
1 carrot, peeled and cut thinly
1/4 lb (125 g) snow peas, trimmed
1 large stalk celery, thinly sliced
2 cups (200 g) thinly sliced cabbage
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
4 calamansi or regular limes, quartered
##
Noodles with Shrimp and Tofu
Pancit Luglug
Initially, this dish might be confused with spaghetti, but it's really a unique dish that is bright orange in color and has the distinct aroma of cooked shrimp. This impressive dish—known as Pancit Luglug or Pancit Palabok depending on the region in which it is made—uses cornstarch noodles. When cooked, these noodles don't last long so they need to be consumed the day they are prepared. Dried rice vermicelli may be used in place of cornstarch noodles.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour 30 minutes
1/2 lb (250 g) fresh shrimp, preferably with heads and tails on
2 tablespoons oil
3 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife and minced
1 onion, minced
3 cups (750 ml) water
1/2 cup (75 g) diced pork shoulder or loin
One 3 1/2-oz (100-g) package deep-fried pressed tofu (tokwa), diced
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 cup (125 ml) annatto water (page 19) (optional)
2 tablespoons fish sauce
2 tablespoons cornstarch
8 cups (2 liters) water (for boiling noodles)
16 oz (500 g) cornstarch noodles (or rice vermicelli)
2 hard-boiled eggs, cut into wedges
2 green onions (scallions), thinly sliced (green part only)
4 limes, quartered
One 3-oz (75-g) bag fried pork rinds (chicharon), crushed (optional)
Twist and pull the heads off the shrimp. Shell and devein but leave the tails on. Set the cleaned shrimp tails aside. Mash the shrimp heads in a mortar or bowl. Pour the 3 cups (750 ml) of water, a little at time, while pressing the heads and shells against the side of the mortar or bowl with the back of a wooden spoon. Strain the shrimp liquid and set aside. Discard the mashed heads.
Heat a skillet over medium heat and add 1 tablespoon of the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Transfer the garlic and onion to a bowl and set aside.
To the same skillet, over medium heat, add the remaining 1 tablespoon of the oil and sauté the diced pork for 5 minutes. Add the shrimp and tofu and sauté for 5 minutes. Add the salt and the sautéed garlic and onion. Stir to combine and set aside.
To make the shrimp sauce, combine the reserved shrimp liquid, annatto water, if using, fish sauce, and cornstarch in a saucepan. Simmer over medium-low heat for 10 minutes until the mixture thickens, stirring frequently to make sure the cornstarch is dissolved. Set aside.
Bring 8 cups (2 liters) of water to a boil in a large saucepan. Add the noodles and cook according to package instructions or until soft (about 7 minutes). Lightly rinse with cold running water to keep the noodles from sticking together. Drain well and transfer the noodles to a serving platter.
To serve, pour the shrimp sauce over the noodles and top with the pork mixture, hard-boiled eggs, and green onion. Squeeze some lime juice over the noodle mixture and sprinkle crushed fried pork rind. Garnish with lime quarters and serve hot.
##
Sautéed Bean Thread Noodles
Sotanghon Guisado
Celebrations call for this special dish of mung bean thread noodles, which have a smooth and delicate texture and are more expensive than other noodles. Also known as "cellophane noodles," these white noodles (sotanghon in Filipino), turn transparent when cooked (unlike rice vermicelli which keeps its white color). The flavor of this dish is brightened by the rich aroma of shiitake mushrooms, the crunch of snow peas, and a few drops of pungent fish sauce.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes +15 minutes soaking time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
One 7-oz (220-g) package bean thread (cellophane) noodles
5 shiitake mushrooms (fresh or dried)
2 tablespoons oil
4 cloves garlic, crushed with the side of a knife
1 onion, finely sliced
1 carrot, peeled and cut into thin matchsticks
1 bone-in chicken thigh
1 1/4 teaspoons salt
3 cups (750 ml) water
1/4 lb (125 g) snow peas, trimmed
1 tablespoon fish sauce
1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
3 green onions (scallions), thinly sliced
Soak the noodles in a bowl of warm water for 15 minutes to soften, then drain well. (The noodles do not need to be completely soft.) Set aside.
If using dried shiitake mushrooms, soak them in warm water for 15 minutes. Remove and discard the mushroom stems and thinly slice the mushroom caps.
Heat a skillet over medium heat add the oil. Add the garlic and sauté until lightly browned. Add the onion and sauté until translucent. Add the carrot and sauté over medium heat for 10 minutes, stirring frequently. Remove from the heat and set aside.
Place the chicken, 1 teaspoon of the salt and the water in a saucepan and bring to a boil over high heat. Cook for 10 minutes. Remove the chicken from the pan and reserve the broth. Tear the meat off the bones using two forks—one to hold the bone in place and one to tear the meat off the bone. Set the meat aside. Discard the bones.
To the skillet with the sautéed carrot mixture, add the noodles, mushrooms, snow peas, fish sauce, black pepper chicken, reserved broth the remaining 1/4 teaspoon of the salt. Cook over medium heat for 5 minutes or until the noodles are soft. If the noodles get too dry, add a little water. Divide among 4 plates and garnish with the green onion. Serve immediately.
#
chapter 8 desserts and beverages
For a Filipino, the best time to have a dessert is anytime—between meals, during meals, and after meals. Filipinos are notoriously fond of sweets and have created some amazing panghimagas (desserts) to satisfy their sugar cravings. The most popular dessert on the islands is Halo-halo, a combination of sweet beans, fruits, shaved ice, toasted rice, milk, flan, and purple yam pudding. This is a classic summertime favorite. Other favorite desserts include Sweet Banana and Jackfruit Rolls (page 102), Toasted Butter Cookies (page 100), Sweet Purple Yam Pudding (page 99), and Filipino Leche Flan (page 108)—a rich custard with a layer of caramelized sugar on top.
Fruits such as pineapple, mango, banana, jackfruit, watermelon, guava, and papaya are used to make colorful additions to desserts. Coconut is a key ingredient in countless numbers of desserts—rich coconut milk is used to prepare Sweet Coconut Milk Delight (page 98) and fried coconut milk, or latik, makes a delicious topping for Sweet Rice Cakes with Fried Coconut Topping (page 100). Grated coconut garnishes the Coconut Sponge Cakes (page 103).
The cacao tree is native to the tropical Amazon forests and was brought to the Philippines by Spanish colonialists. Centuries later, the Filipinos have grown to love the chocolate that is made from the cacao fruit. Chocolate bars are used to make Chocolate Rice Porridge (page 98), a favorite of young and old Filipinos alike.
Like other tropical countries, the Philippines has a wide selection of palamig (cold drinks) to beat the heat. Street vendors sell the ever popular Iced Tapioca Pearl and Jelly Drink (page 106) on every corner.
Hot drinks make their appearance during the colder Christmas season, when Filipino Hot Chocolate (page 105) and Healthy Ginger Tea (page 107), soothe the throat and warm the body.
##
Sweet Coconut Milk Delight
Ginataang Bilo-bilo
A ginat aan dish uses coconut milk (gata). This ginataan dessert contains jackfruit, sweet potato, tapioca pearls, and bilo-bilo (glutinous rice balls), simmered in sweet coconut milk. This traditional dish is a wonderful family dessert, ideal for a rainy afternoon. Serve it warm or chilled.
To make the rice balls, combine the rice flour with the 4 tablespoons of water in a bowl. Mix well and form into small balls, about 1/ 2 inch (1.25 cm) in diameter. Pour 8 cups (2 liters) of water into a pot and bring to a boil. Drop the balls in the boiling water and cook for 5 minutes, or until they float. Remove the rice balls and set aside.
Boil the tapioca pearls in the same pot over medium heat until soft and translucent. Drain and set aside.
In a saucepan, combine 2 cups (500 ml) of the coconut milk and the 2 cups (500 ml) of water and bring to a boil. Add sweet potato, and cook over medium heat for 15 minutes. Add the tapioca, sugar and rice balls, and cook for 10 minutes.
Add the jackfruit and banana and cook for 5 minutes until everything is tender. Add the remaining 1/ 2 cup (125 ml) of the coconut milk and bring to a boil. Reduce heat to low and simmer for 3 minutes more. Ladle onto individual bowls and serve warm or chilled.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 30 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes
1 cup (150 g) glutinous rice flour
4 tablespoons water (for rice balls)
8 cups (2 liters) water (for boiling)
1/2 cup (50g) dried tapioca pearls
2 1/2 cups (625 ml) coconut milk
2 cups (500 ml) water
2 1/2 cups (250 g) peeled and cubed sweet potato
1 cup (100 g) sugar
5 bulbs fresh or canned jackfruit, cut into strips
3 ripe saba bananas (or 3 regular bananas), sliced into rounds
##
Champorado
Chocolate Rice Porridge
The Philippines has been growing cacao trees and creating chocolate treats ever since the Spanish brought the trees over in the seventeenth century. While Mexican champurrado is a thick chocolate drink, the Filipino version is a sweet dish of sticky rice and cocoa. Filipino children love to have this for breakfast and afternoon snacks. Grownups like to have it with salted fish (tuyo). Champorado is best served hot.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes + 30 minutes soaking time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
2 1/2 cups (750 ml) water
1 cup (200 g) uncooked glutinous rice, washed, soaked for at least 30 minutes, and drained
3 1/2 oz (100 g) unsweetened chocolate or 1 cup (85 g) cocoa powder
1/2 cup (100 g) brown sugar
1/2 cup (125 ml) milk
Place water and glutinous rice in a saucepan and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to the lowest setting. Cover and cook for 25 minutes more.
Add the chocolate or cocoa powder and sugar and stir over low heat. Mix well. If it gets too thick, add a little of the milk. Ladle the rice into bowls and serve with swirls of milk on top. Serve hot.
##
Sweet Purple Yam Pudding
Ube Halaya
Ube, or purple yam, is a root crop that grows all over the country. It makes a colorful ingredient in a variety of desserts, such as ice cream, cakes and pastries. This pudding—made from purple yam powder that is readily available in groceries—is perfect by itself, but also makes a beautiful topping for Halo-halo (page 104).
Place the yam powder and milk in a saucepan and mix thoroughly. Add the sugar, egg and butter and simmer over low heat for about 1 hour. Stir constantly using a wooden spoon until the mixture thickens and becomes elastic.
Place the mixture in lightly greased containers with lid and let cool to room temperature. Do not cover while still hot. When cooled, cover and chill in the refrigerator for about 3 hours. Serve chilled in individual bowls.
Serves 4 to 6
Cooking time: 1 hour + 3 hours chilling time
3/4 cup (115 g) purple yam powder
1 1/2 cups (375 ml) milk
1/2 cup (100 g) sugar
1 egg, beaten
1 teaspoon unsalted butter
##
Sweet Rice Cakes with Fried Coconut Topping
Biko Kalabasa
There are many variations on this traditional Kapampangan dessert and this version uses latik, or fried coconut milk solids, as a topping. Latik is made by reducing coconut milk to solids through boiling and then the solids are fried in their own oil, resulting in brown and nutty caramelized coconut bits. This delicious rice dessert is labor-intensive but the combination of latik, squash and glutinous rice tastes heavenly.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 10 minutes + 3 hours soaking time
Cooking time: 1 hour 30 minutes
3 cups (600 g) uncooked glutinous rice, washed, soaked for 3 hours and drained 3 cans coconut milk (13 1/2 oz/400 ml each)
1 lb (500 g) acorn squash, peeled, deseeded, and sliced to yield 4 cups (400 g)
3 cups (600 g) dark brown sugar
1 tablespoon unsalted butter, melted
Place the glutinous rice and 1 can of the coconut milk in a saucepan. Bring to a boil and reduce the heat to the lowest setting. Cook for 20 minutes and turn off the heat. Leave for another 15 minutes with the lid on. Set aside. (Alternatively, place the glutinous rice and coconut milk in a rice cooker and leave to cook.)
Place the squash in a large saucepan with 1 1/ 2 cans of the coconut milk and 1 cup (200 g) of the brown sugar. Cook over high heat for about 10 minutes or until soft and then mash the squash. Add 1 more cup (200 g) of the brown sugar and stir over medium heat until creamy. Add the cooked rice. Stir constantly with a wooden spoon, taking care not to burn the rice. Add the remaining 1 cup (200 g) of sugar and stir constantly over medium-low heat for at least 1 hour until completely smooth and elastic. Transfer the rice mixture to a lightly greased serving platter, and spread it out evenly to 1 1/ 2-inch (3.5 cm) thick. Brush the top with the butter.
To make latik, place a heavy skillet over medium-low heat. Add the remaining 1/ 2 cup (125 ml) of coconut milk. Stir constantly with a wooden spoon while boiling for about 20 minutes, or until the coconut milk hardens into solids and produces its own oil. The coconut solids turn brown as they are fried in their own oil. Drain the coconut oil and reserve for other use. Remove the latik and drain, then sprinkle it on top of the cake. Let the cake cool to room temperature and then cut into serving portions. The cake is easier to cut when cooled. Serve at room temperature.
##
Pulburon
Toasted Butter Cookies
A Spanish polvorón is a shortbread, but the Filipino Pulburon is a delicate, dry and powdery cookie that starts crumbling as soon as you bite into it. This unbaked cookie is made of toasted flour, powdered milk, butter and sugar. A special Pulburon mold makes the preparation easier but measuring spoons also work well. Pulburon cookies in various flavors and sizes have become popular pasalubong (gifts or souvenir items) purchased by people who visit the Philippines for friends back home.
Yields 20 cookies
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1 1/2 cups (150 g) all-purpose flour
1 cup (100 g) powdered milk
1/2 cup (100 g) sugar
1 cup (150 g) unsalted butter, melted
Pulburon molds, to form the cookies
Cellophane or wax paper, for wrapping
Toast the flour in a heavy skillet over medium-low heat, stirring constantly in a circular motion with a wooden spoon for about five minutes or until the flour turns slightly brown. Do not burn the flour.
Combine the toasted flour, powdered milk, sugar, and butter in a mixing bowl and mix well. If the mixture is too dry or loose, add more melted butter.
Transfer the mixture into a plate. Press the mold onto the mixture. If not using the mold, scoop up 2 teaspoons of the mixture and then press together into a compact form. Then wrap each cookie in wax paper or cellophane (try using different colors for variety!) and twist the end as you would a candy or simply fold the edges under.
##
Egg Yolk Treats Yemas
A Yema is a decadent egg candy, typically eaten at fiestas and at Christmas or given to a party host as a gift. When you make these candies to give away, wrap each one in wax paper or in fancy colored cellophane as shown in the photograph. About the origin of this dish, one legend has it that the Spanish colonizers used huge amounts of egg whites to seal up cracks in church walls, and the leftover yolks were made into Yemas so they wouldn't go to waste. Yemas can be rolled into balls—the easiest and most common method—or triangles for a fancier presentation. Filipinos commonly use the leftover egg whites to make meringue cookies.
Makes about 20 candies
Preparation time: 25 minutes
Cooking time: 35 minutes
12 egg yolks
One 14-oz (410-ml) can sweetened condensed milk
1/2 cup (100 g) brown sugar sugar (for coating the balls in sugar) or 1 cup (200 g) brown sugar (for coating the balls in caramel)
1/4 cup (65 ml) water (for coating the balls in caramel)
Cellophane, for wrapping
Combine the egg yolks and condensed milk in a saucepan, preferably nonstick. Stir continuously over low heat for about 30 minutes or until firm. It should have the consistency of mashed potatoes. If you are not using a nonstick pan, the mixture is more liable to burn so it's imperative to watch it carefully. Transfer to a plate and let cool before forming into balls. Scoop out about 1 tablespoon of the mixture and shape into a small ball. Continue with the remainder of the mixture.
There are two options to coat the balls. To coat the ball with sugar, place the 1/ 2 cup (100 g) of brown sugar in a bowl and roll the balls in the sugar to coat them. Place each candy in the middle of a cellophane square, gather up all four corners and twist together to secure. To coat the balls in caramel, pour the water into a saucepan or small skillet and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat to low and add the 1 cup (200 g) of brown sugar. Stir constantly until the syrup is caramelized or turns amber brown. Turn off the heat. Using a toothpick, dip each piece of candy in the syrup and place on a tray to cool. Wrap each ball with cellophane as described above.
Tip: If you want to form the candies into triangles, stir the mixture over low heat a little longer to make it drier and firmer (this will make it easier to work with).
##
Sweet Banana and Jackfruit Rolls Turon Saba
Not to be confused with Spanish Turron, which is an almond nougat candy, the Filipino Turon is made by coating sliced bananas and jackfruit pieces with brown sugar, then wrapping them in spring roll wrappers and deep-frying them. The jackfruit slices may be omitted, although they give the banana rolls a juicy and aromatic sweetness.
Makes 20 rolls
Preparation time: 30 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1/2 cup (100 g) light brown sugar
10 ripe saba bananas, cut in half lengthwise (or regular bananas, cut in half lengthwise and then crosswise)
5 jackfruit bulbs, fresh, canned or frozen, thinly sliced into strips (optional)
One 16-oz (500-g) package of frozen 8-in (20-cm) spring roll wrappers (about 20 sheets), thawed
1 tablespoon water
2 cups (500 ml) oil for deep-frying (page 18)
Place the light brown sugar on a plate. Roll each banana piece in the sugar to coat it evenly. Place a coated banana segment and a slice or two of jackfruit (if using) in the center of a spring roll wrapper. Roll the bottom edge of the wrapper up and over the fruit and tuck it snugly around the fruit. Fold both ends in and continue rolling up the wrapper, then seal the edge with a little water and some of the sugar. Do the same with the rest of the fruit and the wrappers.
Heat the oil in a saucepan or wok over high heat. Use a wooden chopstick or skewer to check if the oil is hot enough. When it's hot enough, bubbles will form all around the stick. (Or use a deep-fryer thermometer to read the temperature, which should be between 350° and 375°F or 175° to 190°C when ready). Reduce the heat to medium once it reaches the desired temperature to avoid burning the oil.
Deep-fry two or three banana rolls at a time until golden and crispy. Do not overcrowd the pan. Sprinkle some sugar on top and serve hot.
##
Bibingka Coconut Sponge Cakes
This local sponge cake is traditionally associated with Simbang Gabi —the nine-day series of dawn masses leading up to Christmas. December coincides with the rice harvest season, so Filipinos enjoy a variety of kakanin (native desserts made from rice) around Christmas time. There are so many ways to make this cake—one is to use glutinous rice and top each cake with a slice of salted egg and sugar. The aroma that comes from the cake reminds Filipinos of home. Surprisingly, this is a very popular dessert with foreign visitors to the Philippines.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time 1 hour
3 eggs, beaten
1 cup (200 g) light brown sugar
2 cups (400 g) rice flour
3 tablespoons unsalted butter, melted
One 13 1/2-oz (400-ml) can coconut milk
1 tablespoon baking powder
1 banana leaf (optional)
2 tablespoons fresh or frozen grated coconut
1 tablespoon unsalted butter, sliced
In a mixing bowl, place the eggs, brown sugar, rice flour, butter, coconut milk and baking powder. Mix thoroughly.
Preheat the oven to 325°F (160°C).
If you're using a banana leaf, line a round baking pan (about 8 x 3-inch/20 x 7.5-cm) with the leaf (cut according to the size of the tray) and pour in the cake batter. The banana leaf adds fragrance to the cake when cooked but using it is optional as the cakes are still good without the leaf. If you're not using a banana leaf, lightly grease the pan with butter and pour in the cake batter.
To make individual cakes, line a 4-inch (10-cm) wide and 2 1/4-inch (5.5-cm) deep minipan with 5-inch (12.5-cm) banana leaf (this is optional) and pour batter into the minipan.
Bake for about 1 hour or until browned or a toothpick inserted near the center comes out clean. Place the cake onto a serving platter and put butter on top of the cake. Sprinkle the grated coconut on the cake.
##
Halo-halo
Mixed Fruits and Shaved Ice Parfait
The quintessential Halo-halo (literally mix-mix) dessert is a mixture of shaved ice, milk, various fruits, sweet beans and a topping of either Filipino Leche Flan (page 108) or Sweet Purple Yam Pudding (page 99). A "special order" means a topping of ice cream! It is normally served in a tall glass and eaten with a long spoon like a parfait. This recipe contains the standard ingredients but there are no rules what to put into Halohalo or which item goes in first. Try sweetened red beans (sold in bottles in Asian grocery stores), nata de coco (coconut gelatin) or any ripe fruit. There is one rule though—mix everything up when eating.
In 4 tall parfait glasses or bowls, place a few slices of jackfruit and banana and 1 tablespoon each of two or three of the other ingredients (see list to the right). Fill each glass with 1 cup (200 g) of the crushed ice (prepare crushed ice by using either a blender or food processor) and pour the evaporated milk over the ice, dividing it evenly among the glasses. Top each glass with 1 tablespoon of the toasted young rice (if using), and then with 1 tablespoon of the Sweet Purple Yam Pudding or Filipino Leche Flan or 1 scoop of ice cream.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
4 bulbs fresh, frozen or canned jackfruit, sliced
1 ripe regular banana or saba banana, sliced
1 tablespoon each of 2 or 3 of the following: bottled coconut sport strings
canned sweetened kidney beans
canned sweetened chickpeas
canned cooked corn kernels
other commonly available fruits (canned or fresh) like lychees, mangoes or fruit cocktail
4 cups (800 g) crushed ice
2 cups (500 ml) evaporated milk (or fresh milk)
4 tablespoons toasted young rice (pinipig) or crispy rice cereal (optional)
4 tablespoons Sweet Purple Yam Pudding (page 99) or Filipino Leche Flan (page 108) or 4 scoops ice cream, any flavor
##
Filipino Hot Chocolate
This aromatic and easy-to-make drink reminds me of Christmas. Native cacao tablets, called tableas, which are made of ground cocoa beans, are simmered in water buffalo milk. Ground peanuts are added for flavor and the eggs make the drink foamy and rich. The chocolate is thickened vigorously with a wooden whisk (batidor or molinillo). If you cannot find Filipino or Mexican chocolate tablets, Hershey's® Cocoa is a good substitute.
Heat the milk in a saucepan over medium heat and add the chocolate tablets (or powder and sugar) and ground peanuts, stirring with a wooden spoon continuously until the chocolate is melted and thoroughly mixed. Add the egg yolks, if using, and mix for about 3 minutes or until thick. Serve hot.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 3 minutes
4 cups (1 liter) milk
4 sweetened Filipino or Mexican chocolate tablets (or 4 tablespoons Hershey's® Cocoa plus 4 tablespoons of light brown sugar)
2 tablespoons peanut, peeled, toasted and finely ground (optional)
2 egg yolks, beaten (optional)
##
Rice Cakes with Sweet Coconut Filling Suman Bulagta
Suman is found everywhere in the Philippines—if there is a church, there is a suman vendor. There are countless varieties of this dish with almost every town or locality having its own version. Banana leaves impart a sweet aroma and taste, and a subtle color. If the leaf tears or cracks while wrapping, double wrap it with another leaf or aluminum foil rather than starting all over again with a new leaf. If banana leaves are not available, wrap the cakes in parchment paper first then in aluminum foil. It is best to eat the suman within a couple of days although they can be stored in the refrigerator for a week. To reheat them, place in a microwave (remove the foil first) for fifteen seconds with the banana leaves on, or you can heat them in a steamer for about five minutes. Don't unwrap them until just before eating, otherwise the cakes become hard and dry.
Wash the glutinous rice and drain. Leave to soak in water in a bowl for at least 1 hour. Rinse and drain through a fine sieve. Return the drained rice to the bowl.
To extract the green color from the banana leaves, place a couple of thin strips and 2 tablespoons of warm water in a mortar and mash with the pestle. Strain and pour the green liquid over the rice and mix well. Discard the banana strips.
Place the softened banana leaf on a clean surface, lighter side up, and fill the center of each leaf with 1 to 1 1/ 2 tablespoons of the rice mixture. Do not overfill. Fold the left and right sides of the leaf over the mixture, then fold the bottom and top over it to form a suman square packet. Place the packet folded-sides down on a clean surface while wrapping the other. Put two packets together and tie with kitchen twine. Continue with the remainder of the rice mixture.
Pour water into a stockpot and bring to a boil. Add the packets and cook over high heat for 1 hour. Completely submerge the packets by putting a heavy object over the lid, or occasionally turn the packets while boiling. When cooked, drain immediately. Open the leaf wrappings, place on individual serving plates and sprinkle with sugar and grated coconut. Or serve the unwrapped sumans in a large plate, and the sugar and coconut in another.
Makes about 15
Preparation time: 1 hour soaking time + 30 minutes
Cooking time: 1 hour
3 cups (600 g) uncooked glutinous rice
15 sheets 10-in (25-cm) squares banana leaves, rinsed with boiling water to soften
2 tablespoons warm water
Kitchen twine
10 cups (2.5 liters) water
1 cup (200 g) light brown sugar
1 cup (200 g) fresh or frozen grated coconut
##
Iced Tapioca Pearl and Jelly Drink
Sago at Gulaman
This sweet, thirst-quenching drink is popular during the sizzling summer months. In restaurants, it's served in a fancy glass with a spoon and a straw; street vendors serve it in a plastic cup or bag with a straw. Agar-agar or gulaman is used to make the jellies. Gelatin powder can also be used.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 30 minutes
8 cups (2 liters) water
1 bar white agar-agar, flaked (or 1 tablespoon gelatin powder)
1 1/2 cups (300 g) dark brown sugar
1/2 cup (50 g) dried tapioca pearls, boiled (to yield 2 cups/200 g)
Ice cubes
To make the jelly, bring 2 cups (500 ml) of the water to a boil in a saucepan. Add the agar-agar flakes and stir constantly over low heat until flakes are completely melted (if using gelatin powder, stir until the powder is completely dissolved). Transfer to a tray or baking dish and set aside to cool at room temperature. When cooled, it should be firm. Cut into small dice using a knife.
To make the sugar syrup, bring the remaining 6 cups (1.5 liters) of water to a boil in a saucepan. Add the sugar and stir constantly over medium heat for 5 minutes. Set aside to cool.
Place the cooked tapioca pearls and jelly in glasses. Pour the syrup into the glasses and top with ice cubes as desired.
##
Sweet Mango Juice
Often called the king of fruits in the Philippines, the mango is a highly nutritious fruit that is native to India. Sweet Mango Juice is one of the best-loved drinks in the Philippines because of its smooth texture.
Combine the mango slices, ice cubes, water and sugar in a blender. Process until smooth. Serve.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
1 1/2 lbs (700 g) ripe mangoes, peeled and sliced
2 cups (250 g) ice cubes
2 cups (500 ml) water
1 tablespoon sugar (or adjust to taste)
##
Tangy Green Mango Juice
Green mangoes can make a delicious juice but you need to add a lot of sugar. This recipe calls for 1 cup (200 g) of sugar but feel free to adjust the amount. Though don't add too much—you don't want to kill off the naturally tart taste. This tangy and invigorating drink provides a refreshing break from the heat. Filipino mangoes are green when unripe but, depending on the variety, the color as well as size may vary and some mangoes are already ripe when still green. The produce manager at your store can help you to identify the right variety.
Combine the mango slices, ice cubes, water and sugar in a blender. Process until smooth. Serve.
Serves 4
Preparation time: 15 minutes
1 1/2 lbs (700 g) unripe mangoes, peeled and sliced
2 cups (250 g) ice cubes
2 cups (500 ml) water
1 cup (200 g) sugar (or adjust to taste)
##
Healthy Ginger Tea Salabat
This healthy ginger tea is often enjoyed during the Christmas season when it is slightly cooler than usual. With ginger's medicinal qualities, this tea warms up the body and drives away colds. In the Philippines, when a child has a sore throat, he is given a cup of warm ginger tea.
In a saucepan, combine the ginger, water, and brown sugar and bring to a boil. Cook over medium heat for 20 minutes. If the taste is too strong, add more water.
Strain the tea into a teapot. Discard the ginger. Serve hot in tea cups.
Serves 4 to 6
Preparation time: 5 minutes
Cooking time: 20 minutes
1 lb (500 g) fresh ginger, peeled and sliced
6 cups (1.5 liters) water
1 cup (200 g) light brown sugar
##
Filipino Leche Flan
Variations on this popular dessert are found in many countries but the Filipino version is sweeter than most. Just the egg yolks are used in this flan, which gives it a creamier taste and melt-in-the-mouth texture compared to versions that use whole eggs. If you prefer a less creamy, but sweeter flan, reduce the amount of sugar in the flan (the sugar in the caramel, however, should not be reduced). The flan needs to chill in the refrigerator for at least six hours before serving, so it is a good idea to make this ahead of time. Leftover flan is great addition to Halo-halo (page 104). Filipinos commonly use the leftover egg whites to make meringue cookies.
Serves 6 to 8
Preparation time: 10 minutes + 2 hours cooling time
Cooking time: 30 minutes
Individual flan molds (or two 9 x 2-in/23 x 5-cm flan molds or llanera)
One 12-oz (354 ml) can evaporated milk (or whole milk)
One 14-oz (410 ml) can sweetened condensed milk
1/2 cup (100 g) sugar
1/4 teaspoon vanilla extract
12 egg yolks, beaten
Caramel
3 tablespoons water
1 cup (150 g) light brown sugar
To make the Caramel, bring the water to a boil in a saucepan and reduce the heat to low before adding the sugar. Stir continuously for about 2 minutes or until the sugar caramelizes or turns amber. Immediately pour the caramelized sugar into the individual flan molds (Filipinos prefer the bigger 9 x 2-in/23 x 5-cm flan molds). Swirl the flan molds to evenly spread the caramel. Set the molds aside.
Prepare the steamer. Place a steamer in a large saucepan or work. Pour in water to just below the steamer and bring to a boil.
Combine the evaporated milk, condensed milk, sugar and vanilla extract in a bowl. Gently pass the beaten egg yolks through a strainer into the bowl. Mix thoroughly.
Pour the mixture into the flan molds containing the caramel. Cover the molds with aluminum foil, arrange the molds in the steamer (water should already be boiling before placing the molds inside the steamer) and steam for about 30 minutes. Set aside to cool and then refrigerate for at least 2 hours.
To serve, run a knife along the edges of the flan molds to loosen the flan. To remove individual flans, turn the molds over onto a platter or individual plates. To remove the larger flans, place a platter on top of the mold and, holding the platter tightly to the mold, quickly turn upside down. The flan should come out easily with the caramel on top.
How to Make Leche Flan
1 Combine the evaporated milk, condensed milk, sugar and vanilla extract.
2 Pass the beaten egg yolks through a strainer.
3 Pour the caramelized sugar into the flan molds and swirl to evenly spread the caramel.
4 Pour the flan mixture into the molds on top of the caramel.
5 Cover the molds with foil and steam for 30 minutes or until firm.
#
Index
Achara 21
Afritadang Manok 60
Agar-Agar 12, 106
Ampalaya 13, 75, 80
Anchovy Sauce 11, 12, 80
Annatto seeds 12, 19, 28, 33, 56, 92,
Arroz a la Cubana 88
Arroz Caldo 8, 92
Bagoong See Sauteed Shrimp Paste
Banana blossom 12, 82
Banana Blossom with Shrimp 82
Banana ketchup 12, 21, 27, 57, 65, 76, 83,88
Banana leaves 13, 28, 33, 89, 103, 109
Bananas 12, 43, 66, 88, 98, 102, 108
Barbecued Chicken Skewers 10, 61
Batchoy 9, 40
Beans,
Fermented black beans 14, 47
Green beans 56,73, 80
Mung beans 16, 81
Long beans 16
Beef
Cuban Rice with Ground Beef 88
Filipino Beef Steak 53
Kaldereta Beef Stew 9, 53
Marinated Morcon Stuffed Beef Roll 55
Oxtail Vegetable Stew 9, 56
Stuffed Meatloaf with Cheese and Sausage 57
Bell peppers 13, 57, 60, 75
Bibingka 10, 103
Bicol Express 9, 49
Bihon Guisado 93
Biko Kalabasa 100
Bitter gourd 13, 75, 80
Braised Chayote with Shrimp 81
Bringhe 9, 89
Calamansi limes 13, 92, 93, 94
Calamares 27
Camaron Rebosado 26
Cane vinegar 13
Champorado 98
Chayote 13, 42, 43, 81
Chicharon 14, 40, 80, 81, 94
Chicken
Chicken Adobo 64
Tangy Asado Chicken 63
Barbecued Chicken Skewers 10, 61
Chicken and Vegetables in Tangy Tomato Sauce 60
Chicken Empanadas 29
Chicken Soup with Green Papaya 42
Chicken Stew with Vegetables 66
Chicken Tamales 9, 10, 28
Coconut Chicken with Pineapple 62
Filipino Fried Chicken 65
Classic Filipino Chicken Pot Pie 67
Quick Eggdrop Chicken Noodle Soup 41
Rice Porridge with Chicken 92
Chili peppers 13, 21, 22, 49, 53, 63, 75, 77
Chinese cabbage 13, 39, 56
Chocolate Rice Porridge 98
Chorizo de Bilbao 13, 66, 89,
Coconut 13, 14
Coconut Chicken with Pineapple 62
Coconut milk 8, 9,14, 28, 49, 62, 89, 98, 100, 103,
Grated Coconut 14, 18, 103, 109
Coconut Oil 17, 100,
Coconut Sponge Cakes 10, 103
Coconut sport strings 14, 108
Coconut Vinegar 13
Crispy Fried Fishballs 33
Crispy Fried Garlic 23
Crispy Lechon Pork 48
Crunchy Fried Squid 27
Cuban Rice with Ground Beef 88
Daing na Bangus 74
Egg Yolk Treats 101
Embutido 57
Ensaladang Kangkong 85
Escabeche 75
Estofadong Tulya 71
Fiery Pork Stew with Coconut 49
Filipino Beef Steak 53
Filipino cane vinegar 14
Filipino Ceviche 77
Filipino Fried Chicken 65
Filipino Hot Chocolate 105
Filipino Leche Flan 9, 108
Filipino Spinach and Egg Salad 85
Filipino–Style Seafood Paella 90
Fish and Seafood
Banana Blossom with Shrimp 82
Braised Chayote with Shrimp 81
Crispy Fried Fishballs 33
Crunchy Fried Squid 27
Filipino Ceviche 9, 77
Filipino-Style Seafood Paella 94
Fish Soup with Miso Dip 36
Fried Marinated Fish 74
Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips 26
Fried Whole Fish with Eggs 73
Mung Bean Stew with Shrimp 81
Piquant Fish Stew 75
Noodles with Shrimp and Tofu 94
Sautéed Corn with Shrimp 84
Sautéed Marinated Clams 71
Sautéed Shrimp with Long Beans 73
Sautéed Squid 70
Stuffed Crabs 76
Sweet and Sour Fish 75
Fish sauce 14, 21, 32, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 51, 60, 62, 66, 70, 75, 80, 81, 84, 91, 92, 93, 94
Fresh Pork Salad Rolls 32
Fried Garlic 23, 40, 91
Fried pork rinds 14, 40, 80, 81, 94
Fried Rice Noodles 8, 10, 93
Fried Rice with Egg 91
Fried Shrimp with Assorted Dips 26
Garlic Mayonnaise Dip 20, 26, 27, 33,
Ginataang Bilo-bilo 98
Glazed Christmas Ham with Pineapple 49
Glutinous rice 14, 89, 100, 105
Guisadong Mais 84
Guisadong Munggo 81
Guisadong Pusit 70
Guisadong Sayote 81
Guisadong Sitaw 73
Halo-halo 104
Hamon 10, 49
Healthy Ginger Tea 10, 107
Hot and Spicy Sauce 21
Humba 47
Iced Tapioca Pearl and Jelly Drink 106
Inihaw na Baboy 46
Inihaw na Manok 10, 61
Jackfruit 14, 98, 102, 108
Kangkong 17
Kaldereta Beef Stew 53
Kapampangan Paella 9, 89
Kare-Kare 9, 56
Kilawing Puso ng Saging 82
Kinilaw na Tanigue 9, 77
Langka 14, 98, 102, 108
Lechon Sauce 48
Litson Kawali 48
Liver Paste 23, 48, 53
Lumpiang Sariwa 32
Lumpiang Shanghai 31
Macaroni Soup 39
Marinated Morcon Stuffed Beef Roll 55
Menudo 51
Miso 16
Misuang Manok 41
Mixed Fruits and Shaved Ice Parfait 104
Mixed Vegetables with Anchovy Sauce 9, 80
Morcon 55
Mung Bean and Spinach Stew 81
Nilagang Baboy 43
Noodle
Bihon Guisado 93
Canton noodles 15
Cornstarch noodles 15
Fried Rice Noodles 93
Mami noodles 15
Miki noodles 15
Misua 15
Mung bean thread noodles 15
Noodles with Shrimp and Tofu 94
Rice vermicelli 15
Sautéed Bean Thread Noodles 10, 95
Noodle Soup with All the Trimmings 9, 40
Noodles with Shrimp and Tofu 94
Oxtail Vegetable Stew 56
Paksiw na Isda 75
Pan de Sal Bread Rolls 30
Pancit 93, 94, 95
See Noodles 15
Pancit Guisado 8, 10, 90
Pancit Luglug 92
Pancit Molo 9, 37
Papaya, Green 14, 21, 33, 42, 74, 81,
Papaya Shrimp Fritters 33
Pastel de Pollo 67
Patis See Fish sauce
Pechay 13, 39, 56
Perfect Steamed Rice 23
Pesang Isda sa Miso 36
Pickled Green Papaya 21
Pinakbet 9, 80
Pinipig 16
Pininyahang Manok 62
Piquant Fish Stew 75
Pochero 66
Pork
Crispy Lechon Pork 48
Fresh Pork Salad Rolls 32
Traditional Tocino Bacon 9, 50
Fiery Pork Stew with Coconut 9, 49
Glazed Christmas Ham with Pineapple 10, 49
Pork and Corn Soup 43
Pork and Tomato Stew 51
Pork Soup with Squash 43
Roasted Marinated Pork 46
Sweet Soy Pork with Black Beans 47
Poultry See Chicken
Pritong Manok 65
Pulburon 100
Quick Eggdrop Chicken Noodle Soup 41
Rellenong Alimasag 76
Rellenong Talong 83
Rice 10, 11
Cuban Rice with Ground Beef 88
Filipino–Style Seafood Paella 90
Fried Rice with Egg 91
Glutinous rice 14, 89, 100, 105
Kapampangan Paella 9, 89
Perfect Steamed Rice 23
Rice Porridge with Chicken 92
Rice Cakes with Sweet Coconut Filling 105
Rice Porridge with Chicken 92
Rice Flour 16
Sago at Gulaman 106
Salabat 10, 107
Salted Eggs 22
Salted Fish 98
Sarsiadong Tilapia 73
Sautéed Bean Thread Noodles 10, 95
Sautéed Corn with Shrimp 84
Sautéed Marinated Clams 71
Sautéed Shrimp with Long Beans 73
Sauteed Shrimp Paste 16, 21, 40, 56, 69, 73, 74, 81, 82, 85
Sinangag 8, 95
Sinigang Shrimp Soup 39
Sopa de Conchitas 39
Sopas de Upo 43
Sotanghon Guisado 10, 93
Spicy Garlic Vinegar Dipping Sauce 22
Spring Rolls 8, 10, 31
Spring roll wrappers 16
Stuffed Crabs 76
Stuffed Eggplant 83
Sweet and Sour Fish 75
Sweet and Sour Sauce 21
Sweet and Spicy Sauce 21
Sweet Banana and Jackfruit Rolls 102
Suman Bulagta 105
Sweet Coconut Milk Delight 98
Sweet Garlic Sauce 21
Sweet Mango Juice 107
Sweet Purple Yam Pudding 99
Sweet Rice Cakes with Fried Coconut Topping 100
Tamarind 16
Tangy Asado Chicken 63
Tangy Green Mango Juice 107
Tapioca pearls 17
Taro root 17
Tinolang Manok 42
Toasted Butter Cookies 100
Toasted Rice 17
Tomato and Salted Egg Salad 22
Turon Saba 102
Tuyo 98
Ube Halaya 99
Ukoy 33
Vinegar Garlic Sauce 20
Vinegar and Sautéed Shrimp Paste Sauce 21
Wonton Soup 9, 37
Yema 101
#
To Ronald
Please note that the publisher and author of this cookbook are NOT RESPONSIBLE in any manner whatsoever for any domestic accidents, fires, food poisoning or allergic reactions that could result from the preparation of the recipes given within, including from the eating of raw vegetables, eggs, meat or fish. The publisher and author are not responsible for any kind of food borne disease or illness caused by undercooked food.
Published by Tuttle Publishing, an imprint of Periplus Editions (HK) Ltd., with editorial offices at 364 Innovation Drive, North Clarendon, Vermont 05759 U.S.A. and 61 Tai Seng Avenue #02-12, Singapore 534167.
Copyright © 2010 Miki Garcia
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Garcia, Miki, 1969-
Filipino cooking / Miki Garcia; photography by Luca Invernizzi
Tettoni. —1st ed.
p. cm.
Includes index.
ISBN: 978-1-4629-0528-7 (ebook)
1. Cookery, Philippine. I. Title.
TX724.5.P5G37 2010
641.59599—dc22
2009033442
Distributed by
North America, Latin America & Europe
Tuttle Publishing
364 Innovation Drive, North Clarendon, VT 05759-9436 U.S.A.
Tel: 1 (802) 773-8930; Fax: 1 (802) 773-6993
info@tuttlepublishing.com
www.tuttlepublishing.com
Asia Pacific
Berkeley Books Pte. Ltd.
61 Tai Seng Avenue #02-12, Singapore 534167
Tel: (65) 6280-1330; Fax: (65) 6280-6290
inquiries@periplus.com.sg
www.periplus.com
First edition
15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Printed in Singapore
TUTTLE PUBLISHING® is a registered trademark of Tuttle Publishing, a division of Periplus Editions (HK) Ltd.
#
Resources
PilipinoMart
Offers wholesale discounts, requires no membership fee nor minimum order.
Email: info@pilipinomart.com
Tel: (626) 262 4403
www.pilipinomart.com
Filgoods International
Offers dried, bottled and canned goods.
Email: filgoods@filgoods.com
www.filgoods.com
PinoyGrocery.Com
Offers Filipino, Vietnamese and Thai products. Ships products except frozen and fresh goods.
11 South Mason Road Suite 116 Katy Texas, 77450
Email: Inquiries@PinoyGrocery.com
Tel: (281) 829 9798
www.pinoygrocery.com
Filipino Store
Offers dried goods, canned products and noodles. Frozen goods for pick-up only. 1105 E Jackson PL, Indianola, IA 50125
Email: dwightbenilda@filipino-store.com
Tel: (515) 285 3894
www.filipino-store.com
Oriental Super-Mart
A South Florida store that offers a large selection of Filipino and other Asian products including dry and frozen foods, and beverages.
5422 W. Atlantic Blvd., Margate, FL 33063 954-970-8868
orientalsupermrk@bellsouth.net
www.orientalsuper-mart.com/ourstore/
Manila Grocery Company
No online shopping but can arrange shipment of orders except frozen items.
8002 N Oak Trafficway Suite 108
Kansas City, MO 64118-1272
Email: manilagrocery@sbcglobal.net
Tel: (866) 508-8898
www.manilagroceryco.com
Philippine Food Corporation
Prefers wholesalers but will refer interested buyers to stores within their areas.
4529 N. Ravenswood Avenue Chicago Illinois 60640
Email: philfood@flash.net
Tel: (773) 784-7447
www.philippinefood.net
Phil-Am Merchandising, Inc.
Offers dry and frozen goods from its online and retail stores.
683 Newark Avenue, Jersey City, NJ 07306
Email: sales@philamfood.com
Tel: (201) 963-0455
www.philamfood.com
Asian Wok
Offers various products from 10 Asian countries, including the Philippines.
Tel: 1-800-300-6346
www.asianwok.com
ImportFood.com
Find substitutes for ingredients used in Filipino dishes from this online Thai store.
PO Box 2054, Issaquah, WA 98027
Email: info@importfood.com
Tel: 1-888-618-8424
www.importfood.com
Pinoy Mini Mall
A UK-based company that offers Filipino products and delivers all across Europe.
Tel: 0870-330-7430
www.pinoyminimall.co.uk
Kabayan
An online Australia-based company that offers frozen and dry Filipino products.
65 Hawthory Road, Kilsyth, 3137 Victoria Australia
sales@kabayan-online.com.au
Tel: 63 03 9725 6564
www.kabayan-online.com.au
#
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 590 |
const assert = require('assert');
const { bucketPut } = require('../../../lib/api/bucketPut');
const bucketGetPolicy = require('../../../lib/api/bucketGetPolicy');
const bucketPutPolicy = require('../../../lib/api/bucketPutPolicy');
const { cleanup,
DummyRequestLogger,
makeAuthInfo }
= require('../helpers');
const log = new DummyRequestLogger();
const authInfo = makeAuthInfo('accessKey1');
const bucketName = 'getbucketpolicy-testbucket';
const testBasicRequest = {
bucketName,
headers: { host: `${bucketName}.s3.amazonaws.com` },
url: '/',
};
const expectedBucketPolicy = {
Version: '2012-10-17',
Statement: [
{
Effect: 'Allow',
Resource: `arn:aws:s3:::${bucketName}`,
Principal: '*',
Action: ['s3:GetBucketLocation'],
},
],
};
const testPutPolicyRequest = {
bucketName,
headers: { host: `${bucketName}.s3.amazonaws.com` },
post: JSON.stringify(expectedBucketPolicy),
};
describe('getBucketPolicy API', () => {
before(() => cleanup());
beforeEach(done => bucketPut(authInfo, testBasicRequest, log, done));
afterEach(() => cleanup());
it('should return NoSuchBucketPolicy error if ' +
'bucket has no policy', done => {
bucketGetPolicy(authInfo, testBasicRequest, log, err => {
assert.strictEqual(err.NoSuchBucketPolicy, true);
done();
});
});
describe('after bucket policy has been put', () => {
beforeEach(done => {
bucketPutPolicy(authInfo, testPutPolicyRequest, log, err => {
assert.equal(err, null);
done();
});
});
it('should return bucket policy', done => {
bucketGetPolicy(authInfo, testBasicRequest, log, (err, res) => {
assert.equal(err, null);
assert.deepStrictEqual(expectedBucketPolicy, JSON.parse(res));
done();
});
});
});
});
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 5,081 |
This class is all about Commitment! Teach your dog independent jump commitment from the ground up to maximize your handling and expand your options on course.
All handling depends on great jump commitment, whether it is 'meat & potatoes', distance work, or complex handling maneuvers. This class will focus on teaching independent obstacle commitment, starting with the flat area necessities through total commitment. We will discuss commitment to all obstacles but the exercises will be done on a jump. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 6,922 |
Q: Python np.lognormal gives infinite results for big average and St Dev I am trying to draw the lognormal distribution for my data. using the following code:
mu, sigma = 136519., 50405. # mean and standard deviation
hs = np.random.lognormal(mu, sigma, 1000) #mean, s dev , Size
count, bins, ignored = plt.hist(hs, 100, normed=True)
x = np.linspace(min(bins), max(bins), 10000)
pdf = (math.exp(-(np.log(x) - mu)**2 / (2 * sigma**2)))
#plt.axis('tight')
plt.plot(x, pdf, linewidth=2, color='r')
As you can see, my mean and sigma are big values, it creates the problem that hs goes to infinity that gives an error. While if I put something like mu =3 and sigma =1, it works, any suggestions for big numbers?
Update 1 :
I corrected my code with the first answer, but now I only get a straight line :
mu, sigma = 136519 , 50405 # mean and standard deviation
normal_std = np.sqrt(np.log(1 + (sigma/mu)**2))
normal_mean = np.log(mu) - normal_std**2 / 2
hs = np.random.lognormal(normal_mean, normal_std, 1000)
print(hs.max()) # some finite number
print(hs.mean()) # about 136519
print(hs.std()) # about 50405
# hs = np.random.lognormal(mu, sigma, 1000) #mean, s dev , Size
#
count, bins, ignored = plt.hist(hs, 100, normed=True)
x = np.linspace(min(bins), max(bins), 10000)
pdfT = [];
for el in range (len(x)):
pdfTmp = (math.exp(-(np.log(x[el]) - mu)**2 / (2 * sigma**2)))
pdfT += [pdfTmp]
#plt.axis('tight')
pdf = np.asarray(pdfT)
plt.plot(x, pdf, linewidth=2, color='r')
A: The parameters mu and sigma in np.random.lognormal are not the mean and STD of the lognormal distribution. They are the mean and STD of the underlying normal distribution, that is of log(X). This means that by passing 136519 for the mean you ask NumPy to generate numbers of size exp(136519) which is about 10**60000, far beyond the double precision limits.
With a bit of algebra you can get the correct parameters for np.random.lognormal from the ones you have.
mu, sigma = 136519., 50405.
normal_std = np.sqrt(np.log(1 + (sigma/mu)**2))
normal_mean = np.log(mu) - normal_std**2 / 2
hs = np.random.lognormal(normal_mean, normal_std, 1000)
print(hs.max()) # some finite number
print(hs.mean()) # about 136519
print(hs.std()) # about 50405
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 7,966 |
Pimental es uno de los 8 corregimientos que forman parte del municipio de Chimá, en el departamento de Córdoba, Colombia.
Población
Pimental cuenta con una población aproximada de 807 habitantes. Limita con los corregimientos de Punta Verde y Carolina.
Economía
Su economía se basa en actividades agrícolas tales como la siembra de cultivos entre los que se destacan cultivos de frijol, yuca, maíz, algodón, plátano entre otros.
También se dedican a la cría de animales como gallos, gallinas y caballos, para después comercializarlos.
Fiestas y actividades
La fiesta más importante y representativa es la de la Virgen del Carmen, la cual se celebra el 16 de julio. Para llevar a cabo esta celebración los habitantes de Pimental decoran los buses con flores e imágenes alusivas a la Virgen y recorren el corregimiento en una caravana.
La muestra de fandangos que es baile tradicional de la Costa Caribe de Colombia se realiza en la plaza central, en donde los grupos realizan las presentaciones con trajes típicos, los cuales son de colores llamativos.
Las peleas de gallos son muy comunes entre los hombres, quienes se reúnen en las galleras, sitio en el cual se realizan dichas peleas. Las carreras de caballos son actividades familiares, las cuales se realizan normalmente los domingos.
Fauna y flora
Pimental cuenta con el paso del Caño Bugre y la Ciénaga Grande de Lorica, lo que hace fácil el subsistir de las familias, pues hay una gran variedad de plantas y animales.
Cuenta también con una gran variedad de árboles maderables y silvestres como el cedro, el roble, el campano, el pimiento, el dorado, el trementino entre otros.
Referencias
Enlaces externos
http://www.dane.gov.co/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=238&Itemid=121
Corregimientos de Córdoba (Colombia) | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 1,835 |
module.exports = {
"blue-base": "#1890ff",
"blue-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{blue-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"blue-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{blue-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"blue-3": "mix(@blue-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"blue-4": "mix(@blue-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"blue-5": "mix(@blue-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"blue-6": "mix(@blue-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"blue-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{blue-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"blue-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{blue-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"blue-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{blue-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"blue-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{blue-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"purple-base": "#722ed1",
"purple-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{purple-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"purple-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{purple-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"purple-3": "mix(@purple-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"purple-4": "mix(@purple-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"purple-5": "mix(@purple-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"purple-6": "mix(@purple-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"purple-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{purple-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"purple-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{purple-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"purple-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{purple-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"purple-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{purple-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"cyan-base": "#13c2c2",
"cyan-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{cyan-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"cyan-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{cyan-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"cyan-3": "mix(@cyan-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"cyan-4": "mix(@cyan-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"cyan-5": "mix(@cyan-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"cyan-6": "mix(@cyan-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"cyan-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{cyan-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"cyan-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{cyan-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"cyan-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{cyan-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"cyan-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{cyan-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"green-base": "#52c41a",
"green-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{green-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"green-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{green-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"green-3": "mix(@green-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"green-4": "mix(@green-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"green-5": "mix(@green-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"green-6": "mix(@green-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"green-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{green-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"green-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{green-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"green-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{green-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"green-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{green-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"magenta-base": "#eb2f96",
"magenta-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{magenta-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"magenta-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{magenta-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"magenta-3": "mix(@magenta-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"magenta-4": "mix(@magenta-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"magenta-5": "mix(@magenta-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"magenta-6": "mix(@magenta-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"magenta-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{magenta-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"magenta-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{magenta-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"magenta-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{magenta-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"magenta-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{magenta-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"pink-base": "#eb2f96",
"pink-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{pink-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"pink-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{pink-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"pink-3": "mix(@pink-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"pink-4": "mix(@pink-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"pink-5": "mix(@pink-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"pink-6": "mix(@pink-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"pink-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{pink-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"pink-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{pink-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"pink-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{pink-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"pink-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{pink-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"red-base": "#f5222d",
"red-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{red-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"red-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{red-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"red-3": "mix(@red-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"red-4": "mix(@red-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"red-5": "mix(@red-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"red-6": "mix(@red-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"red-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{red-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"red-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{red-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"red-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{red-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"red-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{red-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"orange-base": "#fa8c16",
"orange-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{orange-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"orange-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{orange-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"orange-3": "mix(@orange-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"orange-4": "mix(@orange-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"orange-5": "mix(@orange-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"orange-6": "mix(@orange-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"orange-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{orange-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"orange-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{orange-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"orange-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{orange-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"orange-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{orange-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"yellow-base": "#fadb14",
"yellow-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{yellow-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"yellow-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{yellow-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"yellow-3": "mix(@yellow-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"yellow-4": "mix(@yellow-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"yellow-5": "mix(@yellow-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"yellow-6": "mix(@yellow-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"yellow-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{yellow-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"yellow-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{yellow-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"yellow-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{yellow-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"yellow-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{yellow-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"volcano-base": "#fa541c",
"volcano-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{volcano-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"volcano-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{volcano-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"volcano-3": "mix(@volcano-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"volcano-4": "mix(@volcano-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"volcano-5": "mix(@volcano-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"volcano-6": "mix(@volcano-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"volcano-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{volcano-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"volcano-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{volcano-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"volcano-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{volcano-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"volcano-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{volcano-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"geekblue-base": "#2f54eb",
"geekblue-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{geekblue-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"geekblue-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{geekblue-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"geekblue-3": "mix(@geekblue-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"geekblue-4": "mix(@geekblue-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"geekblue-5": "mix(@geekblue-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"geekblue-6": "mix(@geekblue-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"geekblue-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{geekblue-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"geekblue-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{geekblue-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"geekblue-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{geekblue-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"geekblue-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{geekblue-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"lime-base": "#a0d911",
"lime-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{lime-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"lime-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{lime-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"lime-3": "mix(@lime-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"lime-4": "mix(@lime-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"lime-5": "mix(@lime-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"lime-6": "mix(@lime-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"lime-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{lime-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"lime-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{lime-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"lime-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{lime-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"lime-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{lime-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"gold-base": "#faad14",
"gold-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{gold-base}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"gold-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{gold-base}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"gold-3": "mix(@gold-base, @component-background, 30%)",
"gold-4": "mix(@gold-base, @component-background, 45%)",
"gold-5": "mix(@gold-base, @component-background, 65%)",
"gold-6": "mix(@gold-base, @component-background, 85%)",
"gold-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{gold-base}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"gold-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{gold-base}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"gold-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{gold-base}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"gold-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{gold-base}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"preset-colors": "pink, magenta, red, volcano, orange, yellow, gold, cyan, lime, green, blue, geekblue,\n purple",
"theme": "dark",
"ant-prefix": "ant",
"html-selector": "html",
"primary-color": "@blue-6",
"info-color": "@blue-6",
"success-color": "@green-6",
"processing-color": "@blue-6",
"error-color": "@red-5",
"highlight-color": "@red-5",
"warning-color": "@gold-6",
"normal-color": "#d9d9d9",
"white": "#fff",
"black": "#000",
"primary-1": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{primary-color}', 8) `), @component-background, 15%)",
"primary-2": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{primary-color}', 7) `), @component-background, 25%)",
"primary-3": "mix(@primary-color, @component-background, 30%)",
"primary-4": "mix(@primary-color, @component-background, 45%)",
"primary-5": "mix(@primary-color, @component-background, 65%)",
"primary-6": "@primary-color",
"primary-7": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{primary-color}', 5) `), @component-background, 90%)",
"primary-8": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{primary-color}', 4) `), @component-background, 95%)",
"primary-9": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{primary-color}', 3) `), @component-background, 97%)",
"primary-10": "mix(color(~`colorPalette('@{primary-color}', 2) `), @component-background, 98%)",
"body-background": "@black",
"component-background": "#141414",
"popover-background": "#1f1f1f",
"popover-customize-border-color": "#3a3a3a",
"font-family": "-apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial,\n 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol',\n 'Noto Color Emoji'",
"code-family": "'SFMono-Regular', Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Menlo, Courier, monospace",
"text-color": "fade(@white, 65%)",
"text-color-secondary": "fade(@white, 45%)",
"text-color-inverse": "@white",
"icon-color": "inherit",
"icon-color-hover": "fade(@white, 75%)",
"heading-color": "fade(@white, 85%)",
"heading-color-dark": "fade(@white, 100%)",
"text-color-dark": "fade(@white, 85%)",
"text-color-secondary-dark": "fade(@white, 65%)",
"text-selection-bg": "@primary-color",
"font-variant-base": "tabular-nums",
"font-feature-settings-base": "tnum",
"font-size-base": "14px",
"font-size-lg": "@font-size-base + 2px",
"font-size-sm": "12px",
"heading-1-size": "ceil(@font-size-base * 2.71)",
"heading-2-size": "ceil(@font-size-base * 2.14)",
"heading-3-size": "ceil(@font-size-base * 1.71)",
"heading-4-size": "ceil(@font-size-base * 1.42)",
"line-height-base": "1.5715",
"border-radius-base": "2px",
"border-radius-sm": "@border-radius-base",
"padding-lg": "24px",
"padding-md": "16px",
"padding-sm": "12px",
"padding-xs": "8px",
"padding-xss": "4px",
"control-padding-horizontal": "@padding-sm",
"control-padding-horizontal-sm": "@padding-xs",
"margin-lg": "24px",
"margin-md": "16px",
"margin-sm": "12px",
"margin-xs": "8px",
"margin-xss": "4px",
"height-base": "32px",
"height-lg": "40px",
"height-sm": "24px",
"item-active-bg": "@primary-1",
"item-hover-bg": "fade(@white, 8%)",
"iconfont-css-prefix": "anticon",
"link-color": "@primary-color",
"link-hover-color": "@primary-5",
"link-active-color": "@primary-7",
"link-decoration": "none",
"link-hover-decoration": "none",
"link-focus-decoration": "none",
"link-focus-outline": "0",
"ease-base-out": "cubic-bezier(0.7, 0.3, 0.1, 1)",
"ease-base-in": "cubic-bezier(0.9, 0, 0.3, 0.7)",
"ease-out": "cubic-bezier(0.215, 0.61, 0.355, 1)",
"ease-in": "cubic-bezier(0.55, 0.055, 0.675, 0.19)",
"ease-in-out": "cubic-bezier(0.645, 0.045, 0.355, 1)",
"ease-out-back": "cubic-bezier(0.12, 0.4, 0.29, 1.46)",
"ease-in-back": "cubic-bezier(0.71, -0.46, 0.88, 0.6)",
"ease-in-out-back": "cubic-bezier(0.71, -0.46, 0.29, 1.46)",
"ease-out-circ": "cubic-bezier(0.08, 0.82, 0.17, 1)",
"ease-in-circ": "cubic-bezier(0.6, 0.04, 0.98, 0.34)",
"ease-in-out-circ": "cubic-bezier(0.78, 0.14, 0.15, 0.86)",
"ease-out-quint": "cubic-bezier(0.23, 1, 0.32, 1)",
"ease-in-quint": "cubic-bezier(0.755, 0.05, 0.855, 0.06)",
"ease-in-out-quint": "cubic-bezier(0.86, 0, 0.07, 1)",
"border-color-base": "#434343",
"border-color-split": "#303030",
"border-color-inverse": "@white",
"border-width-base": "1px",
"border-style-base": "solid",
"outline-blur-size": "0",
"outline-width": "2px",
"outline-color": "@primary-color",
"outline-fade": "20%",
"background-color-light": "fade(@white, 4%)",
"background-color-base": "fade(@white, 8%)",
"disabled-color": "fade(@white, 30%)",
"disabled-bg": "@background-color-base",
"disabled-color-dark": "fade(@white, 30%)",
"shadow-color": "rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.45)",
"shadow-color-inverse": "@component-background",
"box-shadow-base": "@shadow-2",
"shadow-1-up": "0 -6px 16px -8px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.32), 0 -9px 28px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2),\n 0 -12px 48px 16px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.12)",
"shadow-1-down": "0 6px 16px -8px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.32), 0 9px 28px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2),\n 0 12px 48px 16px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.12)",
"shadow-1-left": "-6px 0 16px -8px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.08), -9px 0 28px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.05),\n -12px 0 48px 16px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.03)",
"shadow-1-right": "6px 0 16px -8px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.32), 9px 0 28px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2),\n 12px 0 48px 16px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.12)",
"shadow-2": "0 3px 6px -4px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.48), 0 6px 16px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.32),\n 0 9px 28px 8px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2)",
"btn-font-weight": "400",
"btn-border-radius-base": "@border-radius-base",
"btn-border-radius-sm": "@border-radius-base",
"btn-border-width": "@border-width-base",
"btn-border-style": "@border-style-base",
"btn-shadow": "0 2px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.015)",
"btn-primary-shadow": "0 2px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.045)",
"btn-text-shadow": "0 -1px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.12)",
"btn-primary-color": "#fff",
"btn-primary-bg": "@primary-color",
"btn-default-color": "@text-color",
"btn-default-bg": "transparent",
"btn-default-border": "@border-color-base",
"btn-danger-color": "#fff",
"btn-danger-bg": "@error-color",
"btn-danger-border": "@error-color",
"btn-disable-color": "@disabled-color",
"btn-disable-bg": "@disabled-bg",
"btn-disable-border": "@border-color-base",
"btn-default-ghost-color": "@text-color",
"btn-default-ghost-bg": "transparent",
"btn-default-ghost-border": "fade(@white, 25%)",
"btn-font-size-lg": "@font-size-lg",
"btn-font-size-sm": "@font-size-base",
"btn-padding-horizontal-base": "@padding-md - 1px",
"btn-padding-horizontal-lg": "@btn-padding-horizontal-base",
"btn-padding-horizontal-sm": "@padding-xs - 1px",
"btn-height-base": "@height-base",
"btn-height-lg": "@height-lg",
"btn-height-sm": "@height-sm",
"btn-circle-size": "@btn-height-base",
"btn-circle-size-lg": "@btn-height-lg",
"btn-circle-size-sm": "@btn-height-sm",
"btn-square-size": "@btn-height-base",
"btn-square-size-lg": "@btn-height-lg",
"btn-square-size-sm": "@btn-height-sm",
"btn-square-only-icon-size": "@font-size-base + 2px",
"btn-square-only-icon-size-sm": "@font-size-base",
"btn-square-only-icon-size-lg": "@btn-font-size-lg + 2px",
"btn-group-border": "@primary-5",
"btn-link-ghost-color": "@text-color",
"checkbox-size": "16px",
"checkbox-color": "@primary-color",
"checkbox-check-color": "#fff",
"checkbox-check-bg": "transparent",
"checkbox-border-width": "@border-width-base",
"descriptions-bg": "@background-color-light",
"descriptions-title-margin-bottom": "20px",
"descriptions-default-padding": "@padding-md @padding-lg",
"descriptions-middle-padding": "@padding-sm @padding-lg",
"descriptions-small-padding": "@padding-xs @padding-md",
"dropdown-selected-color": "@primary-color",
"dropdown-menu-submenu-disabled-bg": "transparent",
"empty-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"radio-size": "16px",
"radio-dot-color": "@primary-color",
"radio-dot-disabled-color": "fade(@white, 20%)",
"radtio-solid-checked-color": "@white",
"radio-button-bg": "@btn-default-bg",
"radio-button-checked-bg": "@btn-default-bg",
"radio-button-color": "@btn-default-color",
"radio-button-hover-color": "@primary-5",
"radio-button-active-color": "@primary-7",
"radio-disabled-button-checked-bg": "fade(@white, 20%)",
"radio-disabled-button-checked-color": "@black",
"screen-xs": "480px",
"screen-xs-min": "@screen-xs",
"screen-sm": "576px",
"screen-sm-min": "@screen-sm",
"screen-md": "768px",
"screen-md-min": "@screen-md",
"screen-lg": "992px",
"screen-lg-min": "@screen-lg",
"screen-xl": "1200px",
"screen-xl-min": "@screen-xl",
"screen-xxl": "1600px",
"screen-xxl-min": "@screen-xxl",
"screen-xs-max": "(@screen-sm-min - 1px)",
"screen-sm-max": "(@screen-md-min - 1px)",
"screen-md-max": "(@screen-lg-min - 1px)",
"screen-lg-max": "(@screen-xl-min - 1px)",
"screen-xl-max": "(@screen-xxl-min - 1px)",
"grid-columns": "24",
"grid-gutter-width": "0",
"layout-body-background": "@body-background",
"layout-header-background": "@popover-background",
"layout-header-height": "64px",
"layout-header-padding": "0 50px",
"layout-header-color": "@text-color",
"layout-footer-padding": "24px 50px",
"layout-footer-background": "@layout-body-background",
"layout-sider-background": "@layout-header-background",
"layout-trigger-height": "48px",
"layout-trigger-background": "#262626",
"layout-trigger-color": "#fff",
"layout-zero-trigger-width": "36px",
"layout-zero-trigger-height": "42px",
"layout-sider-background-light": "#fff",
"layout-trigger-background-light": "#fff",
"layout-trigger-color-light": "@text-color",
"zindex-badge": "auto",
"zindex-table-fixed": "auto",
"zindex-affix": "10",
"zindex-back-top": "10",
"zindex-picker-panel": "10",
"zindex-popup-close": "10",
"zindex-modal": "1000",
"zindex-modal-mask": "1000",
"zindex-message": "1010",
"zindex-notification": "1010",
"zindex-popover": "1030",
"zindex-dropdown": "1050",
"zindex-picker": "1050",
"zindex-tooltip": "1060",
"animation-duration-slow": "0.3s",
"animation-duration-base": "0.2s",
"animation-duration-fast": "0.1s",
"collapse-panel-border-radius": "@border-radius-base",
"dropdown-menu-bg": "@popover-background",
"dropdown-vertical-padding": "5px",
"dropdown-edge-child-vertical-padding": "4px",
"dropdown-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"dropdown-line-height": "22px",
"label-required-color": "@highlight-color",
"label-color": "@heading-color",
"form-warning-input-bg": "@input-bg",
"form-item-margin-bottom": "24px",
"form-item-trailing-colon": "true",
"form-vertical-label-padding": "0 0 8px",
"form-vertical-label-margin": "0",
"form-item-label-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"form-item-label-height": "@input-height-base",
"form-item-label-colon-margin-right": "8px",
"form-item-label-colon-margin-left": "2px",
"form-error-input-bg": "@input-bg",
"input-height-base": "@height-base",
"input-height-lg": "@height-lg",
"input-height-sm": "@height-sm",
"input-padding-horizontal": "@control-padding-horizontal - 1px",
"input-padding-horizontal-base": "@input-padding-horizontal",
"input-padding-horizontal-sm": "@control-padding-horizontal-sm - 1px",
"input-padding-horizontal-lg": "@input-padding-horizontal",
"input-padding-vertical-base": "max(\n round((@input-height-base - @font-size-base * @line-height-base) / 2 * 10) / 10 -\n @border-width-base,\n 3px\n)",
"input-padding-vertical-sm": "max(\n round((@input-height-sm - @font-size-base * @line-height-base) / 2 * 10) / 10 - @border-width-base,\n 0\n)",
"input-padding-vertical-lg": "ceil((@input-height-lg - @font-size-lg * @line-height-base) / 2 * 10) /\n 10 - @border-width-base",
"input-placeholder-color": "fade(@white, 30%)",
"input-color": "@text-color",
"input-icon-color": "fade(@white, 30%)",
"input-border-color": "@border-color-base",
"input-bg": "transparent",
"input-number-hover-border-color": "@input-hover-border-color",
"input-number-handler-active-bg": "@item-hover-bg",
"input-number-handler-hover-bg": "@primary-5",
"input-number-handler-bg": "transparent",
"input-number-handler-border-color": "@border-color-base",
"input-addon-bg": "@background-color-light",
"input-hover-border-color": "@primary-5",
"input-disabled-bg": "@disabled-bg",
"input-outline-offset": "0 0",
"input-icon-hover-color": "fade(@white, 85%)",
"mentions-dropdown-bg": "@popover-background",
"mentions-dropdown-menu-item-hover-bg": "@mentions-dropdown-bg",
"select-border-color": "@border-color-base",
"select-item-selected-font-weight": "600",
"select-dropdown-bg": "@popover-background",
"select-item-selected-bg": "@primary-1",
"select-item-active-bg": "@item-hover-bg",
"select-dropdown-vertical-padding": "@dropdown-vertical-padding",
"select-dropdown-font-size": "@dropdown-font-size",
"select-dropdown-line-height": "@dropdown-line-height",
"select-dropdown-height": "32px",
"select-background": "transparent",
"select-clear-background": "@component-background",
"select-selection-item-bg": "fade(@white, 8)",
"select-selection-item-border-color": "@border-color-split",
"select-single-item-height-lg": "40px",
"select-multiple-item-height": "@input-height-base - @input-padding-vertical-base * 2",
"select-multiple-item-height-lg": "32px",
"select-multiple-item-spacing-half": "ceil(@input-padding-vertical-base / 2)",
"cascader-bg": "transparent",
"cascader-item-selected-bg": "@primary-1",
"cascader-menu-bg": "@popover-background",
"cascader-menu-border-color-split": "@border-color-split",
"cascader-dropdown-vertical-padding": "@dropdown-vertical-padding",
"cascader-dropdown-edge-child-vertical-padding": "@dropdown-edge-child-vertical-padding",
"cascader-dropdown-font-size": "@dropdown-font-size",
"cascader-dropdown-line-height": "@dropdown-line-height",
"anchor-bg": "@component-background",
"anchor-border-color": "@border-color-split",
"tooltip-max-width": "250px",
"tooltip-color": "#fff",
"tooltip-bg": "#434343",
"tooltip-arrow-width": "5px",
"tooltip-distance": "@tooltip-arrow-width - 1px + 4px",
"tooltip-arrow-color": "@tooltip-bg",
"popover-bg": "@popover-background",
"popover-color": "@text-color",
"popover-min-width": "177px",
"popover-min-height": "32px",
"popover-arrow-width": "6px",
"popover-arrow-color": "@popover-bg",
"popover-arrow-outer-color": "@popover-bg",
"popover-distance": "@popover-arrow-width + 4px",
"popover-padding-horizontal": "@padding-md",
"modal-body-padding": "@padding-lg",
"modal-header-bg": "@popover-background",
"modal-header-padding": "@padding-md @padding-lg",
"modal-header-border-color-split": "@border-color-split",
"modal-header-close-size": "56px",
"modal-content-bg": "@popover-background",
"modal-heading-color": "@heading-color",
"modal-footer-bg": "transparent",
"modal-footer-border-color-split": "@border-color-split",
"modal-footer-padding-vertical": "10px",
"modal-footer-padding-horizontal": "16px",
"modal-mask-bg": "fade(@black, 45%)",
"modal-confirm-body-padding": "32px 32px 24px",
"progress-default-color": "@processing-color",
"progress-remaining-color": "@background-color-base",
"progress-text-color": "@text-color",
"progress-radius": "100px",
"progress-steps-item-bg": "fade(@white, 8%)",
"menu-inline-toplevel-item-height": "40px",
"menu-item-height": "40px",
"menu-item-group-height": "@line-height-base",
"menu-collapsed-width": "80px",
"menu-bg": "@component-background",
"menu-popup-bg": "@popover-background",
"menu-item-color": "@text-color",
"menu-highlight-color": "@primary-color",
"menu-item-active-bg": "@primary-1",
"menu-item-active-border-width": "3px",
"menu-item-group-title-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"menu-icon-size": "@font-size-base",
"menu-icon-size-lg": "@font-size-lg",
"menu-item-vertical-margin": "4px",
"menu-item-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"menu-item-boundary-margin": "8px",
"menu-dark-color": "@text-color-secondary-dark",
"menu-dark-bg": "@popover-background",
"menu-dark-arrow-color": "#fff",
"menu-dark-submenu-bg": "@component-background",
"menu-dark-highlight-color": "#fff",
"menu-dark-item-active-bg": "@primary-color",
"menu-dark-selected-item-icon-color": "@white",
"menu-dark-selected-item-text-color": "@white",
"menu-dark-item-hover-bg": "transparent",
"spin-dot-size-sm": "14px",
"spin-dot-size": "20px",
"spin-dot-size-lg": "32px",
"table-bg": "@component-background",
"table-header-bg": "#1d1d1d",
"table-header-color": "@heading-color",
"table-header-sort-bg": "#262626",
"table-body-sort-bg": "fade(@white, 1%)",
"table-row-hover-bg": "#262626",
"table-selected-row-color": "inherit",
"table-selected-row-bg": "@primary-1",
"table-body-selected-sort-bg": "@table-selected-row-bg",
"table-selected-row-hover-bg": "@table-selected-row-bg",
"table-expanded-row-bg": "@table-header-bg",
"table-padding-vertical": "16px",
"table-padding-horizontal": "16px",
"table-padding-vertical-md": "@table-padding-vertical * 3 / 4",
"table-padding-horizontal-md": "@table-padding-horizontal / 2",
"table-padding-vertical-sm": "@table-padding-vertical / 2",
"table-padding-horizontal-sm": "@table-padding-horizontal / 2",
"table-border-radius-base": "@border-radius-base",
"table-footer-bg": "@background-color-light",
"table-footer-color": "@heading-color",
"table-header-bg-sm": "@table-header-bg",
"table-header-sort-active-bg": "#303030",
"table-header-filter-active-bg": "#434343",
"table-filter-btns-bg": "@popover-background",
"table-filter-dropdown-bg": "@popover-background",
"table-expand-icon-bg": "transparent",
"tag-default-bg": "@background-color-light",
"tag-default-color": "@text-color",
"tag-font-size": "@font-size-sm",
"picker-bg": "transparent",
"picker-basic-cell-hover-color": "@item-hover-bg",
"picker-basic-cell-active-with-range-color": "@primary-1",
"picker-basic-cell-hover-with-range-color": "darken(@primary-color, 35%)",
"picker-basic-cell-disabled-bg": "#303030",
"picker-border-color": "@border-color-split",
"picker-date-hover-range-border-color": "darken(@primary-color, 20%)",
"picker-date-hover-range-color": "@picker-basic-cell-hover-with-range-color",
"picker-time-panel-cell-height": "28px",
"calendar-bg": "@popover-background",
"calendar-input-bg": "@calendar-bg",
"calendar-border-color": "transparent",
"calendar-item-active-bg": "@item-active-bg",
"calendar-full-bg": "@component-background",
"calendar-full-panel-bg": "@calendar-full-bg",
"carousel-dot-width": "16px",
"carousel-dot-height": "3px",
"carousel-dot-active-width": "24px",
"badge-height": "20px",
"badge-dot-size": "6px",
"badge-font-size": "@font-size-sm",
"badge-font-weight": "normal",
"badge-status-size": "6px",
"badge-text-color": "@white",
"rate-star-color": "@yellow-6",
"rate-star-bg": "fade(@white, 12%)",
"card-head-color": "@heading-color",
"card-head-background": "transparent",
"card-head-font-size": "@font-size-lg",
"card-head-font-size-sm": "@font-size-base",
"card-head-padding": "16px",
"card-head-padding-sm": "@card-head-padding / 2",
"card-head-height": "48px",
"card-head-height-sm": "36px",
"card-inner-head-padding": "12px",
"card-padding-base": "24px",
"card-padding-base-sm": "@card-padding-base / 2",
"card-actions-background": "@background-color-light",
"card-actions-li-margin": "12px 0",
"card-skeleton-bg": "#303030",
"card-background": "@component-background",
"card-shadow": "0 1px 2px -2px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.64), 0 3px 6px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.48),\n 0 5px 12px 4px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.36)",
"card-radius": "@border-radius-base",
"card-head-tabs-margin-bottom": "-17px",
"comment-bg": "transparent",
"comment-padding-base": "@padding-md 0",
"comment-nest-indent": "44px",
"comment-font-size-base": "@font-size-base",
"comment-font-size-sm": "@font-size-sm",
"comment-author-name-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"comment-author-time-color": "fade(@white, 30%)",
"comment-action-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"comment-action-hover-color": "fade(@white, 65%)",
"comment-actions-margin-bottom": "inherit",
"comment-actions-margin-top": "@margin-sm",
"comment-content-detail-p-margin-bottom": "inherit",
"tabs-card-head-background": "@background-color-light",
"tabs-card-height": "40px",
"tabs-card-active-color": "@primary-color",
"tabs-title-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"tabs-title-font-size-lg": "@font-size-lg",
"tabs-title-font-size-sm": "@font-size-base",
"tabs-ink-bar-color": "@primary-color",
"tabs-bar-margin": "0 0 @margin-md 0",
"tabs-horizontal-margin": "0 32px 0 0",
"tabs-horizontal-margin-rtl": "0 0 0 32px",
"tabs-horizontal-padding": "@padding-sm 0",
"tabs-horizontal-padding-lg": "@padding-md 0",
"tabs-horizontal-padding-sm": "@padding-xs 0",
"tabs-vertical-padding": "@padding-xs @padding-lg",
"tabs-vertical-margin": "0 0 @margin-md 0",
"tabs-scrolling-size": "32px",
"tabs-highlight-color": "@primary-color",
"tabs-hover-color": "@primary-5",
"tabs-active-color": "@primary-7",
"tabs-card-gutter": "2px",
"tabs-card-tab-active-border-top": "2px solid transparent",
"back-top-color": "#fff",
"back-top-bg": "@text-color-secondary",
"back-top-hover-bg": "@text-color",
"avatar-size-base": "32px",
"avatar-size-lg": "40px",
"avatar-size-sm": "24px",
"avatar-font-size-base": "18px",
"avatar-font-size-lg": "24px",
"avatar-font-size-sm": "14px",
"avatar-bg": "fade(@white, 30%)",
"avatar-color": "#fff",
"avatar-border-radius": "@border-radius-base",
"switch-height": "22px",
"switch-sm-height": "16px",
"switch-min-width": "44px",
"switch-sm-min-width": "28px",
"switch-sm-checked-margin-left": "-(@switch-sm-height - 3px)",
"switch-disabled-opacity": "0.4",
"switch-color": "@primary-color",
"switch-bg": "@white",
"switch-shadow-color": "fade(#00230b, 20%)",
"pagination-item-bg": "transparent",
"pagination-item-size": "@height-base",
"pagination-item-size-sm": "24px",
"pagination-font-family": "Arial",
"pagination-font-weight-active": "500",
"pagination-item-bg-active": "transparent",
"pagination-item-link-bg": "transparent",
"pagination-item-disabled-color-active": "@black",
"pagination-item-disabled-bg-active": "fade(@white, 25%)",
"pagination-item-input-bg": "@pagination-item-bg",
"pagination-mini-options-size-changer-top": "0px",
"page-header-padding": "@padding-lg",
"page-header-padding-vertical": "@padding-md",
"page-header-padding-breadcrumb": "@padding-sm",
"page-header-content-padding-vertical": "@padding-sm",
"page-header-back-color": "@icon-color",
"page-header-ghost-bg": "transparent",
"breadcrumb-base-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"breadcrumb-last-item-color": "@text-color",
"breadcrumb-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"breadcrumb-icon-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"breadcrumb-link-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"breadcrumb-link-color-hover": "@primary-5",
"breadcrumb-separator-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"breadcrumb-separator-margin": "0 @padding-xs",
"slider-margin": "10px 6px 10px",
"slider-rail-background-color": "#262626",
"slider-rail-background-color-hover": "@border-color-base",
"slider-track-background-color": "@primary-3",
"slider-track-background-color-hover": "@primary-4",
"slider-handle-border-width": "2px",
"slider-handle-background-color": "@component-background",
"slider-handle-color": "@primary-3",
"slider-handle-color-hover": "@primary-4",
"slider-handle-color-focus": "tint(@primary-color, 20%)",
"slider-handle-color-focus-shadow": "fade(@primary-color, 12%)",
"slider-handle-color-tooltip-open": "@primary-color",
"slider-handle-shadow": "0",
"slider-dot-border-color": "@border-color-split",
"slider-dot-border-color-active": "@primary-4",
"slider-disabled-color": "@disabled-color",
"slider-disabled-background-color": "@component-background",
"tree-bg": "transparent",
"tree-title-height": "24px",
"tree-child-padding": "18px",
"tree-directory-selected-color": "#fff",
"tree-directory-selected-bg": "@primary-color",
"tree-node-hover-bg": "@item-hover-bg",
"tree-node-selected-bg": "@primary-2",
"collapse-header-padding": "@padding-sm @padding-md",
"collapse-header-padding-extra": "40px",
"collapse-header-bg": "@background-color-light",
"collapse-content-padding": "@padding-md",
"collapse-content-bg": "@component-background",
"skeleton-color": "#303030",
"skeleton-to-color": "fade(@white, 16%)",
"skeleton-paragraph-margin-top": "28px",
"skeleton-paragraph-li-margin-top": "@margin-md",
"transfer-header-height": "40px",
"transfer-item-height": "@height-base",
"transfer-disabled-bg": "@disabled-bg",
"transfer-list-height": "200px",
"transfer-item-hover-bg": "#262626",
"transfer-item-padding-vertical": "6px",
"transfer-list-search-icon-top": "12px",
"message-notice-content-padding": "10px 16px",
"message-notice-content-bg": "@popover-background",
"wave-animation-width": "6px",
"alert-success-border-color": "@green-3",
"alert-success-bg-color": "@green-1",
"alert-success-icon-color": "@success-color",
"alert-info-border-color": "@primary-3",
"alert-info-bg-color": "@primary-1",
"alert-info-icon-color": "@info-color",
"alert-warning-border-color": "@gold-3",
"alert-warning-bg-color": "@gold-1",
"alert-warning-icon-color": "@warning-color",
"alert-error-border-color": "@red-3",
"alert-error-bg-color": "@red-1",
"alert-error-icon-color": "@error-color",
"alert-message-color": "@heading-color",
"alert-text-color": "@text-color",
"alert-close-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"alert-close-hover-color": "@icon-color-hover",
"alert-no-icon-padding-vertical": "@padding-xs",
"alert-with-description-no-icon-padding-vertical": "@padding-md - 1px",
"list-header-background": "transparent",
"list-footer-background": "transparent",
"list-empty-text-padding": "@padding-md",
"list-item-padding": "@padding-sm 0",
"list-item-padding-sm": "@padding-xs @padding-md",
"list-item-padding-lg": "16px 24px",
"list-item-meta-margin-bottom": "@padding-md",
"list-item-meta-avatar-margin-right": "@padding-md",
"list-item-meta-title-margin-bottom": "@padding-sm",
"list-customize-card-bg": "transparent",
"list-item-meta-description-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"statistic-title-font-size": "@font-size-base",
"statistic-content-font-size": "24px",
"statistic-unit-font-size": "16px",
"statistic-font-family": "@font-family",
"drawer-header-padding": "@padding-md @padding-lg",
"drawer-body-padding": "@padding-lg",
"drawer-bg": "@popover-background",
"drawer-footer-padding-vertical": "@modal-footer-padding-vertical",
"drawer-footer-padding-horizontal": "@modal-footer-padding-horizontal",
"drawer-header-close-size": "56px",
"timeline-width": "2px",
"timeline-color": "@border-color-split",
"timeline-dot-border-width": "2px",
"timeline-dot-color": "@primary-color",
"timeline-dot-bg": "@component-background",
"timeline-item-padding-bottom": "20px",
"typography-title-font-weight": "600",
"typography-title-margin-top": "1.2em",
"typography-title-margin-bottom": "0.5em",
"upload-actions-color": "@text-color-secondary",
"process-tail-color": "@border-color-split",
"steps-nav-arrow-color": "fade(@white, 20%)",
"steps-background": "transparent",
"steps-icon-size": "32px",
"steps-icon-custom-size": "@steps-icon-size",
"steps-icon-custom-top": "0px",
"steps-icon-custom-font-size": "24px",
"steps-icon-top": "-1px",
"steps-icon-font-size": "@font-size-lg",
"steps-icon-margin": "0 8px 0 0",
"steps-title-line-height": "@height-base",
"steps-small-icon-size": "24px",
"steps-small-icon-margin": "0 8px 0 0",
"steps-dot-size": "8px",
"steps-dot-top": "2px",
"steps-current-dot-size": "10px",
"steps-desciption-max-width": "140px",
"steps-nav-content-max-width": "auto",
"notification-bg": "@popover-background"
}; | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 9,889 |
Q: Can we Run hive query using SSH and passing file from local I want to Run hive query from external cluster like below.
ssh user@<ipaddress> hive -f <localfilepath>
It works successfully if we have file on the cluster but wont work for local file.
Is there way to achieve this ?
A: From the logical point of view, immediatly after the command "ssh user@" you are "inside" that host. So you can't see the files from external cluster.
You could do it in two steps:
*
*push the file to cluser
*execute it
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 7,640 |
This is a placeholder page for Kendall Blackerby, which means this person is not currently on this site. We do suggest using the tools below to find Kendall Blackerby.
You are visiting the placeholder page for Kendall Blackerby. This page is here because someone used our placeholder utility to look for Kendall Blackerby. We created this page automatically in hopes Kendall Blackerby would find it. If you are not Kendall Blackerby, but are an alumni of Parkwood High School Monroe, NC, register on this site for free now. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 6,516 |
This is a complete list of all Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores locations, along with their geographic coordinates. Loves is a chain of gas stations and convenience stores that was started in 1964. Today Loves partners with food chains such as Subway, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, Arby's, Godfather's Pizza, Baskin Robins, and Carl's Jr. to offer more food selection at their locations. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 4,001 |
Weinbau in Indiana bezeichnet den Weinbau im amerikanischen Bundesstaat Indiana. Gemäß US-amerikanischem Gesetz ist jeder Bundesstaat und jedes County eine geschützte Herkunftsbezeichnung und braucht nicht durch das Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives als solche anerkannt zu werden.
Aufgrund der frühen Besiedlung und einer Weinbaugeschichte seit dem Jahr 1816 lag Indiana noch Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts auf Rang zehn der wichtigsten Anbaugebiete der Vereinigten Staaten. Wie fast überall kam der Weinbau spätestens durch die Alkoholprohibition zum Erliegen. Zurzeit gibt es eine einzige definierte American Viticultural Area (kurz AVA), die Ohio River Valley AVA.
Siehe auch
Weinbau in den Vereinigten Staaten
Literatur
Einzelnachweise | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 5,190 |
\section*{Introduction}
The notion of a \emph{diffeological structure}, or simply
\emph{diffeology}, due to J.M. Souriau \cite{So1,So2}, appeared in
Differential Geometry as part of the quest to generalize the notion
of a smooth manifold in a way that would yield a category closed
under the main topological constructions yet carrying sufficient
geometric information. To be more precise, it is well-known that the
category of smooth manifolds, while being the main object of study
in Differential Geometry, is not closed under some of the basic
topological constructions, such as taking quotients or function
spaces, nor does it include objects which in recent years attracted
much attention both from geometers and mathematical physicists, such
as irrational tori, orbifolds, spaces of connections on principal
bundles in Yang-Mills field theory, to name just a few. Many
fruitful attempts, some of which are summarized in \cite{St}, had
been made to address these issues, notably in the realm of
functional analysis and noncommutative geometry, via smooth
structures \`a la Sikorski or \`a la Fr\"olicher; each of these
attempts however had its own limitations, be that the sometimes
exaggerated technical complexity or missing certain topological
situations (such as singular quotients, missing from Sikorski's and
Fr\"olicher's spaces).
The diffeology, whose birth story is beautifully described in the
Preface and Afterword of the excellent book \cite{iglesiasBook}, has
the advantage of being possibly the least technical (and therefore
very easy to work with) and, much more importantly, very wide in
scope. Indeed, the category of diffeological spaces contains, on one
hand, smooth manifolds as a full subcategory, and is very
well-behaved on the other: in particular, it is complete, cocomplete
and cartesian closed (see, for example, Theorems 2.5 and 2.6 in
\cite{CSW_Dtopology}).
As for diffeological groups, they were in fact the context in which
the notion of diffeology was introduced; the very titles of the
already mentioned foundational papers by Souriau are witnesses to
this fact. More precisely, the historical origin of the concept of
``diffeology'' was, as evidenced by Iglesias-Zemmour's fascinating
account of those events in \cite{iglesiasBook}, Souriau's attempt to
regard some types of coadjoint orbits of infinite dimensional groups
of diffeomorphisms as Lie groups, and to do so in ``the simplest
possible manner''. On the other hand, as mentioned in Chapter 7 of
\cite{iglesiasBook}, the theory of diffeological groups has not yet
been much developed.
\paragraph{What does this have to do with groups of tree
automorphisms?} Before answering this question, it should be useful
to say right away what we mean by a ``tree''; and to give the idea
of what is done in this paper, it should suffice to point out that
all trees under consideration are infinite, rooted, and
\emph{regular}. The meaning of the latter is this: we fix an integer
$p\geqslant 2$ and consider an infinite tree with precisely one
vertex of valence $p$ (this is the root) and all other vertices of
valence $p+1$. Such an object is a very natural venue for applying
the notion of diffeology: on one hand, it is a topological space
quite different from a (one-dimensional) manifold, since it contains
an infinite (albeit discrete) set of points whose local
neighbourhood is a cone over at least three points, and on the other
hand, there is a natural diffeological structure to put on it, the
so-called ``wire diffeology'' (see below). This fact in itself
raises a number of questions, for reasons of intellectual curiosity
at least if nothing else, such as, will the \emph{D-topology} be
different or equal to the standard topology of the tree?
Now, groups of automorphisms of such a tree, even restricted to a
rather specific construction such as the one we will deal with
(which is however independently interesting from the algebraic point
of view, see the foundational paper \cite{GrigFoundation}) are
easily seen to be groups of diffeomorphisms of the tree with respect
to the above diffeological structure. The category of diffeological
spaces being closed under taking groups of diffeomorphisms, they
become in the end diffeological groups; and since they are also
topological groups with respect to, for instance, profinite topology
(but occasionally there are some others, see, for instance,
\cite{mioJalg}), the same questions about comparing the two
topologies arise... And going further still, the question becomes,
\emph{what kind of information about these groups can we obtain if
we regard them as diffeological groups?}
\paragraph{The content} The first two sections are
devoted to recalling some of the main definitions and constructions
related to, respectively, diffeological spaces and (certain kind of)
groups of automorphisms of regular rooted trees; they gather
together everything that is used henceforth, \emph{i.e.} in Sections
3 and 4. The first of these two deals with the choice of the
diffeology to put on the tree, showing in the end that the topology
corresponding to the final choice (the so-called D-topology) is
indeed the one coinciding with that of the tree in the usual sense.
The last section is devoted to the functional diffeology on the
whole group of tree automorphisms, showing that (for reasons that
apply actually to any subgroup of this group) the functional
diffeology is the discrete one; a finding that is not surprising in
view of the discrete nature of these groups that had originated as
so-called \emph{automata groups} \cite{alyoshin}.
\paragraph{Acknowledgments} This was one of the first papers for me
on the subject, and just completing it felt like a minor
accomplishment. For a, maybe indirect, but no less significant for
that, assistance in that moment I must thank Prof. Riccardo Zucchi,
despite his habit of refuting his merits.\footnote{Originally this
acknowledgment included other people; they are not here anymore.
People disappoint and get disappointed, whoever is at fault; I guess
that's life.}
\section{Diffeological spaces}\label{defn-diffeology-sect}
This section is devoted to a short background on diffeological
spaces, introducing the concepts that we will need in what follows.
\paragraph{The concept} We start by giving the basic definition of a
diffeological space, following it with the definition of the
\emph{standard diffeology} on a smooth manifold; it is this latter
diffeology that allows for the natural inclusion of smooth manifolds
in the framework of diffeological spaces.
\begin{defn} \emph{(\cite{So2})} A \textbf{diffeological space} is a pair
$(X,\calD_X)$ where $X$ is a set and $\calD_X$ is a specified
collection of maps $U\to X$ (called \textbf{plots}) for each open
set $U$ in $\matR^n$ and for each $n\in\matN$, such that for all
open subsets $U\subseteq\matR^n$ and $V\subseteq\matR^m$ the
following three conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}
\item (The covering condition) Every constant map $U\to X$ is a
plot;
\item (The smooth compatibility condition) If $U\to X$ is a plot
and $V\to U$ is a smooth map (in the usual sense) then the
composition $V\to U\to X$ is also a plot;
\item (The sheaf condition) If $U=\cup_iU_i$ is an open cover and
$U\to X$ is a set map such that each restriction $U_i\to X$ is a
plot then the entire map $U\to X$ is a plot as well.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
Typically, we will simply write $X$ to denote the pair
$(X,\calD_X)$. Such $X$'s are the objects of the category of
diffeological spaces; naturally, we shall define next the arrows of
the category, that is, say which maps are considered to be smooth in
the diffeological sense. The following definition says just that.
\begin{defn} \emph{(\cite{So2})} Let $X$ and $Y$ be two
diffeological spaces, and let $f:X\to Y$ be a set map. We say that
$f$ is \textbf{smooth} if for every plot $p:U\to X$ of $X$ the
composition $f\circ p$ is a plot of $Y$.
\end{defn}
As is natural, we will call an isomorphism in the category of
diffeological spaces a \textbf{diffeomorphism}. The typical notation
$C^{\infty}(X,Y)$ will be used to denote the set of all smooth maps
from $X$ to $Y$.
\paragraph{The standard diffeology on a smooth manifold} Every
smooth manifold $M$ can be canonically considered a diffeological
space with the same underlying set, if we take as plots all maps
$U\to M$ that are smooth in the usual sense. With this diffeology,
the smooth (in the usual sense) maps between manifolds coincide with
the maps smooth in the diffeological sense. This yields the
following result (see Section 4.3 of \cite{iglesiasBook}).
\begin{thm}
There is a fully faithful functor from the category of smooth
manifolds to the category of diffeological spaces.
\end{thm}
\paragraph{Comparing diffeologies} Given a set $X$, the set of all
possibile diffeologies on $X$ is partially ordered by inclusion
(with respect to which it forms a complete lattice). More precisely,
a diffeology $\calD$ on $X$ is said to be \textbf{finer} than
another diffeology $\calD'$ if $\calD\subset\calD'$ (whereas
$\calD'$ is said to be \textbf{coarser} than $\calD$). Among all
diffeologies, there is the finest one, which turns out to be the
natural \textbf{discrete diffeology} and which consists of all
locally constant maps $U\to X$; and there is also the coarsest one,
which consists of \emph{all} possible maps $U\to X$, for all
$U\subseteq\matR^n$ and for all $n\in\matN$. It is called \emph{the}
\textbf{coarse diffeology} (or \textbf{indiscrete diffeology} by
some authors).
\paragraph{Generated diffeology and quotient diffeology} One notion
that will be crucial for us is the notion of a so-called
\textbf{generated diffeology}. Specifically, given a set of maps
$A=\{U_i\to X\}_{i\in I}$, the \textbf{diffeology generated by $A$}
is the smallest, with respect to inclusion, diffeology on $X$ that
contains $A$. It consists of all maps $f:V\to X$ such that there
exists an open cover $\{V_j\}$ of $V$ such that $f$ restricted to
each $V_j$ factors through some element $U_i\to X$ in $A$ via a
smooth map $V_j\to U_i$. Note that the standard diffeology on a
smooth manifold is generated by any smooth atlas on the manifold,
and that for any diffeological space $X$, its diffeology $\calD_X$
is generated by $\cup_{n\in\matN}C^{\infty}(\matR^n,X)$.
Note that one useful property of diffeology as concept is that the
category of diffeological spaces is closed under taking quotients.
To be more precise, let $X$ be a diffeological space, let $\cong$ be
an equivalence relation on $X$, and let $\pi:X\to Y:=X/\cong$ be the
quotient map. The \textbf{quotient diffeology} (\cite{iglOrb}) on
$Y$ is the diffeology in which $p:U\to Y$ is the diffeology in which
$p:U\to Y$ is a plot if and only if each point in $U$ has a
neighbourhood $V\subset U$ and a plot $\tilde{p}:V\to X$ such that
$p|_{V}=\pi\circ\tilde{p}$.
\paragraph{Sub-diffeology and inductions} Let $X$ be a diffeological
space, and let $Y\subseteq X$ be its subset. The
\textbf{sub-diffeology} on $Y$ is the coarsest diffeology on $Y$
making the inclusion map $Y\hookrightarrow X$ smooth. It consists of
all maps $U\to Y$ such that $U\to Y\hookrightarrow X$ is a plot of
$X$. This definition allows also to introduce the following useful
term: for two diffeological spaces $X,X'$ a smooth map $f:X'\to X$
is called an \textbf{induction} if it induces a diffeomorphism
$X\to\mbox{Im}(f)$, where $\mbox{Im}(f)$ has the sub-diffeology of
$X$.
\paragraph{Sums of diffeological spaces} Let $\{X_i\}_{i\in I}$ be a
collection of diffeological spaces, with $I$ being some set of
indices. The \textbf{sum}, or the \textbf{disjoint union}, of
$\{X_i\}_{i\in I}$ is defined as
$$X=\coprod_{i\in I}X_i=\{(i,x)\,|\,i\in I\mbox{ and }x\in X_i\}.$$
The \textbf{sum diffeology} on $X$ is the finest diffeology such
that the natural injections $X_i\to\coprod_{i\in I}X_i$ are smooth
for each $i\in I$. The plots of this diffeology are maps
$U\to\coprod_{i\in I}X_i$ that are \emph{locally} plots of one of
the components of the sum.
\paragraph{The diffeological product} Let, again, $\{X_i\}_{i\in I}$ be a
collection of diffeological spaces, and let $\calD_i$, $i\in I$, be
their respective diffeologies. The \textbf{the product diffeology}
$\calD$ on the product $X=\prod_{i\in I}X_i$ is the \emph{coarsest}
diffeology such that for each index $i\in I$ the natural projection
$\pi_i:\prod_{i\in I}X_i\to X_i$ is smooth.
\paragraph{Functional diffeology} Let $X$, $Y$ be two diffeological
spaces, and let $C^{\infty}(X,Y)$ be the set of smooth maps from $X$
to $Y$. Let \textsc{ev} be the \emph{evaluation map}, defined by
$$\mbox{\textsc{ev}}:C^{\infty}(X,Y)\times X\to Y\mbox{ and }\mbox{\textsc{ev}}(f,x)=f(x). $$
The words ``functional diffeology'' stand for \emph{any} diffeology
on $C^{\infty}(X,Y)$ such that the evaluation map is smooth; note,
for example, that the discrete diffeology is a functional
diffeology. However, they are typically used, and we also will do
that from now on, to denote \emph{the coarsest} functional
diffeology.
There is a useful criterion for a given map to be a plot with
respect for the functional diffeology on a given $C^{\infty}(X,Y)$,
which is as follows.
\begin{prop}\label{criterio-funct-diff} \emph{(\cite{iglesiasBook}, 1.57)}
Let $X$, $Y$ be two diffeological spaces, and let $U$ be a domain of
some $\matR^n$. A map $p:U\to C^{\infty}(X,Y)$ is a plot for the
functional diffeology of $C^{\infty}(X,Y)$ if and only if the
induced map $U\times X\to Y$ acting by $(u,x)\mapsto p(u)(x)$ is
smooth.
\end{prop}
\paragraph{Diffeological groups} A \textbf{diffeological group} is a
group $G$ equipped with a compatible diffeology, that is, such that
the multiplication and the inversion are smooth:
$$[(g,g')\mapsto gg']\in C^{\infty}(G\times G,G)\mbox{ and }[g\mapsto g^{-1}]\in C^{\infty}(G,G).$$
Thus, it mimicks the usual notions of a topological group and a Lie
group: it is both a group and a diffeological space such that the
group operations are maps (arrows) in the category of diffeological
spaces.
\paragraph{Functional diffeology on diffeomorphisms} Groups of
diffeomorphisms of diffeological spaces being the main examples
known of diffeological groups, and being precisely the kind of
object which we study below, we shall comment on their functional
diffeology. Let $X$ be a diffeological space, and let
$\mbox{Diff}(X)$ be the group of diffeomorphisms of $X$. As
described in the previous paragraph, $\mbox{Diff}(X)$, as well as
any of its subgroups, inherits the functional diffeology of
$C^{\infty}(X,X)$. On the other hand, there is the standard
diffeological group structure on $\mbox{Diff}(X)$ (or its subgroup),
which is the coarsest \emph{group} diffeology such that the
evaluation map is smooth. Note that, as observed in Section 1.61 of
\cite{iglesiasBook}, this diffeological group structure is in
general finer than the functional diffeology (therefore making a
comparison between the two will be part of our task in what
follows).
\paragraph{The D-topology} There is a ``canonical'' topology underlying each
diffeological structure; it is defined as follows:
\begin{defn} \emph{(\cite{iglesiasBook})} Given a diffeological
space $X$, the final topology induced by its plots, where each
domain is equipped with the standard topology, is called the
\textbf{D-topology} on $X$.
\end{defn}
To be more explicit, if $(X,\calD_X)$ is a diffeological space then
a subset $A$ of $X$ is open in the D-topology of $X$ if and only if
$p^{-1}(A)$ is open for each $p\in\calD_X$; we call such subsets
\textbf{D-open}. Note that if $\calD_X$ is generated by some
$\calD'$ then $A$ is D-open if and only if $p^{-1}(A)$ is open for
each $p\in\calD'$.
A smooth map $X\to X'$ is continuous if $X$ and $X'$ are equipped
with D-topology (hence there is an associated functor from the
category of diffeological spaces to the category of topological
spaces). As an important example, it is easy to see that the
D-topology on a smooth manifold with the standard diffeology
coincides with the usual topology on the manifold; in fact, this is
frequently the case even for non-standard diffeologies. That is due
to the fact that, as established in \cite{CSW_Dtopology}, the
D-topology is completely determined smooth curves. More precisely,
the following statement was proven in \cite{CSW_Dtopology}:
\begin{thm} \emph{(Theorem 3.7 of \cite{CSW_Dtopology})} The
D-topology on a diffeological space $X$ is determined by
$C^{\infty}(\matR,X)$, in the sense that a subset $A$ of $X$ is
D-open if and only if $p^{-1}(A)$ is open for every $p\in
C^{\infty}(\matR,X)$.
\end{thm}
\section{Regular trees and subgroups of $\mbox{Aut
T}$}\label{defn-trees-sect}
As already mentioned, we will consider regular rooted trees of
valence $p$; this implies that there is a \emph{root}, of valence
$p$, and all the other vertices have valence $p+1$; such a tree is
naturaly decomposed into \emph{levels}, sets of vertices of equal
distance from the root (this distance being an integer equal to the
number of edges in the shortest path connecting the root to the
vertex in question). Below we give precise definitions of these
concepts and others that we will need.
\paragraph{Regular rooted trees} A regular 1-rooted tree, the simplest
example of which is shown in Fig. \ref{tree:fig}, is naturally
identified with the set of all words in a given finite alphabet $A$
of appropriate cardinality $p$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{tree.eps}
\vspace{1cm}
\mycap{An example of a regular 1-rooted tree; in this case $p=2$. The
figure shows the root and the two vertices of the first level, with all
the edges incident to them.}
\label{tree:fig}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Under this identification, the words correspond to vertices, the
root is the empty word, and two vertices are joined by an edge if
and only if they have the form $a_1a_2\ldots a_n$ and $a_1a_2\ldots
a_na_{n+1}$ for some $n$ and some $a_i\in A$. The number $n$ is
called the $\textbf{length}$ of a vertex $u=a_1a_2\ldots a_n$ and is
denoted by $|u|$. The set of all vertices of length $n$ is called
the $n$th \textbf{level} of $T$.
Suppose that $u=\hat{a}_1\hat{a}_2\ldots\hat{a}_n$ is a vertex. The
set of all vertices of the form
$$\hat{a}_1\hat{a}_2\ldots\hat{a}_na_{n+1}a_{n+2}\ldots a_{n+m},$$
where $m\in\matN$ and $a_{n+i}$ range over the set $A$, forms a
subtree of $T$; we will denote this subtree by $T_u$. It is easy to
see that $T_u$ is naturally isomorphic to the same tree $T$ via the
map
$$\hat{a}_1\hat{a}_2\ldots\hat{a}_na_{n+1}a_{n+2}\ldots a_{n+m}\mapsto a_{n+1}a_{n+2}\ldots a_{n+m}.$$
This map allows to identify subtrees $T_u$ for all vertices $u$,
with one fixed tree $T$.
\paragraph{Their automorphism groups} Let $T$ be a tree as above; an
\textbf{automorphism} of $T$ is a bijective map $f$ which fixes the
root and preserves the adjacency of vertices. The set of all
possible automorphisms of $T$ is obviously a group which we denote
by $\Aut T$; note that it is a profinite group\footnote{More
precisely, it is a pro-$p$-group.} (see also below).
\paragraph{Vertex stabilizers and congruence subgroups} Consider now
an arbitrary subgroup $G$ of $\Aut T$ and a vertex $v$ of $T$. The
\textbf{stabilizer} of $v$ in $G$ is the subgroup
$$\stab_G(v)=\{g\in G\,|\,v^g=v\}.$$
Now, if we consider the set of all vertices of level $n$, the
subgroup $\cap_{|v|=n}\stab_G(v)$ is called the ($n$th)
\textbf{level stabilizer} and is denoted by $\stab_G(n)$.
The subgroups $\stab_G(n)$ are also called \textbf{principal
congruence subgroups} in $G$. A subgroup of $G$ which contains a
principal congruence subgroup is in turn called a \textbf{congruence
subgroup}.
\paragraph{Rigid stabilizers} Let once again $G\leqslant\Aut T$ and
$v\in T$ a vertex. The \textbf{rigid stabilizer} of $v$ in $G$ is
the subgroup
$$\rist_G(v)=\{g\in G\,|\,u^g=u\mbox{ for all }u\in T\setminus T_v\}.$$
We also denote by $\rist_G(n)$ the subgroup
$\prod_{|v|=n}\rist_G(v)$; note that this is a normal subgroup of
$G$ (unlike the rigid stabilizer of just one vertex).
\paragraph{Recursive presentation of the action of $\Aut T$} It is
easy to see that $\Aut T$ possesses a sort of ``recurrent''
structure, that we now describe, as it is extremely useful for
working with $\Aut T$ (and its subgroups). Observe that $\Aut T$
admits a natural map $\phi:\Aut T\to\Aut T\wr\Sym(A)$, where
$\Sym(A)$ is the group of all permutations of elements of $A$. Thus,
every element $x$ of $\Aut T$ is given by an element
$$f_x\in\underbrace{\Aut T\times\ldots\times\Aut T}_{|A|}$$
and a permutation $\pi_x\in\Sym(A)$. The latter permutation is
called the \textbf{accompanying permutation}, or the
\textbf{activity}, of $x$ at the root. We write that
$$\phi(x)=f_x\cdot\pi_x.$$
In particular, the restriction of $\phi$ onto $\stab_{\Aut T}(1)$ is
an embedding (actually, an isomorphism) of $\stab_{\Aut T}(1)$ into
(with) the direct product of $|A|$ copies of $\Aut T$; we will
denote this restriction by $\Phi_1$. Furthermore, it is easy to see
that
$$\Phi_1(\stab_{\Aut T}(2))=\underbrace{\stab_{\Aut T}(1)\times\ldots\times\stab_{\Aut T}(1)}_{|A|};$$
therefore we can obtain the isomorphism
$$\Phi_2=(\underbrace{\Phi_1\times\ldots\times\Phi_1}_{|A|})\circ\Phi_1:\stab_{\Aut T}(2)\to
\underbrace{\Aut T\times\ldots\Aut T}_{|A|^2}.$$ Proceeding in this
manner, we define for each positive integer $n$ the isomorphism
$$\Phi_n=(\underbrace{\Phi_{n-1}\times\ldots\times\Phi_{n-1}}_{|A|})\circ\Phi_1:\stab_{\Aut T}(n)\to
\underbrace{\Aut T\times\ldots\Aut T}_{|A|^n}.$$
\paragraph{Profinite topology and congruence topology} Let $G\leqslant\Aut
T$; the \textbf{profinite topology} on $G$ is the topology generated
by all its finite-index subgroups taken as the system of
neighbourhoods of unity. To define the \textbf{congruence topology},
we take the set of all principal congruence subgroups (\emph{i.e.},
the level stabilizers) as the system of neighbourhoods of unity.
These two topologies frequently coincide (as it happens for the
first of the examples described below) but sometimes they do not (as
is the case for the second of the examples that follow).
\paragraph{Examples} Simple examples of the groups described above
can be found in \cite{GrigFoundation} or \cite{mioJalg} (a different
sort). We do not describe them, since we will not need them.
\section{A regular tree as a diffeological space}\label{diffeology-T-sect}
In this section we endow each regular tree $T$ with a diffeology.
The condition imperative in making the choice of such is that the
corresponding D-topology coincide with the usual one.
\subsection{General considerations}
A regular rooted tree, such as the ones we are considering, is not
naturally a smooth object, and a choice of diffeology with which to
endow it, represents its own issue. Although there exist other
options, the one we prefer is a certain analogue of the so-called
\emph{wire diffeology}. The latter was introduced by J.M. Souriau as
a diffeology on $\matR^n$ alternative to the standard one; it is the
diffeology generated by the set $C^{\infty}(\matR,\matR^n)$, the set
of the usual smooth maps $\matR\to\matR^n$ (thus, its plots are
characterized as those maps that locally factor through the smooth
maps $\matR\to\matR^n$). For $n\geqslant 2$ this diffeology is
different from the standard one (see \cite{iglesiasBook}, Sect.
1.10), although the underlying D-topology is the same (see
\cite{CSW_Dtopology}).
Of course, when we want to carry this notion over to one of our
regular trees, the first question to consider is, \emph{which maps
take the place of smooth ones?} We speak about this in detail later
on, but in brief, the main points are: the set of all maps $\matR\to
T$ would produce a very, and perhaps unreasonably, large diffeology,
the set of all continuous maps still gives a very large one (see
below for the curious observation of how the Peano curve enters the
picture in this respect), and so it seems reasonable to settle for
the set of all embeddings $\matR\hookrightarrow T$ as the generating
set for the wire diffeology on $T$.
\subsection{The wire diffeology on $T$}
As has already been mentioned, such diffeology is the one generated
by some subset of the set of all maps $\{\matR\to T\}$; the question
is, which subset? The following easy considerations suggest to
discard the ``extreme'' possibilities, more specifically: the
coarsest of such diffeologies is the one consisting of \emph{all}
maps $\matR\to T$, whereas the finest one is the discrete
diffeology, \emph{i.e.} the one generated by all constant maps
$\matR\to T$. Neither of the two is very interesting (as is
generally the case), and neither respects the structure of $T$ as a
topological space, something that we do want to take into account.
This latter consideration suggests to consider continuous maps only,
and our options become, to take \emph{all} continuous maps or only
some of them (such as, for instance, the injective ones, which is
what we will end up doing). We now illustrate that the diffeology
generated by the set of all continuous maps $\matR\to T$ (which for
the moment we will call the \emph{coarse wire diffeology}) is still
very large and, in some very informal sense, loses the
$1$-dimensional nature of $T$.
\paragraph{The coarse wire diffeology and the Peano curve} The above
statement that the just-mentioned coarse wire diffeology does not
truly respect the $1$-dimensional nature of our trees, can actually
be observed immediately from the famous example of the \emph{Peano
curve}, a continuous curve that fills the entire unit square.
Furthermore, after the appearance in 1890 of the ground-breaking
Peano's example, it became known that \emph{any} $\matR^n$ (with $n$
an arbitrary positive integer number) is the range of some
continuous curve; to be precise, for any $n=2,3,\ldots$ there exists
a continuous surjective map $s_n:\matR\to\matR^n$ (hence onto any
domain of $\matR^n$). Although none of these maps is invertible,
they do allow for a sort of immersion of \emph{any other} diffeology
into the coarsest wire diffeology, by assigning to a given plot
$p:\matR^n\supseteq U\to T$ the composition $p\circ t_U \circ s_n$
(where $t_U$ is some diffeomorphism $\matR^n\to U$, fixed for each
$U$). Although this assignment would not be one-to-one, it does give
an (intuitive, if nothing else) idea of how large the coarse wire
diffeology is.
\paragraph{The embedded wire diffeology on $T$} This is the
diffeology that we settle one; it is the diffeology generated by all
injective and continuous in both directions maps $\matR\to T$. It
depends on $T$ only, so we denote it by $\calD_T$. We furthermore
denote the generating set of $\calD_T$, the set $\{f:\matR\to T\,|\,
f\mbox{ is injective and both ways continuous}\}$, by
$\tilde{\calP}_T$.
The first thing that we would like to do is to restrict this
generating set as much as possible; indeed, if two maps,
$f_1,f_2:\matR\to T$, are such that $f_2=f_1\circ g$ for some
diffeomorphism $g:\matR\to\matR$ then (as it follows from the
definition of a generated diffeology) only one of them needs to
belong to the generating set. Therefore we denote by $\calP_T$ the
quotient of $\tilde{\calP}_T$ by the (right) action of the group of
diffeomorphisms of $\matR$; when it does not create confusion, by
one or more elements of $\calP_T$ we will mean a corresponding
collections of maps that are specific representatives of some
equivalence classes. The above observations then prove the
following:
\begin{claim}
The diffeology $\calD_T$ is generated by $\calP_T$.
\end{claim}
\paragraph{The topology} We now proceed to showing that the diffeology
chosen does satisfy the condition that we wanted to, namely, that
the following is true.
\begin{thm}
The D-topology corresponding to $\calD_T$ is the usual topology of
$T$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Recall that by the definition of D-topology a set $X'\subset T$ is
D-open if and only if for any plot $p:U\to T$ the pre-image
$p^{-1}(X)$ is open in $U$; now, by construction and by the
definition of the generated diffeology this is equivalent to
$\gamma^{-1}(X)$ being open in $\matR$ for any $\gamma\in\calP_T$.
We need to show that $X'$ is D-open if and only if it is open in $T$
in the usual sense. Suppose first that $X'$ is open. Then its
pre-image with respect to any $\gamma$ is open in $\matR$ because
$\gamma$ is continuous; therefore it is D-open by the very
definition of D-openness.
Now suppose that $X'$ is a D-open set; we need to show that it is
also open in the usual sense. To do so, it is sufficient to show
that for any point of $X'$ the latter contains its open
neighbourhood. Choose such an arbitrary point $x\in X'$; we consider
two cases.
Suppose first that $x$ belongs to the interior of some edge $e$. Set
$X=X'\cap\mbox{Int}(e)$, and let $\gamma\in\calP_T$; we can assume
that its image contains $e$. Note that since $\gamma$ is injective,
we have
$\gamma^{-1}(X)=\gamma^{-1}(X')\cap\gamma^{-1}(\mbox{Int}(e))$; both
of these two sets are open in $\matR$, the first because $X'$ is
D-open and the second because it is the pre-image of an open set
under the continuous map $\gamma$. This implies that
$\gamma^{-1}(X)$ is open in $\matR$, therefore $X$ is open in the
image of $\gamma$, the latter being a homeomorphism with its image,
and it is open in $\mbox{Int}(e)$, hence it is open in $T$ as well.
Thus, $X$ is an open neighbourhood of $x$ contained in $X'$.
Suppose now that $x$ is a vertex (we can assume that it is not the
root; the proof changes only formally for the latter). Let
$e_1,\ldots,e_{p+1}$ be the edges incident to $x$. For each
$1\leqslant i<j\leqslant p+1$ let
$X_{i,j}=\mbox{Int}(e_i)\cup\mbox{Int}(e_j)\cup\{x\}$; set
$$X=\cup_{i,j}(X'\cap X_{i,j}).$$
We need to show that $X$ is open in $T$. For each $i,j$ choose a map
$\gamma_{i,j}$ such that its image contains $e_i\cup e_j$. Then
$\gamma_{i,j}^{-1}(X'\cap
X_{i,j})=\gamma_{i,j}^{-1}(X')\cap\gamma_{i,j}^{-1}(X_{i,j})$; both
of these sets are open in $\matR$, by the D-openness of $X'$ and by
continuity of $\gamma$. Hence $\gamma_{i,j}^{-1}(X'\cap X_{i,j})$ is
open in $\matR$ and, $\gamma_{i,j}$ being a homeomorphism with its
image, the set $X'\cap X_{i,j}$ is open in $e_i\cup e_j$. It follows
that $X$ is open in $e_1\cup\ldots\cup e_{p+1}$ and therefore it is
open in $T$; thus, it is an open nieghbourhood of $x$ contained in
$X'$, and this concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{$\Aut T$ as a diffeological group}
In this section we consider $T$ endowed with the embedded wire
diffeology described in the previous section. We must first ensure
that the elements of $\Aut T$ are smooth maps with respect to this
diffeology; this then gives rise to the functional diffeology on
$\Aut T$ and to the \emph{a priori} finer diffeology that makes
$\Aut T$ into a diffeological group and is the finest one with such
property.
\subsection{The functional diffeology on $\Aut T$}
In this section we first make some observations regarding the plots
of the functional diffeology on $\Aut T$; as a preliminary, we need
to show that such diffeology is indeed well-defined, \emph{i.e.},
that the elements of $\Aut T$ are indeed diffeomorphisms. We then
proceed to consider the D-topology underlying the functional
diffeology of $\Aut T$.
\paragraph{Automorphisms as diffeomorphisms} The following statement
follows easily from the choice of diffeology on $T$.
\begin{prop}
Let $g\in\Aut T$. Then $g:T\to T$ is a smooth map with respect to
the diffeology $\calD_T$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By definition of a generated diffeology and that of a smooth map it
is sufficient to show that for any given injective and both ways
continuous map $\gamma:\matR\to T$ the composition $g\circ\gamma$ is
again injective and both ways continuous. This follows from the fact
that $g$ is an automorphism of $T$, \emph{i.e.}, it is a
homeomorphism of $T$ considered with its usual topology; as we have
already established that the D-topology of $T$ coincides with the
usual one, this proves the claim.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{A special family of plots of $T$} In the arguments that follow,
we will make use of the following family of plots of $T$. Let
$\hat{\gamma}$ be an infinite path in $T$; let $v_0\in\hat{\gamma}$
be the vertex of the smallest length. For each $\hat{\gamma}$ we fix
a homeomorphism $\gamma:\matR\to\hat{\gamma}\subset T$ such that
$$\gamma(0)=v_0,\mbox{and for any }n\in\matZ\,\,\,\,\gamma(n)\mbox{ is a vertex of length }|v_0|+n.$$
Obviously, every $\gamma$ is a plot for the diffeology $\calD_T$. We
denote the set of maps $\gamma$, associated to all possible
$\hat{\gamma}\subset T$, by
$$\Gamma(T)=\{\gamma\,|\;\hat{\gamma}\mbox{ an infinite path in }T\}.$$
We denote by $\Gamma_0(T)$ the subset of $\Gamma(T)$ consisting of
all those maps whose image contains the root.
For technical reasons we wish to stress that all maps
$\gamma\in\Gamma(T)$ possess, by construction, the following
properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item for any given $x\in\matR$, its image $\gamma(x)$ is a vertex
if and only if $x\in\matZ$;
\item in particular, the restriction of $\gamma$ on any interval of form
$(n,n+1)$ is a homeomorphism with the interior of some edge of
$T$.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Smooth curves in $\Aut T$} Since the D-topology is
defined by smooth curves (as mentioned in the first section, see
\cite{CSW_Dtopology}), we first establish the following
characterization of those plots of the functional diffeology on
$\Aut T$ that are curves.
\begin{prop}
Let $p:\matR\to\Aut T$ be a plot for the functional diffeology on
$\Aut T$. Then for all $m,n\in\matN$ the automorphisms $p(n)$,
$p(n+1)$ belong to the same coset of $\stab(n)$, and the
automorphisms $p(-m)$, $p(-m-1)$ belong to the same coset of
$\stab(m)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Recall that by Proposition \ref{criterio-funct-diff} $p$ is a plot
if and only if the map $\varphi_p:\matR\times T\to T$ given by
$\varphi_p(x,v)=p(x)(v)$ is smooth. The latter condition implies, in
particular, that for any smooth map $f:\matR\to\matR$ and for any
injective two ways continuous map $\gamma:\matR\to T$ the
composition $\varphi_p\circ(f,\gamma):\matR\to T$ is a plot of $T$,
\emph{i.e.}, that (at least locally) it is the composition
$\tilde{\gamma}\circ\tilde{f}$, of some smooth map
$\tilde{f}:\matR\to\matR$ and some injective two ways continuous
$\tilde{\gamma}:\matR\to T$. In particular, the map
$\varphi_p\circ(f,\gamma)$ is a continuous map in the usual sense.
Let us now fix a positive integer $n$, a vertex $v$ of length $n$,
and a vertex $v'$ of length $n+1$ adjacent to $v$. Let
$\gamma\in\Gamma_0(T)$ be such that $\gamma(n)=v$ and
$\gamma(n+1)=v'$. By definition of $\varphi_p$ we have that
$$(\varphi_p\circ(\mbox{Id},\gamma))(n)=\varphi_p(n,\gamma(n))=p(n)(v),\mbox{ and}$$
$$(\varphi_p\circ(\mbox{Id},\gamma))(n+1)=\varphi_p(n+1,\gamma(n+1))=p(n+1)(v').$$
We claim that $p(n)(v)$ and $p(n+1)(v')$ are adjacent vertices. That
they are vertices, of which the first is has length $n$ and the
second one has length $n+1$, is obvious, since $p$ takes values in
$\Aut T$, all of whose elements send vertices to vertices preserving
their length. It suffices to show that they are adjacent,
\emph{i.e.}, joined by an edge. As we have already observed, the map
$\varphi_p\circ(\mbox{Id},\gamma)$ is continuous in the usual sense,
so it suffices to show that the image of the interval $(n,n+1)$
under it does not contain vertices. Indeed, by its definition
$\varphi_p\circ(\mbox{Id},\gamma)$ writes as
$(\varphi_p\circ(\mbox{Id},\gamma))(x)=p(x)(\gamma(x))$; we first
observe that this image is a vertex if and only if $\gamma(x)$ is a
vertex (this is because $p(x)\in\Aut T$), then, second, $\gamma(x)$
is a vertex if and only if $x\in\matZ$ (this is by choice of
$\gamma$). In particular, if $n<x<n+1$ then
$(\varphi_p\circ(\mbox{Id},\gamma))(x)=p(x)(\gamma(x))$ belongs to
the interior of some edge, and precisely, the edge that joins
$p(n)(v)$ and $p(n+1)(v')$.
It remains to observe that $p(n+1)(v')$ is adjacent to a unique
vertex of length $n$; since $v$ and $v'$ are adjacent, $v$ has
length $n$, and $p(n+1)$ is an automorphism, this vertex is
$p(n+1)(v)$. On the other hand, $p(n)(v)$ has length $n$, and we
have just shown that it is adjacent to $p(n+1)(v')$; we conclude
that
$$p(n)(v)=p(n+1)(v).$$
Finally, since $v$ is arbitrary, we can conclude that
$p(n)\stab(n)=p(n+1)\stab(n)$, as claimed; and since $n$ is
arbitrary, this proves the entire statement.
\end{proof}
We now can draw the following conclusion.
\begin{cor}
Each of the two sequences $\{p(n)\}$, $\{p(-m)\}$ is a converging
sequence for the congruence topology on $\Aut T$.
\end{cor}
Note that we phrase this statement in terms of the congruence
topology on $\Aut T$, and not in those of the profinite topology,
which for $\Aut T$ does coincide with the congruence one. This is to
highlight the relation of this statement for examples such as the
group $\Gamma$, for which the two topologies are different; although
we will see shortly a fact that renders the difference
insignificant.
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that $p(n)\stab(n)=p(n+k)\stab(n)$ for all
$n,k\in\matN$; as in the previous proof, this is equivalent to
having $p(n)(v)=p(n+k)(v)$ for any vertex $v$ of length $n$. Choose
such a vertex, and fix a map $\gamma\in\Gamma_0(T)$ such that
$\gamma(n)=v$. As we have established in the proof of the previous
proposition, $p(n+1)(\gamma(n+1))$ belongs to the subtree
$T_{p(n)(v)}$. By the same reasoning, applied to $n+1$, the vertex
$p(n+2)(\gamma(n+2))$ belongs to the subtree
$T_{p(n+1)(\gamma(n+1))}\subset T_{p(n)(v)}$. Now, since
$\gamma(n+2)\in T_v$ by choice of $\gamma$, each vertex of length
$n+2$ belongs to a unique subtree $T_u$ with $|u|=n$, and $p(n+2)$
is an automorphism, we can conclude that $p(n+2)(v)=p(n)(v)$, and
the corollary follows by the now obvious induction on $k$.
\end{proof}
The above Corollary actually paves the way to the following
statement of crucial consequences:
\begin{prop}\label{D-top:discrete:prop}
Let $p:\matR\to\Aut T$ be a plot for the functional diffeology. Then
$p$ is a constant map.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Recall that by Proposition \ref{criterio-funct-diff} $p$ is a plot
if and only if the map $\varphi:\matR\times T\to T$ given by
$\varphi(u,t)=p(u)(t)$ is smooth. Now, by definition $\varphi$ is
smooth if and only if for any plot $p':U\to\matR\times T$ the
composition $\varphi\circ p'$ is again a plot of $T$.
Let us fix and arbitrary vertex $v$ of $T$, and let us take, as the
plot $p'$, the following map:
$(\mbox{Id}_{\matR},c_v):\matR\to\matR\times T$, where $c_v:\matR\to
T$ is the constant map acting by $c_v(x)\equiv v$. Then
$$(\varphi\circ(\mbox{Id}_{\matR},c_v))(x)=p(x)(v).$$
Observe now that $p(x)$ is an automorphism of $T$ for all $x$, and
so sends vertices to vertices; therefore the image of the map
$\varphi\circ(\mbox{Id}_{\matR},c_v)$ is a set of vertices of $T$.
In particular, it is a discrete subset of $T$.
On the other hand, $\varphi\circ(\mbox{Id}_{\matR},c_v)$ is a plot
of $T$; as such, it is either a constant map or it filters through
an injective continuous map $\matR\to T$ via a smooth map
$\matR\to\matR$. In this latter case it must a continuous map
defined on a connected set and so cannot have a discrete set with
more than one point as its image. It remains to conclude that
$\varphi\circ(\mbox{Id}_{\matR},c_v)$ is a constant map, which means
that $p(x)(v)$ does not depend on $x$. Since $v$ is arbitrary, this
implies that $p$ is a constant map, as is claimed.
\end{proof}
The meaning of this Proposition is that the only smooth curves in
$\Aut T$ are the constant ones; this has far-reaching consequences,
as we immediately see.
\paragraph{The D-topology of $\Aut T$} From what is established in
the previous paragraph we easily draw the following conclusion.
\begin{thm}
The D-topology underlying the functional diffeology on $\Aut T$ is
the discrete topology.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
This follows from the Proposition above and Theorem 3.7 of
\cite{CSW_Dtopology} (see also Example 3.2(2) therein).
\end{proof}
\paragraph{The functional diffeology of $\Aut T$ is discrete}
Moreover, we consider the proof of Proposition
\ref{D-top:discrete:prop}, we see that the plot $p$ under
consideration being defined on $\matR$ rather than an arbitrary
domain $U\subseteq\matR^k$ was not significant; it would hold just
the same writing $U$ in place of $\matR$ and $u\in U$ in place of
$x$. This implies that \emph{all} plots of the functional diffeology
of $\Aut T$ are constant maps, and therefore this diffeology is
indeed discrete.
\subsection{Functional diffeology of $\Aut T$ and its diffeological
group structure}
We shall now make some remarks regarding the diffeological group
structure on $\Aut T$, in relation to its functional diffeology. We
have already established that the latter is discrete and therefore
is the finest possible diffeology on $\Aut T$ (see
\cite{iglesiasBook}, Section 1.20). For this reason it coincides
with the diffeological group structure, the latter being \emph{a
priori} finer than the functional diffeology.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 9,686 |
Home » Research » Publications » PDF Library » Gerrit Dou 1613–1675 Master Painter
Download Free Backlist Titles
CASVA Publications
Systematic Catalogs
Fliter results by:
Antiquities / Archaeology (6)
Decorative Arts (18)
European Art (53)
NGA Collection (31)
World Art (11)
Gerrit Dou, 1613–1675: Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt
Ronni Baer with contributions by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. and Annetje Boersma; edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.
Gerrit Dou was one of the most highly esteemed Dutch painters of the 17th century, celebrated for the illusionistic images he created with his fine and delicate technique. Rembrandt's first pupil, Dou was lauded at an early age by his contemporaries as a model for other painters. By the mid-19th century, however, Dou's reputation had fallen into eclipse, and his works appeared only rarely, if at all, in exhibitions of Dutch art. This book, which accompanied the first international exhibition devoted exclusively to Dou's works, provides an extraordinary opportunity to reassess the artist's achievements. The catalog assembles 35 of Dou's paintings spanning his career and includes essays on Dou's artistic reputation, life, subject matter, and painting technique. Entries trace the provenance and exhibition history of each painting and analyze the style and themes of these exquisite works.
View PDF (53.39MB)
Gods, Saints, and Heroes: Dutch Painting in the Age of Rembrandt
Jan Steen: Painter and Storyteller
Civic Pride: Group Portraits from Amsterdam
Johannes Vermeer's The Art of Painting
Pleasure and Piety: The Art of Joachim Wtewael (1566–1638)
Rembrandt's Late Religious Portraits | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 7,912 |
{"url":"https:\/\/www.yaclass.in\/p\/mathematics-cbse\/class-8\/comparing-quantities-2515\/percentage-practical-problems-2032\/re-5ff3f6cd-65ac-4778-8d94-fe114da6bca6","text":"### Exercise condition:\n\n4\nIf the price of rice is raised by 20$$\\%$$, find by how much percent a\u00a0housewife\u00a0should reduce her consumption of\u00a0rice\u00a0so as\u00a0not to increase expenditure.\n\nRequired percentage\u00a0$$=$$ $$\\%$$\n[Note: Submit answer\u00a0as a\u00a0whole number]","date":"2020-09-18 19:50:24","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.24264343082904816, \"perplexity\": 7034.602591242867}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2020-40\/segments\/1600400188841.7\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20200918190514-20200918220514-00633.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
Baby shower invitations will set the tone for the happiest day of this. But, for some people it can be very difficult to find the ideal invitation suit your budget. Therefore, printed baby shower invitations customized quickly become one popular way to provide information about the arrival of a new baby, whether it be male or female.
Printable baby shower invitations should have good quality. Why? Because they will be sent to the guest to commemorate the event. Announcements by email becomes the standard way to send a brand to guests. Guests will marvel at the invitation, something they can show off to family and friends.
You can print the baby shower invitations on acid-free paper, is to ensure that they will last for a lifetime. A mass-produced invitations will fade within a certain time, the brand will not last long. Free printable baby shower invitation that will last with good acid.
A great idea for storing printed baby shower invitations and save them in your child's baby book. Yeah, you can show your kids the beauty of the invitation and let them know how much they anticipated.
Printable baby shower invitations can be created with different computer programs. Do not forget to make the images available in the online stock. For those of you who want to save money but want to have a beautiful invitation, printable baby shower invitations can be the best way. You need to remember, enter the appropriate information and not just stuck on the beauty of the invitation. Do not forget to include important details about your party. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 50 |
\section{Introduction}
Very-high-energy cosmic rays and gamma rays induce extensive air showers (EAS) when entering the atmosphere. Cherenkov and fluorescence light emitted by secondary charged particles is used as a proxy for studying the primary particles that initiate the particle cascades.
Design, calibration and data analysis of cosmic-ray and gamma-ray observatories strongly rely on Monte Carlo simulations of both the air shower and detector response. \texttt{CORSIKA} program \citep{corsika} is widely used for carrying out the first step of the simulation, whereas the second step depends on the detection technique. For example, in the case of imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes (IACT), the program \texttt{sim\_telarray} \citep{Bernlohr2008} is commonly used. These detailed simulations are currently very demanding computationally.
We present a fast python package called \texttt{ShowerModel} to compute the light emission in air showers and its detection by an array of telescopes \citep{ShowerModel}. This tool can speed up calculations that do not require a full simulation or that may serve to complement complex Monte Carlo studies and data analyses (e.g., as a cross-check). It can also be used for educational purposes. A similar approach was presented previously in \citet{Vuillaume2017}.
Functionalities and examples of results obtained with \texttt{ShowerModel} are shown. Several possible remarkable applications of this software are also briefly discussed.
\section{ShowerModel}
The package comprised several functions and classes to model air-shower development and detection (see Figure \ref{block_diagram}). Both gamma and proton-like 1D air showers can be generated using analytical Greisen or Gaisser-Hillas formulas \citep{Greisen1956, GaisserHillas1977}. Simulation-generated longitudinal profiles can also be input. Different flat atmospheric models are available.
\articlefigure[width=.8\textwidth]{P4-176_f1.eps}{block_diagram}{Class dependency of \texttt{ShowerModel}.}
The code uses detailed parameterizations of both fluorescence and Cherenkov light emission and angular distribution \citep{Morcuende2019, Nerling2006}. The time-varying light intensity reaching a telescope is readily computed from geometry. Rayleigh scattering losses are also included.
Telescope objects are highly configurable (e.g., quantum efficiency, pointing direction, field of view, detection area) to model fluorescence telescopes, imaging air Cherenkov telescopes, wide-angle Cherenkov detectors or hybrid designs. Camera images are produced using the Nishimura-Kamata-Greisen (NKG) function \citep{Nishimura1958, Greisen1956} to describe the lateral distribution of electrons in the air shower.
\section{Functionalities}
\texttt{ShowerModel} permits the calculation of:
\begin{itemize}
\item Projection of shower tracks in local coordinates \texttt{alt}/\texttt{az} as well as the telescope field of view coordinates \texttt{theta}/\texttt{phi} (Figure \ref{fluorescence_telescope}, left).
\articlefigure[width=.8\textwidth]{P4-176_f2.eps}{fluorescence_telescope}{\emph{Left:} Shower track projections of an air shower observed by a fluorescence telescope. \emph{Right:} Signal produced from the two light components.}
\item Longitudinal shower profiles: energy deposit and light production.
\item Cherenkov and fluorescence photon densities on ground (Figure \ref{2d_distr}).
\articlefigure[width=0.8\textwidth]{P4-176_f3.eps}{2d_distr}{Cherenkov and fluorescence photon densities at ground level.}
\item Time evolution of signal in a telescope (Figure \ref{fluorescence_telescope}, right).
\item Shower events detected by an array of telescopes (Figure \ref{obs_event}).
\articlefigure[width=.4\textwidth]{P4-176_f4.eps}{obs_event}{Air shower observed by an observatory of 6 telescopes. Green dots mark the telescope positions and their relative signal sizes.}
\item Camera images in customized telescopes (Figure \ref{camera_images}).
\articlefigure[width=.8\textwidth]{P4-176_f5.eps}{camera_images}{Camera images of an air shower observed by an array of six IACTs.}
\end{itemize}
\section{Possible remarkable use cases}
The proposed tool can serve as a complement of the analysis pipeline of cosmic-ray observatories. For instance, it might be used to fast evaluate if changes in the observation conditions (e.g., atmospheric parameters and night sky background) make necessary new simulations or instrument response functions. In addition, it may be useful to explore new observatory configurations or detection techniques that exploit both Cherenkov and fluorescence signals (see \citet{ICRC2015} and \citet{Thesis_Sailer2020}).
\acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge support from Spanish MINECO (contract FPA2017-82729-C6-3-R) and the European Commission (E.U. Grant Agreement 653477). D.~Morcuende acknowledges a predoctoral grant UCM-Harvard University (CT17/17-CT18/17) from Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 8,532 |
package datastructure
import (
"sysutil"
)
type LoggerInfo struct {
Id string `json:"id"`
Addr string `json:"address"`
BlkDev string `json:"blockdev"`
Stat sysutil.SysUtils `json:"sysutil"`
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 5,206 |
git stash
git stash apply
git rm xxx
git ls-files --with-tree=HEAD^
git cat-file -p HEAD^:welcome.txt
git add -u
### 恢复删除的文件
git cat-file -p HEAD~1:welcome.txt > welcome.txt
git show HEAD~1:welcome.txt > welcome.txt
git checkout HEAD~1 -- welcome.txt
git describe
git log --oneline --decorate -4
#### .gitignore
git config --global core.excludesfile /home/jiangxin/.gitigonre
git config core.excludesfile | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 9,219 |
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Given a sequence $\{s_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ of real numbers, the problem
of finding a Borel measure $\mu$ in $\mathbb{R}$ such that
\begin{equation*}
s_k=\int_\mathbb{R} t^kd\mu\quad \text{ for all } k=0,1,2,\dots
\end{equation*}
is called the Hamburger moment problem.
Denote by $\mathcal{M}$ the set of Borel measures on $\mathbb{R}$ with
infinite support and all their moments finite. For a positive sequence
$\{s_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ (see definition in \cite[Chap.\,1,
Sec\,1]{MR0184042}), the corresponding Hamburger moment problem has
always a solution $\mu\in\mathcal{M}$
\cite[Thm.\,2.1.1]{MR0184042}. $\mathcal{M}$ splits into two sets, one
corresponding to the case when the Hamburger moment problem has a
unique solution and the other when it has various solutions. In the
first case, it is said that the moment problem is determinate,
whereas, in the second case, the problem is called indeterminate. If a
moment problem is determinate (indeterminate), then the corresponding
solution, that is the measure, is also called determinate
(indeterminate).
The problem of finding conditions under which a relevant class of
functions is dense in the spaces $L_p(\mathbb{R}, \mu)$ is classical in
analysis. In particular, conditions which guarantee density of
polynomials go back at least to the work of Hamburger
\cite{MR1511981}. For related work see for example \cite{MR0084064,
MR1217081, MR2562213, MR2172989, MR1842874, MR2071709, MR2214480,
MR2415042, MR638619, MR1871391, MR1650247} (see in
\cite[Sec.\,4.8]{MR1864396} a brief compilation of results on the
matter). A fundamental result characterizing the measures
$\mu\in\mathcal{M}$ for which the polynomials are dense in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\mu)$ is due to M. Riesz \cite[Thm.\,2.3.2]{MR0184042},
\cite{mriesz1923}. It establishes that for the polynomials to be dense
in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\mu)$ it is necessary and sufficient that $\mu$ be
$N$-extremal (see definition in \cite[Pag.\,43]{MR0184042}). In
\cite[Pag.\,86]{MR1627806}, $N$-extremal solutions are called von
Neumann solutions whereas in \cite[Pag.\,2796]{MR1308001} $N$-extremal means
Nevanlinna extremal. Note that in contrast to the definition given in
\cite{MR1308001}, here all determinate solutions are $N$-extremal
\cite[Cor.\,2.3.3]{MR0184042}.
A concept related to the determinacy and $N$-extremality of a measure
is the concept of the \emph{index of determinacy} introduced by Berg
and Dur\'{a}n in \cite{MR1308001}. The index of determinacy of
$\mu\in\mathcal{M}$ quantifies the stability of $\mu$ to be the unique
solution of a moment problem under perturbations of it (see
Definition~\ref{def:index}). This index also gives information on how
a measure can be perturbed and maintain the property of being
$N$-extremal. The fact that a measure $\mu\in\mathcal{M}$ is
indeterminate $N$-extremal or determinate may be changed by adding or
substracting the mass at only one point (see
Proposition~\ref{prop:duran} below) or by modifying the weights
without changing the support (see Proposition~\ref{prop:changing-weights}).
Jacobi operators, i.\,e., self-adjoint extensions of operators having
a tridiagonal matrix representation (see \eqref{eq:jm-0}), naturally
appear in the theory of the Hamburger moment problem. It turns out
that every $N$-extremal solution of a Hamburger moment problem
normalized so that $s_0=1$ is the spectral measure of a Jacobi
operator (see Theorem~\ref{thm:nec-suf-cond-for-meausure}). Thus, the
study of measures $\mu$ such that the polynomials are dense in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\mu)$ is the study of self-adjoint extensions of operators
having a semi-infinite Jacobi matrix as its matrix representation.
We study the constancy of the index of determinacy after changing the
weights and support of the measure. The permanence of the
$N$-extremality of a given measure is also considered. Similar
questions on stability are studied in \cite{MR3407921} and
\cite{MR1754999}. Our approach to this matter is mainly based on
Jacobi operators and Green functions. This allows us to give
results on the stability of the index of determinacy of the spectral
measure of a Jacobi operator under finite rank perturbations of the
operator. Jacobi operators model linear mass-spring systems and the
perturbations considered here correspond to changing one mass and
spring constant in some place of the chain.
Our findings on the stability of the index of determinacy and the
$N$-ex\-trem\-ality of the spectral measures of Jacobi operators shed
light on the inverse spectral problem of reconstructing an operator
from its spectrum and the spectrum of an interior finite rank
perturbation of it. It turns out that the aforehand knowledge of the
index of determinacy of the spectral measure of the Jacobi operator
determines the place where the interior perturbation
occurs. Remarkably, for finite Jacobi matrices, as well as in the case
of infinite index of determinacy, one cannot recover the place of the
perturbation.
As a by-product of our research, we give a new characterization of the
index of determinacy in terms of the cyclicity of vectors generated by
polynomials functions of Jacobi operators.
The paper is organized as follows. In the next section we give some
preparatory facts on Jacobi operators. In
Section~\ref{sec:green-functions}, the Weyl and Green functions
associated to Jacobi operators are introduced and we prove a criterion
for a Green function to be a Weyl function
(Theorem~\ref{thm:equivalence-green-weyl}). This result is interpreted
later in terms of the index of determinacy
(Corollary~\ref{cor:index-weyl-function}). Section
\ref{sec:stability-index-determinacy} presents a characterization of
the index of determinacy (Corollary~\ref{cor:other-criterion}) and
establishes stability results for the index. We provide conditions for
two measures with the same support and different weights to have the
same index (Theorems~\ref{thm:main-minimal-equal-indices} and
\ref{thm:stability-determ-index-weights}). Moreover, conditions for
two measures with different supports to have the same index are found
(Corollary~\ref{cor:finite-rank-pert-index-determinacy}). We show that
finite-rank perturbations of Jacobi operators do not modify the index
of determinacy of the corresponding
measures. Section~\ref{subsec:sol-inv-problem} presents a new
development in the inverse spectral analysis of interior perturbations
of Jacobi operators. We consider a two-spectra inverse problem
where the information of the index of determinacy is given in
advance. This section connects the results of previous sections to the
inverse spectral problem studied in \cite{MR3634444}. To the
best of our knowledge, this is the first time that the index of
determinacy is used in inverse spectral theory.
\section{Jacobi operators}
\label{sec:jacobi_operators}
For a sequence $f=\{f_k\}_{k=1}^\infty$ of complex numbers, consider the
second order difference expressions
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:difference-expr}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:difference-recurrence}
(\Upsilon f)_k&:= b_{k-1}f_{k-1} + q_k f_k + b_kf_{k+1}
\quad k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{1\},\\
\label{eq:difference-initial}
(\Upsilon f)_1&:=q_1 f_1 + b_1 f_2\,,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $q_k\in\mathbb{R}$ and $b_k>0$ for any $k\in\mathbb{N}=\{1,2,\dots\}$. We
remark that (\ref{eq:difference-initial}) can be seen as a boundary
condition.
\begin{definition}
Let $l_2(\mathbb{N})$ be the space of square summable complex
sequences. In this Hilbert space, define the operator $J_0$ whose
domain is the set of sequences having a finite number of
non-zero elements and is given by $J_0f:=\Upsilon
f$.\label{def:j-nought}
\end{definition}
Clearly, the operator
$J_0$ is symmetric and therefore closable, so one can consider the
operator $\cc{J_0}$ being its closure. By the definition of the matrix
representation of an unbounded symmetric operator given in \cite[Sec. 47]{MR1255973},
$\overline{J_0}$ is the operator whose matrix representation with
respect to the canonical basis $\{e_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ in
$l_2(\mathbb{N})$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:jm-0}
\begin{pmatrix}
q_1 & b_1 & 0 & 0 & \cdots
\\[1mm] b_1 & q_2 & b_2 & 0 & \cdots \\[1mm] 0 & b_2 & q_3 &
b_3 & \\
0 & 0 & b_3 & q_4 & \ddots\\ \vdots & \vdots & & \ddots
& \ddots
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
Recall that the element $e_n$ of the canonical basis is the sequence
whose elements are zero except for the $n$-th entry which is 1. Thus
$\cc{J_0}$ is the minimal closed symmetric operator such that
$\inner{e_j}{\cc{J_0}e_k}$ is the $j,k$ entry of the matrix above.
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:deficiency-indices}
The deficiency indices of the symmetric operator $\cc{J_0}$ are either
$(1,1)$ or $(0,0)$ \cite[Chap.\,4,\,Sec.\,1.2]{MR0184042},
\cite[Chap.\,7 Thm.\,1.1]{MR0222718}. When
$\cc{J_0}$ has deficiency indices $(1,1)$, respectively $(0,0)$, the
matrix \eqref{eq:jm-0} is said to be in the limit circle case,
respectively limit point case \cite[Def.\,1.3.2]{MR0184042}. Thus, if $J$ is a self-adjoint
extension of $J_0$,then either $J$ is a proper closed
symmetric extension of $\cc{J_0}$ or $J=\overline{J_0}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:jacobi-operator}
Given the matrix \eqref{eq:jm-0},
we consider $J$ a fixed self-adjoint extension of $J_0$ and refer to it as the
Jacobi operator associated with \eqref{eq:jm-0}.
\end{definition}
When \eqref{eq:jm-0}
is in the limit circle case, there are more than one Jacobi operators
associated with the matrix \eqref{eq:jm-0}.
By setting $f_1=1$, a solution of the equations
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:spectral-equation}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:initial-spectral}
(\Upsilon f)_1&:= zf_1\,,\\
\label{eq:recurrence-spectral}
(\Upsilon f)_k&:= z f_k\,,
\quad k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{1\},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
can be found uniquely by recurrence. This solution, denoted by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pi}
\pi(z)=\{\pi_k(z)\}_{k=1}^\infty \,,
\end{equation}
is such that $\pi_k(z)$ is a polynomial of
degree $k-1$.
The elements of the sequence $\pi(z)
are referred to as the polynomials of the first
kind associated to the matrix
(\ref{eq:jm-0}). By comparing (\ref{eq:difference-expr}) with
(\ref{eq:spectral-equation}), one concludes that for $\pi(z)$ to be in
$\ker(J_0^*-zI)$, it is necessary and sufficient that $\pi(z)$ be an
element of $l_2(\mathbb{N})$. Of course, $\pi(z)\in\ker(J-zI)$, if and only
if $\pi(z)\in\dom(J)$.
Observe that
\begin{align*}
J e_k&= b_{k-1}e_{k-1} + q_k e_k + b_ke_{k+1}
\quad k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{1\},\\
J e_1&=q_1 e_1 + b_1 e_2\,,
\end{align*}
Thus, by the definition of $\pi_k(z)$, one has
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:delta-k-through-delta-1}
e_k=\pi_k(J)e_1\quad\forall k\in\mathbb{N}\,.
\end{equation}
This implies that $J$ is simple and $e_1$ is a cyclic vector (see
\cite[Sec. 69]{MR1255973}). Therefore, if one defines
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:spectral-function-def}
\rho(t):=\inner{e_1}{E_J(t)e_1}\,,\quad t\in\mathbb{R}\,,
\end{equation}
where $E_J$ is the resolution of the identity given by the spectral
theorem, then, by \cite[Sec. 69, Thm. 2]{MR1255973}), there is a
unitary map $\Phi:L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)\to l_2(\mathbb{N})$ such that
$\Phi^{-1}J\Phi$ is the multiplication by the independent variable
defined in its maximal domain. Henceforth we identify the function
$\rho(t)$ with the Borel measure $\rho$ which it uniquely determines
and call it spectral measure of $J$ (with respect to $e_1$).
Moreover, due to \cite[Sec. 69,
Thm. 2]{MR1255973}), it follows from
(\ref{eq:delta-k-through-delta-1}) that
the function $\pi_k\eval{\mathbb{R}}$ belongs to $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ for
all $k\in\mathbb{N}$, i.\,e., all moments of $\rho$ are finite (see also
\cite[Thm.\,4.1.3]{MR0184042}). The equation
\eqref{eq:delta-k-through-delta-1} means that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:unitary-map}
\Phi\pi_k=e_k\,,\quad\forall k\in\mathbb{N}\,,
\end{equation}
which implies that the polynomials are dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$
since $\Phi$ is unitary. Note also that, due to
\eqref{eq:spectral-function-def}, $\int_\mathbb{R} d\rho=1$ holds.
Now, assume that one is given a measure $\rho$ satisfying
$\int_\mathbb{R} d\rho=1$ and such that all the polynomials are in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ and they are dense in this space. Consider the
operator of multiplication by the independent variable $A$ in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ with
\begin{equation*}
\dom(A)=\{f\in L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho):\int_\mathbb{R} t^2\abs{f}^2d\rho(t)<+\infty\}
\end{equation*}
This operator is self-adjoint and $E_A(\Delta)=\chi_\Delta$, where $\chi_\Delta$
is the characteristic function of the Borel set
$\Delta\subset\mathbb{R}$. Therefore, similar to \eqref{eq:spectral-function-def},
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\Delta)=\inner{1}{\chi_\Delta 1}
\end{equation*}
for any Borel set
$\Delta\subset\mathbb{R}$. Note that $1$ is a cyclic vector for $A$ since
the polynomials are dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$. Applying the
Gram-Schmidt procedure to the sequence $\{1,t,t^2,\dots\}$, one obtains an
orthonormal basis $\{p_1=1,p_2,p_3\dots\}$ contained in the domain of
$A$. It can be verified \cite[Sec.\,69]{MR1255973}
(cf. \cite[Pags.\,92,93]{MR1627806}) that the matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:matrix-multiplication-operator}
a_{jk}=\inner{p_j}{Ap_k}\quad\forall j,k\in\mathbb{N}\,.
\end{equation}
is a Jacobi matrix. According to \cite[Sec.\,47]{MR1255973}, $A$ is a
self-adjoint extension of an operator whose matrix representation is
\eqref{eq:matrix-multiplication-operator}.
By constructing an isometry $\Psi$ between $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ and
$l_2(\mathbb{N})$ such that $\Psi p_k=e_k$, one arrives at the following
central assertion (cf. \cite[Thms.\,2.3.3 and 4.1.4]{MR0184042}).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:nec-suf-cond-for-meausure}
A measure $\rho$ is the spectral measure of a Jacobi operator if
and only if $\int_\mathbb{R} d\rho=1$, all the polynomials are in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ and they are dense in this space.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:finite-matrix}
Any probability measure with finite support is the spectral measure of the
operator associated with some finite Jacobi matrix.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:weyl-function}
The Weyl $m$-function is defined as follows
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:weyl-function}
m(z):=\inner{e_1}{(J-z I)^{-1}e_1}\,,\qquad z\not\in\sigma(J)\,.
\end{equation}
Here, for a given operator $T$, $\sigma(T)$ denotes the spectrum of
it.
\end{definition}
Using the map $\Phi$, one concludes from this
definition that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:weyl-by-spectral-th}
m(z)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}
\frac{d\rho(t)}{t-z}\,.
\end{equation}
Thus, by the Nevanlinna representation theorem (see
\cite[Thm.\,5.3]{MR1307384}), $m(z)$ is a Herglotz function. Recall
that a function $f$ is Herglotz (also called Pick or Nevanlinna-Pick
function) when it is holomorphic in the upper half-plane and $\im
f(z)\ge 0$ whenever $\im z>0$.
\section{Green functions for Jacobi operators}
\label{sec:green-functions}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:green-function}
We use the following notation
\begin{equation*}
G(z,k):=\inner{e_k}{(J-zI)^{-1}e_k}\qquad z\not\in\sigma(J)
\end{equation*}
and call $G(z,k)$ the $k$-th Green function of the Jacobi operator $J$.
Observe that $G(z,1)=m(z)$ (See Definition~\ref{def:weyl-function}).
\end{definition}
In view of
(\ref{eq:delta-k-through-delta-1}) and \eqref{eq:spectral-function-def}, one has
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:green-integral}
G(z,n)=\int_\mathbb{R}\frac{\pi_n^2(t)d\rho(t)}{t-z}\,.
\end{equation}
Thus, for any $n\in\mathbb{N}$, $G(\cdot,n)$ is a Herglotz function. This
function is extended analytically to the eigenvalues of $J$ which are simultaneously zeros
of $\pi_n$ since these points are removable singularities.
Using the
von Neumann expansion for the resolvent
(cf.\cite[Chap.\,6,\,Sec.\,6.1]{MR1711536})
\begin{equation*}
(J-zI)^{-1}e_n=
-\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}\frac{J^ke_n}{z^{k+1}}
+\frac{J^N}{z^{N}}
(J-z I)^{-1}e_n\,,\quad N\in\mathbb{N}\,,
\end{equation*}
where $z\in\mathbb{C}\setminus\sigma(J)$,
one obtains the following asymptotic formula
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:G=-asymptotics}
G(z,n)=-\frac{1}{z} +O(z^{-2})
\end{equation}
as $z\to\infty$ along any ray intersecting the real axis only at $0$.
The following definition is taken from \cite[Def.\,2.1]{MR3377115}.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:submatrices}
For a subspace $\mathcal{G}\subset\l_2(\mathbb{N})$ (therefore
$\mathcal{G}$ is closed), let
$P_{\mathcal{G}}$ be the orthogonal projection onto
$\mathcal{G}$. Also, define
$\mathcal{G}^\perp:=\{\phi\in
l_2(\mathbb{N}):\inner{\phi}{\psi}=0\,\forall \psi\in\mathcal{G}\}$ and
the subspace
$\mathcal{F}_n:=\Span\{e_k\}_{k=1}^n$.
For the operator $J$ given in Definition~\ref{def:jacobi-operator}, consider the
operators
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:j+-}
J_n^+:=P_{\mathcal{F}_n^\perp}J\eval{\mathcal{F}_n^\perp}\quad n\in\mathbb{N}\,,\quad
J_n^-:=P_{\mathcal{F}_{n-1}}J\eval{\mathcal{F}_{n-1}}\quad n\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\}\,.
\end{equation}
Here, we have used the notation
$J\eval{\mathcal{G}}$ for the restriction of $J$ to the set
$\mathcal{G}$, that is,
$\dom(J\eval{\mathcal{G}})=\dom(J)\cap\mathcal{G}$. Consider also the corresponding $m$-Weyl functions
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def-m-functions}
m_n^+(z):=\inner{e_{n+1}}{(J_n^+-zI)^{-1}e_{n+1}}\,,\qquad
m_n^-(z):=\inner{e_{n-1}}{(J_n^--zI)^{-1}e_{n-1}}\,.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:same-boundary}
The operator $J_n^+$ is a self-adjoint extension of the operator whose
matrix representation with respect to the basis
$\{e_k\}_{k=n+1}^\infty$ of the Hilbert space
$(\Span\{e_k\}_{k=1}^n)^\perp$ is (\ref{eq:jm-0}) with
the first $n$ rows and $n$ columns removed. When $J_0$ is not
essentially self-adjoint, $J_n^+$ has the same boundary conditions at
infinity as the operator $J$. Clearly, the operator $J_n^-$ lives in
an $n-1$-dimensional space.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:zeros-poly}
By \cite[Cor.\,2.3]{MR3377115}, the set of zeros of the polynomial $\pi_n$
coincides with the spectrum of $J_n^-$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:intersections-spectra}
It follows from \cite[Lem.\,2.9, and Prop.\,3.3]{MR3377115} that
\begin{equation*}
\sigma(J_n^-)\cap\sigma(J_n^+)=\sigma(J_n^-)\cap\sigma(J)\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{remark}
The next assertion is proven in \cite[Thm. 2.8]{MR1616422} and \cite[Prop.,2.3]{MR3377115}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:Gkk-formula}
For any $n\in\mathbb{N}$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Gkk-formula2}
G(z,n)=\frac{-1}{b_n^2m_n^+(z)+b_{n-1}^2m_n^-(z)+z-q_n}\,,
\end{equation}
where we define $m^-_1(z)\equiv 0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{notation}
Let us denote by $\mu_n$ and $\sigma_n$ the measures given by the
Nevanlinna representation of the function $m_n^-(z)$ and $m_n^+(z)$,
respectively, that is, $m_n^\pm$ given in \eqref{eq:def-m-functions}
are the Borel transforms of $\mu_n$ and $\sigma_n$. Also, denote by
$\rho_n$ the measure given by the Nevanlinna representation of the
function $G(z,n)$. Thus
\begin{align}
\label{eq:def-sigma-n}
m_n^+(z)&=\int_\mathbb{R}\frac{d\sigma_n(t)}{t-z}\\
\label{eq:def-mu-n}
m_n^-(z)&=\int_\mathbb{R}\frac{d\mu_n(t)}{t-z}\\
\label{eq:def-rho-n}
G(z,n)&=\int_\mathbb{R}\frac{d\rho_n(t)}{t-z}\,.
\end{align}
We denote by $\delta_\lambda$ the measure
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dirac-measure}
\delta_\lambda(\Delta):=
\begin{cases}
1 & \lambda\in\Delta\\
0 & \lambda\not\in\Delta
\end{cases}
\end {equation}
where $\Delta\subset\mathbb{R} $ is a Borel set.
\end{notation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:equivalence-green-weyl}
Fix $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and let $G(z,n)$ be the $n$-th Green function of the
Jacobi operator $J$. If the polynomials are dense
in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho_n)$, then $G(z,n)$ is the $l$-th Green function
of some other Jacobi operator for any $l\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We show that
the measure $\rho_n$ satisfies the conditions of
Theorem~\ref{thm:nec-suf-cond-for-meausure}. In view of
\eqref{eq:green-integral} and \eqref{eq:def-rho-n}, for any $n\in\mathbb{N}$,
\begin{equation*}
\int_\mathbb{R} d\rho_n= \int_\mathbb{R}\pi_n^2(t) d\rho=\norm{\pi_n(\cdot)}_{L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)}^2=1\,,
\end{equation*}
where the last equality holds due to \eqref{eq:unitary-map}. Moreover,
for any $m\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$,
\begin{equation*}
\int_\mathbb{R} t^md\rho_n(t)= \int_\mathbb{R} t^m\pi_n^2(t) d\rho(t)<\infty
\end{equation*}
since all the moments of $\rho$ are finite. Thus all the polynomials
are in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho_n)$ and by hypothesis the polynomials are
dense there. Therefore Theorem~\ref{thm:nec-suf-cond-for-meausure},
taking into account \eqref{eq:def-rho-n} and \eqref{eq:weyl-by-spectral-th},
implies that $G(z,n)$ is the Weyl $m$-function of some Jacobi
operator.
Let $m(z)$ be the Weyl $m$-function of some Jacobi operator $J$. We show that $m(z)$ is the
$l$-th Green function for any $l\in\mathbb{N}$. By
Proposition~\ref{prop:Gkk-formula} one has
\begin{equation*}
-m(z)^{-1}=b_1^2m_1^+(z)+z-q_1=z-q_1+\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{\eta_k}{\alpha_k-z}\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus, since $m_1^+$ is the Weyl $m$-function of the Jacobi operator $J_1^+$, it
follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:nec-suf-cond-for-meausure} that the measure
\begin{equation*}
\sigma:=\sum_{k=1}^\infty \eta_k \delta_{\alpha_k}
\end{equation*}
is such that the polynomials are in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\sigma)$ and they are dense
in this space. One can also write
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:almost-green}
-m(z)^{-1}=z-q_1+\left(\sum_{k=1}^{l-1}+\sum_{k=l}^\infty\right)\frac{\eta_k}{\alpha_k-z}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that the measure
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\rho}:=\sum_{ k\ge l}\eta_k\delta_{\alpha_k}
\end{equation*}
has also the property that all the polynomials form a dense linear subset of
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\widetilde{\rho})$.
Indeed, on one hand the fact that all the polynomials are in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\sigma)$ implies the same occurs for
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\widetilde{\rho})$. On the other hand, if there is $h\in
L_2(\mathbb{R},\widetilde{\rho})$, such that
$\inner{h}{t^m}_{L_2(\mathbb{R},\widetilde{\rho})}=0$ for all
$m\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$, then
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k=l}^\infty\alpha_k^mh(\alpha_k)\eta_k=0\quad\text{for all } m\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus, by considering the function
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{h}(\alpha_k)=
\begin{cases}
h(\alpha_k) & k\ge l\,\\
0 & k < l\,,
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
one obtains that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k=1}^\infty\alpha_k^m\widetilde{h}(\alpha_k)\eta_k=0
\quad\text{for all } m\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}\,.
\end{equation*}
By the density of the polynomials in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\sigma)$, one concludes
that the norm in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\sigma)$ of $\widetilde{h}$ vanishes, which in turn implies
that $\norm{h}_{L_2(\mathbb{R},\widetilde{\rho})}=0$.
For completing the proof, set
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{q}_l:=q_1\,,\quad
\widetilde{b}_{l-1}^2\widetilde{m}_l^-:=\sum_{k=1}^{l-1}\frac{\eta_k}{\alpha_k-z}\,,
\quad\widetilde{b}_{l}^2\widetilde{m}_l^+:=\sum_{k=l}^\infty\frac{\eta_k}{\alpha_k-z}\,,
\end{equation*}
and substitute these expressions into \eqref{eq:almost-green} to obtain
\begin{equation*}
-m(z)^{-1}=z-\widetilde{q}_l+\widetilde{b}_{l-1}^2\widetilde{m}_l^-+\widetilde{b}_{l}^2\widetilde{m}_l^+\,.
\end{equation*}
Finally, note that the r.\,h.\,s of the last equation is the $l$-th
Green function of some Jacobi operator by Proposition~\ref{prop:Gkk-formula}.
\end{proof}
\section{Index of determinacy}
\label{sec:stability-index-determinacy}
We begin this section by introducing the following notation. For a
nonnegative Borel measurable function $h$ and a Borel measure $\nu$,
we denote by $h\nu$ the measure which associates to any Borel set $\Delta$
the value
\begin{equation*}
\int_\Delta hd\nu\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus $h\nu$ is the measure with density $h$ with respect to $\nu$.
The fact that a measure $\mu$ is in $\mathcal{M}$, the set of Borel
measures on $\mathbb{R}$ with infinite support and all their moments
finite (see Introduction), is indeterminate $N$-extremal or
determinate may be changed by adding or substracting the mass at only
one point.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:duran}
Let $\mu\in\mathcal{M}$ be indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item If $\lambda\not\in\supp\mu$, then $\mu+a\delta_\lambda$
($a>0$) is not $N$-extremal.
\item If $\lambda\in\supp\mu$, then
$\mu-\mu(\{\lambda\})\delta_\lambda$ is determinate.
\end{enumerate}
$\supp\mu$ is the minimal closed set whose complement has $\mu$-zero
measure.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(a) (Communicated by A. Dur\'an) Let $\widetilde{\mu}$ be an
$N$-extremal measure having the same moments as $\mu$ and such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:weight-to-lambda}
\widetilde{\mu}(\{\lambda\})>0\,.
\end{equation}
The existence of such
a $\widetilde{\mu}$ is guaranteed by \cite[Thm.\,3.41]{MR0184042}
and \cite[Thm.\,5]{MR1627806}. Thus, the measures
$\mu+a\delta_\lambda$ and
$\widetilde{\mu}+a\delta_\lambda$ have the same moments, but
\begin{equation*}
\mu(\{\lambda\})+a<\widetilde{\mu}(\{\lambda\})+a
\end{equation*}
as a consequence of (\ref{eq:weight-to-lambda}) and the fact that
$\mu(\{\lambda\})=0$. The last inequality shows that
$\mu+a\delta_\lambda$ is not $N$-extremal since, by \cite[Thm.\,3.41]{MR0184042}
and \cite[Thm.\,5]{MR1627806}, if an $N$-extremal measure gives weight
to a point, then no other solution of the moment problem can give more
weight to that point.
(b) (\cite[Thm.\,7]{MR638619}) We give an alternative proof based on
\cite[Thm. 3.4]{MR0184042}. Define
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\mu}:=\mu-\mu(\{\lambda\})\delta_\lambda\,.
\end{equation*}
Note that $\widetilde{\mu}\in\mathcal{M}$ and
$\widetilde{\mu}(\{\lambda\})=0$. If $\widetilde{\mu}$ is
indeterminate, then there exists a solution of the moment problem
$\gamma$ such that $\gamma(\{\lambda\})>0$ due to
\cite[Thm.\,3.41]{MR0184042} (see also \cite[Thm.\,5]{MR1627806}). Now
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\gamma}:=\gamma+ \mu(\{\lambda\})\delta_\lambda
\end{equation*}
is a solution of the moment problem associated with $\mu$
and gives more weight to $\lambda$ than $\mu$ which is a contradiction
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:density-polynomials}
Since the polynomials are dense
in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\mu)$ if and only if $\mu$ is $N$-extremal, part (a) of
Proposition~\ref{prop:duran} shows that the density can be destroyed
by adding just one point mass to the measure.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Characterization of the index of
determinacy}
\label{sec:defin-char-index}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:index}
For a determinate measure $\mu$, Berg and Dur\'an
introduce in \cite{MR1308001} the index of
determinacy as follows.
\begin{equation*}
\ind_z\mu=\sup\{k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}:\abs{t-z}^{2k}\mu\text{ is determinate}\}\,,
\end{equation*}
where $z\in\mathbb{C}$.
Since the index of determinacy happens to be constant
\cite[Lem.\,3.5]{MR1308001} at complex numbers outside
the support of $\mu$, one can define
\begin{equation*}
\ind\mu:=\ind_z\mu\qquad z\not\in\supp\mu\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
In \cite[Lem.\,2.1]{MR1375156}, the index of determinacy of a measure
is characterized when the measure is multiplied by an arbitrary
polynomial. The next assertion, which follows directly from
results due to C. Berg and A. Dur\'{a}n, describes the general situation.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:berg-duran}
Let $r$ be a polynomial with simple zeros, $\mu\in\mathcal{M}$ and
\begin{equation*}
l:=\card\{\text{\rm zeros of }\, r\ \text{\rm outside } \supp\mu\}\,.
\end{equation*}
Then
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $\mu$ is determinate and $\ind\mu=l-1$ if and only if $\abs{r}^2\mu$ is indeterminate and
$N$-extremal.
\item $\mu$ is determinate and $\ind\mu=k\ge l$ if and only if $\abs{r}^2\mu$ is determinate and
$k=\ind\abs{r}^2\mu +l$.
\item $\mu$ is indeterminate or $\mu$ is determinate and
$\ind\mu<{l-1}$ if and only if $\abs{r}^2\mu$ is indeterminate and
not $N$-extremal.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(a) ($\Rightarrow$) Let $a\not\in\supp\mu$ be a zero of $r$. Write
$r=(t-a)\hat{p}$. Since $\ind\mu=l-1$, we get
$\ind\abs{\hat{p}}^2\mu=0$ by
\cite[Lem.\,2.1(ii)]{MR1375156}. Thus, $\abs{t-a}^2\abs{\hat{p}}^2\mu$ is
indeterminate by Definition~\ref{def:index}. Due to
\cite[Lem.\,A(1)]{MR1308001} (cf. \cite{mriesz1923}),
$\abs{t-a}^2\abs{\hat{p}}^2\mu$ is $N$-extremal. ($\Leftarrow$) Now, assume that
$\abs{r}^2\mu$ is indeterminate $N$-extremal and let $a$ and $\hat{p}$ be
as before. Using the contrapositive of \cite[Prop.\,3.2]{MR1308001},
one has $\abs{\hat{p}}^2\mu$ is determinate. $\abs{\hat{p}}^2\mu$
has zero index of determinacy since, otherwise $\abs{r}^2\mu$ would
be determinate. Applying again \cite[Lem.\,2.1(ii)]{MR1375156} to
$\abs{\hat{p}}^2\mu$, one proves the assertion.
(b) ($\Rightarrow$) This is \cite[Lem.\,2.1(ii)]{MR1375156}.
($\Leftarrow$) $\abs{r}^2\mu$ determinate implies $\mu$ is
determinate by \cite[Prop.\,3.2(i)]{MR1308001}.We must have
$\ind\mu\ge l$ since $\ind\mu <l$ implies $\abs{r}^2\mu$ is
indeterminate by \cite[Lem.\,2.1(i)]{MR1375156}. From
\cite[Lem.\,2.1(ii)]{MR1375156} follows $k=\ind\mu$
(c) ($\Rightarrow$) If $\mu$ is indeterminate apply
\cite[Prop.\,3.2(i)]{MR1308001}. If $\mu$ is determinate then by
\cite[Lem.\,2.1(i)]{MR1375156} $\abs{r}^2\mu$ is an indeterminate
measure and by (a) above it cannot be $N$-extremal. ($\Leftarrow$)
If $\mu$ is determinate then $\ind \mu<l-1 $ since otherwise we are in
cases (a) or (b) above.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:index-weyl-function}
Let $\rho$ be the spectral measure of a Jacobi operator $J$. For the
$n$-th Green function $G(z,n)$ of $J$ to be the $l$-th Green function of
some other Jacobi operator for any $l\in\mathbb{N}$ it is necessary and sufficient that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ind-ge}
\ind\rho\ge \card\{\text{\rm zeros of $\pi_n$ outside $\supp\rho$}\}-1\,.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that \eqref{eq:ind-ge} holds. Then, by
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran}, the polynomials are dense in
$L_2(\mathbb{R},\pi_n^2\rho)$. One direction of the assertion then
follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:equivalence-green-weyl}. If one
assumes that
\begin{equation*}
\ind\rho<\card\{\text{\rm zeros of $\pi_n$ outside $\supp\rho$}\}-1\,,
\end{equation*}
then the polynomials are not dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\pi_n^2\rho)$ by
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran} . Therefore $\pi_n^2\rho$ cannot
be the spectral measure of a Jacobi operator due to
Theorem~\ref{thm:nec-suf-cond-for-meausure} and then, by
\eqref{eq:weyl-by-spectral-th} and \eqref{eq:green-integral},
$G(z,n)$ is not the Weyl $m$-function of a Jacobi operator.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:det-less-det}
Let $\mu$ be a determinate measure. If a measure $\nu$ is such that
$\nu(\mathcal{A})\le\mu(\mathcal{A})$, for any Borel set $\mathcal{A}$,
then $\nu$ is determinate.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(Communicated by C. Berg) Suppose that there is a measure $\sigma$
different from $\nu$ having the same moments as $\nu$. Then
$\sigma+\tau$ and $\nu+\tau$ are two measures with the same
moments. If one takes $\tau=\mu-\nu$, then $\mu=\nu+\tau$ has the
same moments as $\sigma+\tau$, which is a contradiction because
$\mu$ is determinate.
\end{proof}
With the help of Definition~\ref{def:index}, one can give more general
and precise statements regarding what happens when mass points are
added or removed from a measure in $\mathcal{M}$. The next statement
is essentially a reformulation of results by C. Berg and A. Dur\'{a}n.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:berg-duran-sum}
Let $\mathcal{F}\subset\mathbb{R}$ be a finite set and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:beta}
\beta:=\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{F}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi\,,\qquad\beta_\xi>0\,,
\end{equation}
$\mu\in\mathcal{M}$, and $l:=\card\{\xi\in\mathcal{F}\ \text{\rm outside
}\supp\mu\}$.
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $\mu$ is determinate and $\ind\mu=l-1$ if and only if
$\mu+\beta$ is indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\item $\mu$ is determinate and $\ind\mu=k\ge l$ if and only if
$\mu+\beta$ is determinate and $k=\ind(\mu+\beta)+l$.
\item $\mu$ is indeterminate or $\mu$ is determinate with $\ind\mu<l-1$
if and only if $\mu+\beta$ is indeterminate and not $N$-extremal.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(a) One direction is \cite[Thm.\,3.6]{MR1308001} and
the converse is \cite[Lem.\,3.7, Thm.\,3.9]{MR1308001}.
(b) Let
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\beta}=\beta+\sum_{i=1}^{k+1-l}a_i\delta_{\xi_i},\qquad a_i>0\,
\end{equation*}
where $\xi_i\notin\supp(\mu+\beta)$ for $i\in\{1,...,k+1-l \}$. Then
$\widetilde{\beta}$ is a measure such that $\card\{\text{\rm
$\xi\in \supp\widetilde{\beta}$ outside } \supp\mu\}=k+1$
. Applying (a) above we get $\ind \mu=k$ if and only if
$\mu+\widetilde{\beta}=\mu+\beta+\sum_{i=1}^{k+1-l}a_i\delta_{\xi_i}$
is indeterminate $N$-extremal and this happens if and only if
$\ind(\mu + \beta)= k-l$ by (a) again since
$\xi_i\notin\supp(\mu+\beta)$.
(c) ($\Rightarrow$) Let $\mathcal{C}\subset\{\xi\in\mathcal{F}\ \text{\rm outside
}\supp\mu\}$ be such that $\card\mathcal{C}=\ind\mu+1<l$. Define
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\gamma}:=\mu+\sum_{\lambda\in\mathcal{C}}\beta_\lambda\delta_\lambda\,.
\end{equation*}
By item (a), $\widetilde{\gamma}$ is indeterminate $N$-extremal. By
Proposition~\ref{prop:duran} and Lemma~\ref{lem:det-less-det},
$\mu+\beta$ is indeterminate not $N$-extremal. ($\Leftarrow$) If $\mu$
is determinate then $\ind\mu<l-1$ since otherwise we are in cases (a)
or (b) above.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:finite-index-discrete}
A measure of finite index of determinacy is discrete
(cf. \cite[Cor.\,3.4]{MR1308001}). In view of
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(a), this is a consequence of the fact
that an indeterminate $N$-extremal measure is discrete
\cite[Chap.\,3 Sec.\,2 Pag.\,101]{MR0184042}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:infinite-index-discrete}
There are measures with infinite index of determinacy being
discrete. Indeed, take an indeterminate $N$-extremal measure and
remove the mass at an infinite set of points. By
Lemma~\ref{lem:det-less-det} and Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(a), the index of
determinacy of the modified measure is not finite.
\end{remark}
The following assertion is related to \cite[Rem. p. 231,
Thm.\,5]{MR1343638} (see also \cite{MR1308001} Lemma B and the comment
before Lemma D)
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:stability-index-cardinality0}
Let $\mathcal{I}\subset\mathbb{R}$ be an infinite discrete set and
$\widetilde{\mathcal{F}}$ a finite set in $\mathbb{R}$ such that
$\mathcal{I}\cap\widetilde{\mathcal{F}}=\emptyset$. Consider a
sequence
$\{\beta_\xi\}_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\cup\widetilde{\mathcal{F}}}$ of positive
numbers. Define
\begin{equation*}
\mu:=\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi\quad\text{ and
}\quad
\widetilde \mu=\mu -\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{F}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi
+ \sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{\widetilde F}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{F}$ is a finite subset of $\mathcal{I}$. Suppose
that $\mu\in\mathcal{M}$ is either indeterminate $N$-extremal or
determinate with finite
index of determinacy. For
$\card\mathcal{F}=\card\mathcal{\widetilde F}$ to hold, it is necessary and
sufficient that either
$\ind\mu=\ind\widetilde{\mu}$ or $\mu$ and $\widetilde{\mu}$ are
simultaneously indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
($\Rightarrow$)
i) For the case when $\mu$ is indeterminate $N$-extremal, the proof is
essentially given in \cite[Thm.\,8]{MR638619}.
ii) If $0\le\ind\mu=k<+\infty$, choose a set
$\mathcal{A}\subset \mathbb{R}\setminus
(\mathcal{I}\cup\widetilde{\mathcal{F}})$ such that
$\card\mathcal{A}=k+1$ and consider the measure
$$\mu +\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{A}} a_\xi\delta_\xi\,, $$
where $ a_\xi>0$. By Proposition~\ref {prop:berg-duran-sum} (a), this
measure is indeterminate $N$-extremal. It then follows from i) that the
measure
$$\widetilde \mu +\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{A}} a_\xi\delta_\xi$$
is indeterminate $N$-extremal too. Using again
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum} (a) we get that
$\ind \widetilde \mu=k=\ind \mu$.
($\Leftarrow$)
Assume without loss of generality that $\card\mathcal{F}<\card\mathcal{\widetilde F}$
and let $\mathcal{G}\subset\mathcal{\widetilde F}$ be such that
$\card\mathcal{F}=\card\mathcal{G}$. Then
$$\widetilde \mu=\nu+\sum_{\xi\in {\mathcal{\widetilde F}\setminus
\mathcal{G}}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi\,,$$
where
$$\nu=\mu-\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{F}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi + \sum_{\xi\in
\mathcal{G}}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi\,. $$ By what was proven in i) and ii)
above, either $\ind\nu=\ind\mu$ or $\mu$ and $\nu$ are simultaneously
indeterminate $N$-extremal. By Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}
neither $\ind\widetilde \mu=\ind\mu$ nor $\mu$ and $\widetilde{\mu}$ are simultaneously
indeterminate $N$-extremal since
$\mathcal{\widetilde F}\setminus\mathcal{G}$ is not in the support of $\nu$.
\end{proof}
A consequence of the previous lemma is the following result,
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:stability-index-cardinality}
Let $\mathcal{I}\subset\mathbb{R}$ be an infinite discrete set and
$\{\beta_\xi\}_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}}$ be a sequence of positive
numbers. Assume that $\mathcal{F}_1,\mathcal{F}_2\subset\mathcal{I}$
are finite sets and
$\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_1}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi$
is $N$-extremal not having infinite index of determinacy.
\begin{equation*}
\card\mathcal{F}_1=\card\mathcal{F}_2
\end{equation*}
if and only if either
\begin{equation*}
\ind\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_1}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi=
\ind\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_2}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi
\end{equation*}
or the measures
$\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_1}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi$
and
$\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_2}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi$
are simultaneously indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_1}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi=
\sum_{\xi\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_2}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi
\ -\!\!\!\!\!\!\sum_{\xi\in(\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_2)\cap F_1}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi
\ +\!\!\!\!\!\!\sum_{\xi\in(\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_1)\cap F_2}\beta_\xi\delta_\xi
\end{equation*}
and apply lemma \ref {lem:stability-index-cardinality0}, noting that
$\card(\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_2)\cap
F_1=\card(\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}_1)\cap F_2$ if and only if
$\card F_1= \card F_2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:other-criterion}
Let $J$ be a Jacobi operator (see
Definition~\ref{def:jacobi-operator}) and $\rho$ its
spectral
measure. Assume that $\rho$ is a determinate measure and $r$ is a polynomial with
simple zeros. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:condition-other-criterion}
\ind\rho\ge\card(\{\text{zeros of
r}\}\setminus \sigma(J))-1
\end{equation}
if and only if $r(J)e_1$ is a cyclic vector for $J$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}($\Leftarrow$)
Let $u=r(J)e_1$ and assume that $u$ is a cyclic vector for $J$, i.\,e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:density-powers}
\cc{\Span_{k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}}\{J^ku\}}=\l_2(\mathbb{N})\,.
\end{equation}
Since $u$ is a cyclic vector, it follows from \cite[Sec. 69,
Thm. 2]{MR1255973} that there is a unitary map
$\Phi:L_2(\mathbb{R},\mu)\to l_2(\mathbb{N})$, where
$\mu(\Delta):=\inner{u}{E(\Delta)u}$ for any Borel set $\Delta$ of
$\mathbb{R}$ (see Section~\ref{sec:jacobi_operators}), such that
$\Phi J\Phi^{-1}$ is the operator of multiplication by the
independent variable. Thus, \eqref{eq:density-powers} is equivalent
to
\begin{equation*}
\cc{\Span_{k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}}\{t^k\}}=L_2(\mathbb{R},\mu)\,.
\end{equation*}
For finishing this part of the proof, it only remains to note that
\begin{equation*}
\mu=\abs{r}^2\rho
\end{equation*}
and recur to Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran} recalling that
$N$-extremality is equivalent to density of polynomials (see
Introduction) and that $\sigma(J)=\supp\rho$.
($\Rightarrow$) First note that $r(J)e_1$ is in
$\dom(J^k)$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$ since $r(J)e_1$ is a finite
vector, that is, the corresponding sequence has a finite number of
elements different from zero. By Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran},
\eqref{eq:condition-other-criterion} implies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:density-r-squared}
\cc{\Span_{k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}}\{t^k\}}=L_2(\mathbb{R},\abs{r}^2\rho)
\end{equation}
and let $w\in l_2(\mathbb{N})$ be such that
\begin{equation*}
\inner{J^kr(J)e_1}{w}=0\quad\text{ for all }k=0,1,2,\dots
\end{equation*}
This means that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cyclic-cdense-aux}
\int_\mathbb{R} h(t)t^k\cc{r(t)}d\rho=0\quad\text{ for all }k=0,1,2,\dots,
\end{equation}
where $w=\Phi h$ (see Section~\ref{sec:jacobi_operators}). If one
writes $h=\widetilde{h}r$, then
$\widetilde{h}\in L_2(\mathbb{R},\abs{r}^2\rho)$ since
\begin{equation*}
+\infty> \int_\mathbb{R} \abs{h}^2d\rho=
\int_\mathbb{R} \abs{\widetilde{h}}^2\abs{r}^2d\rho\,.
\end{equation*}
Hence, taking into account (\ref{eq:cyclic-cdense-aux}), one has, for
any $k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$,
\begin{equation*}
0=\int_\mathbb{R} h(t)t^k\cc{r(t)}d\rho=\int_\mathbb{R}
\widetilde{h}(t)t^k\abs{r(t)}^2d\rho
=\inner{t^k}{\widetilde{h}}_{L_2(\mathbb{R},\abs {r}^2\rho)}\,.
\end{equation*}
Due to (\ref{eq:density-r-squared}), this implies that
$\widetilde{h}=0$, viz.,
\begin{equation*}
0=\norm{\widetilde{h}}_{L_2(\mathbb{R},\abs{r}^2\rho)}^2=
\int_\mathbb{R} \abs{\widetilde{h}}^2\abs{r}^2d\rho=\int_\mathbb{R} \abs{h}^2d\rho\,.
\end{equation*}
Whence $\norm{h}_{L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)}=0$. Thus, the vector $w$ must
vanish which means that $r(J)e_1$ is a cyclic vector.
\end{proof}
In fact, as shown below, $\ind\rho$ is the only natural number
satisfying the assertion of Theorem~\ref{thm:other-criterion}.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:other-criterion}
Let $J$ and $\rho$ and $r$ be as in
Theorem~\ref{thm:other-criterion}. If
$k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$ is such that $r(J)e_1$ is a cyclic
vector for $J$ whenever
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cyclic-one-option}
\card(\{\text{zeros of $r$}\}\setminus \sigma(J))\le k+1
\end{equation}
and it is not a cyclic vector for $J$ whenever
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cyclic-two-option}
\card(\{\text{zeros of $r$}\}\setminus \sigma(J))> k+1\,,
\end{equation}
then $k=\ind\rho$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\ind\rho<k$. Choose a polynomial $r$ such that
$k=\card(\{\text{zeros of $r$}\}\setminus \sigma(J))-1$. It follows
from \eqref{eq:cyclic-one-option} that $r(J)e_1$ is a cyclic
vector. But $\ind\rho<\card(\{\text{zeros of $r$}\}\setminus
\sigma(J))-1$ implies that $r(J)e_1$ is not cyclic by
Theorem~\ref{thm:other-criterion}. So, assuming $\ind\rho<k$ leads to
a contradiction. Therefore $\ind\rho\ge k$. Let $\ind\rho > k$.
If $r$ is such that $\ind\rho=\card(\{\text{zeros of $r$}\}\setminus \sigma(J))-1$,
then Theorem~\ref{thm:other-criterion} implies that $r(J)e_1$
is cyclic vector. But in this case $k<\card(\{\text{zeros of
$r$}\}\setminus \sigma(J))-1$ and \eqref{eq:cyclic-two-option}
implies that $r(J)e_1$ is a not cyclic vector. We get again a
contradiction. Therefore $k=\ind\rho$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Stability of the index of determinacy}
Let us study the stability of the index of determinacy and the
$N$-extremality for measures. First we deal with the case when the
support of the measure does not change.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:changing-weights}
Changing the weights of a measure can change its index of
determinacy.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following criterion for a measure to be determinate
\cite[Thm.\,5.2,\,pag.\,84]{MR0481888}: If there is $\epsilon >0$
such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:criteria-determinacy}
\int_\mathbb{R} e^{\epsilon\abs{t}}d\mu<\infty\,,
\end{equation}
then $\mu$ is determinate. Thus, an indeterminate, $N$-extremal measure $\nu$,
can be transformed into $\mu$ by changing the weights so that
\eqref{eq:criteria-determinacy} holds. Now consider a measure
$\sigma$ of index $n$ obtained from $\nu$ by removing the mass at
$n+1$ points. The measure $\widetilde{\sigma}$ obtained by removing
from $\mu$ the mass at the same $n+1$ points has index of
determinacy greater than $n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:finite-change-weights}
By changing a finite number of weights the index of determinacy is
preserved.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
From Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(a), a measure has an infinite
index of determinacy if and only if, after adding any finite number
of mass points, it remains determinate. Thus, changing a finite
number of weights do not alter the infinite index of
determinacy. Suppose that $\ind\mu<\infty$, then, by
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(a) (see also
\cite[Pag.\,129]{MR1375156}), $\mu$ is obtained by removing from an
indeterminate $N$-extremal measure $\mu_0$ the mass at a finite set
of points. According to \cite[Thm.\,5(b)]{MR1343638} the measure
$\widetilde{\mu}_0$ obtained by modifying the weight of $\mu_0$ at
one mass point is indeterminate $N$-extremal. Adding to
$\widetilde{\mu}_0$ the same masses at the same points that were
substracted from $\mu_0$ to obtain $\mu$ yields a measure $\eta$ with the
same index of determinacy as $\mu$. Note that $\eta$ is equal to
$\mu$ with one weight modified.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:main-minimal-equal-indices}
Let $J$ and $\widehat{J}$ be Jacobi operators as given in
Definition~\ref{def:jacobi-operator} with spectral measures $\rho$
and $\widehat{\rho}$, respectively. Suppose that, for some
$n\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:equal-number-of-ceros-in-supp}
\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\cap\sigma(J))=
\card(\sigma(\widehat{J}_n^-)\cap\sigma(\widehat{J}))\,,
\end{equation}
where $J_n^-$ and $\widehat{J}_n^-$ are given in Definition~\ref{def:submatrices}.
Consider the measure $\rho_n$ given in \eqref{eq:def-rho-n} and the
corresponding measure $\widehat{\rho}_n$ for $\widehat{J}$.
If $\ind\rho_n=\ind\widehat{\rho}_n$ or $\rho_n$ and
$\widehat{\rho}_n$ are simultaneously indeterminate $N$-extremal, then
$\ind\rho=\ind\widehat{\rho}$. Conversely, if
\begin{equation*}
\ind\rho=\ind\widehat{\rho}\ge n-(\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\cap\sigma(J))+1)\,,
\end{equation*}
then, $\ind\rho_n=\ind\widehat{\rho}_n$ or $\rho_n$ and
$\widehat{\rho}_n$ are simultaneously indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Due to the fact that $\sigma(J_n^-)$ is simple,
\eqref{eq:equal-number-of-ceros-in-supp} and
Remark~\ref{rem:zeros-poly} imply that the number of zeros of
$\pi_n$ that are not in the $\supp\rho$ is equal to the number of
zeros of $\widehat{\pi}_n$ that are not in the
$\supp\widehat{\rho}$. The assertion then follows from Proposition
\ref{prop:berg-duran}
\end{proof}
The following statement gives a criterion for two measures with the same support and
different weights to have the same index of determinacy.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:isospectral-matrices-equal-indices}
Let $J$, $\widehat{J}$, $\rho$, $\widehat{\rho}$, $\rho_n$, and
$\widehat{\rho}_n$ be as in the previous theorem.
Assume that $J$ and $\widehat{J}$ are isospectral Jacobi operators. If, for
some $n\in\mathbb{N}$, $\rho_n=\widehat{\rho}_n$ and $\rho_n$ is
$N$-extremal, then $\ind\rho=\ind\widehat{\rho}$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
For any Borel set $\Delta$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:equal-measures}
\int_\Delta\pi_n^2(t)d\rho(t)=\rho_n(\Delta)=\widehat{\rho}_n(\Delta)=
\int_\Delta\widehat{\pi}_n^2(t)d\widehat{\rho}(t)\,.
\end{equation}
This implies that the zeros of $\pi_n$ that are in the $\supp\rho$
coincide with the zeros of $\widehat{\pi}_n$ that are in the
$\supp\widehat{\rho}$. Therefore
\eqref{eq:equal-number-of-ceros-in-supp} holds. It remains to apply
Theorem~\ref{thm:main-minimal-equal-indices}.
\end{proof}
If $\rho\in\mathcal{M}$ is determinate, then $\rho$ is the spectral
measure of a Jacobi operator $J$ in the sense of
\eqref{eq:spectral-function-def}. In this case, $J$ is the unique
self-adjoint extension of $J_0$ (see Definition~\ref{def:j-nought}), i.\,e., $J_0$ is essentially
self-adjoint \cite[Thm.\,2.2]{MR0184042}, \cite[Thm.\,2]{MR1627806}.
The following assertion appears in \cite[Thm.\,1]{MR1353377}. We
reproduce it here with a brief proof for the reader's convenience.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:berg-duran-operator-powers}
Let $\rho$ be a determinate measure. For the measure $\rho$ to have
index of determinacy $k$, it is necessary and sufficient that
$J_0^l$ is essentially self-adjoint for $l=1,\dots,k+1$ and
$J_0^{k+2}$ is not essentially self-adjoint. The measure $\rho$ has infinite index
of determinacy if and only if $J_0^l$ is essentially self-adjoint
for all $l\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathbb{P}$ be the set of all polynomials, i.\,e.,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}=\left\{\sum_{k=0}^Na_kt^k:\ N\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\},
\ t\in\mathbb{R},\ a_k\in\mathbb{C}\right\}\,.
\end{equation*}
The unitary map
$\Phi$ introduced in Section~\ref{sec:jacobi_operators} satisfies
\eqref{eq:unitary-map} and therefore
\begin{equation*}
\Phi\mathbb{P}=\dom(J_0)\,.
\end{equation*}
$J_0^l$ is essentially self-adjoint if and only if
$\cc{\ran(J_0^l\pm iI)}=l_2(\mathbb{N})$ \cite[Cor. to Thm
VIII.3]{MR751959}. This implies, by means of the unitary map $\Phi$,
that this happens if and only if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:density-aux}
\cc{(t^l\pm
i)\mathbb{P}}=L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)\,.
\end{equation}
By \cite[Lemma]{MR1353377}, \eqref{eq:density-aux} is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:density-aux-2}
\cc{\mathbb{P}}=L_2(\mathbb{R},(1+t^{2l})\rho)\,.
\end{equation}
It follows from
\begin{equation*}
1\le\frac{(1+x^2)^l}{1+x^{2l}}\le 2^{l-1}
\end{equation*}
that the polynomials are dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},(1+t^{2l})\rho)$ if and
only if they are dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},(1+t^{2})^l\rho)$. Thus, by
Definition~\ref{def:index}, $\ind\rho=k$ if and only if
\eqref{eq:density-aux-2} is satisfied for $l=1,\dots,k+1$ but does not
hold for $l=k+2$.
\end{proof}
As a consequence of the previous proposition, one has the following
assertion.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:rho-sigma-n}
Let $J$ be a Jacobi operator and $\rho$ its spectral measure. If
$\rho$ is determinate, then the index of determinacy of $\rho$
coincides with the index of determinacy of $\sigma_n$, as defined in
(\ref {eq:def-sigma-n}), for any $n\in\mathbb{N}$. The measure $\rho$ is
indeterminate $N$-extremal if and only if $\sigma_n$ is
indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Define $B:=\mathbb{O}\oplus J_n^+\eval{\dom(J_0)}$, where
$\mathbb{O}$ is the null operator in $\Span\{e_k\}_{k=1}^n$ and
$\oplus$ indicates that we are considering the orthogonal sum of
operators (see \cite[Sec.\,3.6]{MR1192782}). Note that the domain
of $J_0^l$ and $B^l$ is the same for all $l\in\mathbb{N}$. Since the
matrix corresponding to the operator $J_0$ is tridiagonal, there
exists a finite rank operator $C$ such that $B^l+C=J_0^l$ for any
$l\in\mathbb{N}$. Note that the rank of $C$ depends on $l$ and $n$. By
the Kato-Rellich theorem (see \cite[Chap.\,5, Sec.\,4,
Thm.\,4.4]{MR0407617}) $B^l$ is essentially self-adjoint if and only
if $J_0^l$ is essentially self-adjoint. Now, since
$B^l=\mathbb{O}^l\oplus (J_n^+\eval{\dom(J_0)})^l$, $B^l$ is
essentially self-adjoint if and only if $(J_n^+\eval{\dom(J_0))^l}$
is essentially self-adjoint and the result follows from Proposition
\ref {prop:berg-duran-operator-powers}.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:finite-rank-pert-index-determinacy}
Let $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$ be Jacobi operators as defined in
Section~\ref{sec:jacobi_operators} such that $\widetilde{J}= J+C$,
where $\rank(C)<\infty$, and denote by $\rho$ and $\widetilde{\rho}$
the corresponding spectral measures. If $\rho$ is determinate, then
$\widetilde{\rho}$ is determinate and
$\ind\rho=\ind\widetilde{\rho}$. If $\rho$ is indeterminate
$N$-extremal, then $\widetilde{\rho}$ is indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $\rank(C)<\infty$, there is $n\in\mathbb{N}$ such that
$J_n^+=\widetilde{J}_n^+$. Therefore, taking into account that,
according to \cite[Addenda and Problems to Chap.\,1]{MR0184042}, the
matrix representations of $J$ and $J_n^+$ are simultaneously either
limit circle case or limit point case, one concludes that $\rho$ and
$\widetilde{\rho}$ are simultaneously either determinate or
indeterminate $N$-extremal. If $\rho$ is determinate, then the
assertion follows from Corollary~\ref{cor:rho-sigma-n}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:example}
In the previous proof, one could have used \cite[Chap.\,5, Sec.\,4,
Thms.\,4.3 and 4.4]{MR0407617} (Kato-Rellich theorem) to show that
$J_0$ and $\widetilde{J}_0$ are simultaneously either essentially
self-adjoint or not.
\end{remark}
The next assertion uses the measures introduced in (\ref
{eq:def-sigma-n}), (\ref{eq:def-mu-n}) and (\ref{eq:def-rho-n}).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:oaxaca}
For the measure $\rho_n$ to be determinate with index of determinacy
$k$ (indeterminate
$N$-extremal) it is necessary and sufficient that $\sigma_n+\mu_n$ is
determinate with index of determinacy $k$ (indeterminate $N$-extremal).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Due to Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran}, the $\ind\rho_n=k$ if and
only if $$\ind\rho=k+\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\setminus\sigma(J))\,.$$
This is so, because the set of zeros of $\pi_n$ is the spectrum of
$J_n^-$ (see Remark~\ref{rem:zeros-poly}). Since, according to
Corollary~\ref{cor:rho-sigma-n}, $\ind\rho=\ind\sigma_n$ one has,
using Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum},
\begin{equation*}
\ind(\sigma_n +\mu_n)=k+\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\setminus\sigma(J))-
\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\setminus\sigma(J_n^+))\,.
\end{equation*}
In view of Remark~\ref{rem:intersections-spectra} and
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(b), the last expression yields that
$\ind(\sigma_n +\mu_n)=k$ if and only if $\ind\rho_n=k$.
By Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran}(a), the measure $\rho_n$ is
indeterminate $N$-extremal if and only if
\begin{equation*}
\ind\rho=\card\{\text{zeros of $\pi_n$ outside }\supp\rho\}-1\,.
\end{equation*}
Using Remark~\ref{rem:zeros-poly} and Corollary~\ref{cor:rho-sigma-n},
one concludes that the last expression is equivalent to
\begin{equation*}
\ind\sigma_n= \card(\sigma(J_n^-)\setminus\sigma(J))-1=
\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\setminus\sigma(J_n^+))-1\,.
\end{equation*}
This happens if and only if that $\sigma_n+\mu_n$ is indeterminate $N$-extremal by
Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(a).
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:last-one}
Let $\rho$ be the spectral measure of some Jacobi operator $J$ as in
\eqref{eq:spectral-function-def}. Define the measure $\beta$ by
\eqref{eq:beta} with
\begin{equation*}
\card(\mathcal{F}\setminus\supp\rho)=\card(\sigma(J_n^-)\setminus\sigma(J))\,.
\end{equation*}
The measure $\rho_n$ has index of determinacy $k$ (is indeterminate
$N$-extremal) if and only if $\rho+\beta$ has index of determinacy $k$ (is indeterminate
$N$-extremal).
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The assertion follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:oaxaca}, taking into
account Corollary~\ref{cor:rho-sigma-n} and using the same reasoning
as in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:berg-duran-sum}(b).
\end{proof}
\section{Inverse spectral problems}
\label{subsec:sol-inv-problem}
Let $J$ be the Jacobi operator associated with the matrix
\eqref{eq:jm-0} as in Section~\ref{sec:jacobi_operators}. Fix
$n\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\}$ and consider, along with the self-adjoint operator $J$,
the operator
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def-tilde-j}
\begin{split}
\widetilde{J}(n)=J &+
[q_n(\theta^2-1)+\theta^2h]\inner{e_n}{\cdot}e_n \\
&+ b_n(\theta-1)(\inner{e_n}{\cdot}e_{n+1} +
\inner{e_{n+1}}{\cdot}e_n) \\
&+ b_{n-1}(\theta-1)(\inner{e_{n-1}}{\cdot}e_{n} +
\inner{e_{n}}{\cdot}e_{n-1})
\,,\quad \theta>0\,,
\quad h\in\mathbb{R}\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where it has been assumed that $b_0=0$. Clearly, $\widetilde{J}(n)$ is a
self-adjoint extension of the operator whose matrix representation
with respect to the canonical basis in $l_2(\mathbb{N})$ is a Jacobi
matrix obtained from (\ref{eq:jm-0}) by modifying the entries
$b_{n-1},q_n,b_n$. For instance, if $n>2$, $\widetilde{J}(n)$ is a
self-adjoint extension (possibly not proper) of the operator whose
matrix representation is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:jm-1}
\begin{pmatrix}
q_1 & b_1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots \\[1mm]
b_1 & \ddots & \ddots & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots \\[1mm]
0 & \ddots & q_{n-1} & \theta b_{n-1} & 0 & 0 & \cdots\\
0 & 0 & \theta b_{n-1} & \theta^2(q_n+h) & \theta b_n & 0 & \cdots\\
0 & 0 & 0 & \theta b_{n} & q_{n+1} & b_{n+1} & \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & b_{n+1} & q_{n+2} & \ddots\\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & & \ddots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that $\widetilde{J}(n)$ is obtained from $J$ by a rank-three
perturbation when $n>1$, and a rank-two perturbation otherwise.
Define
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gamma-hold}
\gamma:=\frac{\theta^2h}{1-\theta^2}\,.
\end{equation}
Consider the following inverse problem:
Given two sequences $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ without finite points of
accumulation, $n\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{1\}$ and $\gamma\in\mathbb{R}\setminus S$, find a
Jacobi operator $J$ and parameters $\theta$ and $h$ such that
$\sigma(J)=S$ and $\sigma(\widetilde{J}(n))=\widetilde{S}$ and
\eqref{eq:gamma-hold} holds. We denote
this inverse spectral problem by $(S,\widetilde{S},n,\gamma)$. The
operator $J$ is called a solution of the inverse problem $(S,\widetilde{S},n,\gamma)$.
When $n>1$, it was shown in \cite[Thms.\,5.6]{MR3634444} that
if there is a solution, then there is an infinite set of
solutions. Necessary and sufficient conditions on $S$ and
$\widetilde{S}$ for the existence of solutions of the inverse problem
are given in \cite[Thms.\,5.9]{MR3634444}.
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:same-green}
All solutions of this inverse spectral problem have the same
Green function at $n$ \cite[Prop.\,5.3]{MR3634444} given by
\begin{equation*}
G(z,n)=\frac{\mathfrak{M}_n(z)-\theta^2}{(1-\theta^2)(\gamma-z)}
\end{equation*}
(see \cite[Eq.\,4.2]{MR3634444}), where the function
$\mathfrak{M}_n$ is univocally determined by the sequences $S$ and
$\widetilde{S}$ \cite[Prop.\,4.13]{MR3634444}. Moreover,
$\gamma$ and $\mathfrak{M}_n$ uniquely determine $\theta$ (see proof
of \cite[Prop.\,5.4]{MR3634444}).
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:stability-determ-index-weights}
Let $J$ and $\widehat{J}$ be Jacobi operators which solve the
inverse problem $(S,\widetilde{S},n,\gamma)$ and $\rho$ and $\widehat{\rho}$ be the
corresponding spectral measures. Then, either
\begin{equation*}
\ind\rho=\ind\widehat{\rho}
\end{equation*}
or $\rho$ and $\widehat{\rho}$ are simultaneously indeterminate $N$-extremal.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Due to Remark~\ref{rem:same-green}, $J$ and $\widehat{J}$ have the
same function $G(z,n)$. According to
\cite[Prop.\,3.5]{MR3634444}, one writes
\begin{equation*}
-G(z,n)^{-1}=z-q_n+\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\frac{\eta_\alpha}{\alpha-z}\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{I}$ is a discrete subset of $\mathbb{R}$. By
Proposition~\ref{prop:Gkk-formula}
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\frac{\eta_\alpha}{\alpha-z}=
\begin{cases}
b_n^2m_n^+(z)+b_{n-1}^2m_n^-(z)& \\
b_n^2\widehat{m}_n^+(z)+b_{n-1}^2\widehat{m}_n^-(z)\,,&
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where $m_n^\pm$ are given in Definition~\ref{def:submatrices} and
$\widehat{m}_n^\pm$ are the corresponding functions for
$\widehat{J}$. Thus, using the notation introduced in
\eqref{eq:def-sigma-n}, one has
\begin{equation*}
b_n^2\sigma_n=\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}}\eta_\alpha\delta_\alpha\qquad
b_n^2\widehat{\sigma}_n=\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\widehat{\mathcal{F}}}\eta_\alpha\delta_\alpha
\end{equation*}
where $\widehat{\sigma}_n$ is defined as $\sigma_n$ for the function
$\widehat{m}^+_n$ and $\card\mathcal{F}=\card\widehat{\mathcal{F}}=n$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-index-cardinality}, either
\begin{equation*}
\ind\sigma_n=\ind\widehat{\sigma}_n
\end{equation*}
or $\sigma_n$ and $\widehat{\sigma}_n$ are simultaneously
indeterminate $N$-extremal. Thus, Corollary~\ref{cor:rho-sigma-n}
completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:place-of-perturbation}
Let $J$ and $J'$ be solutions of the inverse problems $(S,\widetilde{S},n,\gamma)$ and
$(S,\widetilde{S},n',\gamma)$ respectively. Denote by $\rho$ and
$\rho'$ the spectral measures corresponding to $J$ and $J'$ and
assume that $\ind\rho<+\infty$. Either
\begin{equation*}
\ind\rho=\ind\rho'
\end{equation*}
or $\rho$ and
$\rho'$ are simultaneously indeterminate $N$-extremal if and only if
\begin{equation*}
n=n'\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
($\Leftarrow$) This is
Theorem~\ref{thm:stability-determ-index-weights}.
($\Rightarrow$) Since $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ univocally determine
$\mathfrak{M}_n$ (see Remark~\ref{rem:same-green}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{M}_n(z)=\mathfrak{M}_{n'}(z)\qquad\text{ for all }
z\in\mathbb{C}\setminus(S\setminus\widetilde{S})\,.
\end{equation*}
Again, Remark~\ref{rem:same-green} yields
\begin{equation*}
G(z,n)=G'(z,n')\,,
\end{equation*}
where $G'(z,n')$ is the $n'$-th Green function of $J'$. Repeating the
argumentation of the previous theorem's proof, one arrives at
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sigma-sigma-prime}
b_n^2\sigma_n=\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}}\eta_\alpha\delta_\alpha\qquad
(b'_{n'})^2\sigma'_{n'}=\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}\setminus\mathcal{F}'}\eta_\alpha\delta_\alpha\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:f-f-prime}
n=\card\mathcal{F}\quad\text{ and }\quad n'=\card\mathcal{F}'
\end{equation}
The hypothesis and Corollary~\ref{cor:rho-sigma-n} imply that either
\begin{equation*}
\ind\sigma_n=\ind\sigma'_{n'}
\end{equation*}
or $\sigma_n$ and $\sigma'_{n'}$ are simultaneously indeterminate
$N$-extremal. To conclude the proof, one applies
Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-index-cardinality} to
\eqref{eq:sigma-sigma-prime} and \eqref{eq:f-f-prime}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:infinite-finite-index}
Under the assumption that $S,\widetilde{S},\gamma$ are fixed, if
$\rho$ in the previous theorem is such that $\ind\rho<+\infty$, then
the place of the perturbation $n$ is determined uniquely by
$\ind\rho$. If $\ind\rho=\infty$, then there are several possible
values of $n$. This happens, in particular, to the inverse problem
for finite Jacobi matrices.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:other-case-gamma}
The inverse spectral problem for which $\gamma\in S$ is treated
analogously.
\end{remark}
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We thank C. Berg, A. Dur\'an, and F. Marcell\'an for valuable remarks.
\def$'${$'$} \def\lfhook#1{\setbox0=\hbox{#1}{\ooalign{\hidewidth
\lower1.5ex\hbox{'}\hidewidth\crcr\unhbox0}}} \def$'${$'$}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 8,805 |
Батальйон зв'язку — основний тактичний підрозділ, тактична і адміністративно-господарська одиниця військ зв'язку.
Призначення, склад
Батальйон зв'язку призначений для забезпечення військового зв'язку, передачі й прийому (обміну) інформації (повідомлень, сигналів) в системах управління військами (силами) і зброєю за допомогою різних засобів і способів. Батальйон зв'язку має у своєму розпорядженні низку засобів військового зв'язку, а також за допомогою доставки командувачам, командирам та штабам оперативних документів та інших службових відправлень за допомогою фельд'єгерів і рухомих засобів зв'язку: автомобілів, БТР, мотоциклів тощо.
Організаційно батальйон зв'язку може входить до складу полку зв'язку або, як окрема частина, загальновійськового з'єднання (бригади, дивізії), об'єднання (Корпус (військова справа), армія), а також з'єднань і об'єднань видів збройних сил чи родів військ.
Основні завдання
Основними завданнями батальйону зв'язку є своєчасна передача даних про противника і команд на приведення військових формувань у вищі ступені бойової готовності, забезпечення своєчасного, точного і прихованого доведення наказів, вказівок, розпоряджень командувачів (командирів) до підлеглих військ (сил) та отримання донесень про хід бойових дій, забезпечення обміну інформацією між взаємодіючими військами видів збройних сил і родів військ, передача інформації з управління військовим тилом, передача даних метеообстановки і сигналів єдиного часу. Основним завданням підрозділів батальйону зв'язку в бою і операції є забезпечення керівному складу з'єднань, об'єднань і штабам усіх ступенів безперервного управління підлеглими військами (силами) в будь-яких умовах обстановки.
Типи батальйонів зв'язку
У залежності за завданнями та способом забезпечення військового зв'язку батальйони у військах зв'язку розрізняються за складом, оснащенням та озброєнням.
окремий батальйон зв'язку (обз) — окремий підрозділ у структурі дивізії/корпусу або структурний підрозділ (батальйон зв'язку) в окремому полку/бригаді зв'язку, що виконує завдання забезпечення зв'язку у військах. Організаційно такий батальйон зв'язку може складатися з двох-трьох рот зв'язку та господарської частини. Господарська частина складається з окремих взводів з ремонту та технічного обслуговування засобів зв'язку, з автотранспортного забезпечення, з господарського забезпечення, з обслуговування і ремонту акумуляторів для переносної радіоапаратури. Роти зв'язку займаються безпосередньо забезпеченням усіх видів зв'язку штабу з'єднання з підрозділами та військовими частинами та в пункті постійної дислокації і в польових умовах. На озброєнні обз має мобільні вузли УКХ і КХ-радіозв'язку на базі вантажних автомобілів і бронетехніки, а також комплексні апаратури для організації дротового телефонного зв'язку в польових умовах. Особовий склад обз — 200–250 чоловік.
окремий батальйон тропосферного зв'язку (обтз) або батальйон радіорелейного зв'язку (обрз); обтз/обрз організовують зв'язок з віддаленими об'єктами шляхом установки ланцюжка приймально-передавальних станцій (ретрансляторів) — радіорелейний зв'язок.
окремий батальйон лінійного зв'язку (облз) або окремий лінійно-станційний батальйон (олсб); облз/олсб організовує зв'язок з місцевої телефонної мережі з передачею даних по радіорелейному зв'язку.
окремий батальйон радіоелектронної боротьби (об РЕБ); об РЕБ займається радіоелектронним придушенням засобів зв'язку противника і радіоелектронним захистом своїх радіоелектронних об'єктів.
Див. також
Війська зв'язку
Війська зв'язку України
Розвідувальний батальйон
Апаратна зв'язку
Гірсько-піхотний батальйон
Інженерний батальйон
Зенітний дивізіон
Джерела
Батальйони
Військова організація
Війська зв'язку
Управління військами | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 9,198 |
Q: Import CAD object in Python and store as array I am using Autodesk Fusion 360 to model a 3D part (see figure below), which I can then export and save as either a .step, .iges, .sat or .smt file.
What I am trying to achieve is to convert this part into a 3D numpy array in Python. Every element of the array will be 0 or 1 to indicate if there is solid material in that position or no material at all (air).
For example, if my object has the dimensions of the figure, each element of an array of size 100x100x50 would represent a volume of 1 mm3 of the object. All the light blue little cubes will have a value of 1 to show that there is solid material at this position, while the red cube will have a value of 0 to indicate that this space does not consist of solid material.
Could this be done using FreeCAD APIs? Or is there any other way to import the .step/.iges/.sat/.smt file in Python and convert/parse it to create the required array?
A: I have finally found a way that works for me and might actually explain better what I have been trying to achieve.
Apparently, FreeCAD has an option where after you have activated the "Points" workbench, you can choose to convert your object into a "point cloud". Each point does not have any mass and the entire new point cloud structure can be exported into a space-separated '.asc' file.
After that, it is trivial to import this into Python numpy arrays. I have personally used a voxel-based representation to visualise the imported object in Python, which can be done using the latest matplotlib or mayavi (these are the two I have tried at least).
A: Split Part into little parts is possible, following example in
/Mod/Part/BOPTools/SplitFeatures.py. But it is not ready to use for your needs, and requires time to adopt. But definitely it is possible to split the part into many parts of any shape you like:
https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Part_Slice
Then you may use this code to build a numpy array:
import FreeCAD
import Part
import numpy as np
# Creating sample parts
solid_ = Part.makeBox(10, 10, 10)
shell_ = Part.makeShell(solid_.Shells)
part_compound = [solid_, shell_]
# Generate numpy array
result = []
for part in part_compound:
result = [*result, [part.CenterOfMass.x,
part.CenterOfMass.y,
part.CenterOfMass.z,
isinstance(part, Part.Solid)]]
print(np.array(result))
This will result an array, where each part's center of mass will be denoted, by its x,y,z and fourth element will be 1 if those part is solid, 0 otherwise.
Code is compatible with Python 3.6 only, so use a docker image:
https://github.com/ZhukovGreen/docker-freecad-cli
A: you can check if a point lies inside of solid with:
solid_shape.isInside(point:App.Vector, tolerance:float, on_boundary_is_inside:bool)
example:
import numpy as np
import FreeCAD as App
import Part
num_pts = 50
shape = Part.makeSphere(1) # radius
bb = shape.BoundBox
x = np.linspace(bb.XMin, bb.XMax, num_pts)
y = np.linspace(bb.YMin, bb.YMax, num_pts)
z = np.linspace(bb.ZMin, bb.ZMax, num_pts)
mesh_x = np.array([[x] * num_pts] * num_pts).transpose(0, 1, 2)
mesh_y = np.array([[y] * num_pts] * num_pts).transpose(2, 0, 1)
mesh_z = np.array([[z] * num_pts] * num_pts).transpose(1, 2, 0)
mesh = np.array([mesh_x.flatten(), mesh_y.flatten(), mesh_z.flatten()]).T
bool_array = np.array([shape.isInside(App.Vector(p), 0.000001, False) for p in mesh])
v_r = float(sum(bool_array)) / float(len(bool_array))
v_r # estimation of Volumeratio
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 8,417 |
Once you start using essential oils, it's hard to image a life without them. And why should you! But since you can't take your entire arsenal with you on vacation, you need to pick and choose what will be most useful for you. Here's a look at what's in my travel kit.
Thieves Spray:Thieves® Spray is ideal for use on door handles, toilet seats, and any surface that needs cleansing to protect from dust and undesirable microorganisms. This small bottle is perfect for traveling or keeping in your purse or backpack.
Deep Relief: Deep Relief essential oil roll-on is a Young Living-exclusive blend of pure essential oils formulated to use for massage after activity. Peppermint, Wintergreen, Copaiba, Helichrysum, Dorado Azul, Lemon, Clove, and Vetiver oil each play an integral role in this blend. Deep Relief Roll-On has an invigorating and energizing scent, and offers a convenient method of application for forehead, temples, and neck anytime, anywhere it's needed.
En-R-Gee: En-R-Gee™ revitalizes with a blend of stimulating oils that have been used traditionally to help restore mental alertness. Uplifting and strengthening as the name suggests, it boosts energy. Rosemary, juniper, lemongrass, nutmeg, Idaho balsam fir, Clove, and black pepper.
Thieves Lozenges: Thieves® Hard Lozenges will refresh your mouth and breath and provide soothing relief for your throat. Lightly sweetened with the low-glycemic sugar maltitol, these lozenges deliver the power of Thieves®, the university-tested essential oil blend, along with the flavor of natural Peppermint and Lemon essential oil.
DiGize:This unique blend contains Ginger, Anise, Fennel, Peppermint, Tarragon, Patchouli, lemongrass, and Juniper essential oils, and includes naturally occurring constituents like menthol, citrol, and zingiberen. Use DiGize with every meal, along with Essentialzymes-4™, to support a daily wellness regimen*. When traveling abroad, use DiGize as a dietary supplement in your water.
LipBalm: A light and refreshing addition to daily lip care, Young Living Lip balms assist in the prevention of dryness. These hydrating lip balms seal in moisture for smooth, soft lips.
RutaVaLa: Young Living's RutaVaLa Roll-On (patents pending) is a proprietary blend of Ruta graveolens (rue), lavender, and valerian essential oils that promotes relaxation of the body and mind, soothes stressed nerves, and promotes restful sleep.
Thieves hand purifier:Thieves® Waterless Hand Purifier is an all-natural hand purifier designed to cleanse and refresh the hands. Thieves Waterless Hand Purifier can be used by adults and children to keep hands clean and promote good hygiene, without the use of water. Dermatologist tested. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 7,443 |
{"url":"https:\/\/braindump.jethro.dev\/posts\/mahler_dex_net_2017\/","text":"mahler_dex-net_2017: Dex-Net 2.0: Deep Learning to Plan Robust Grasps with Synthetic Point Clouds and Analytic Grasp Metrics\n\nDex-Net 2.0: Deep Learning to Plan Robust Grasps with Synthetic Point Clouds and Analytic Grasp Metrics\n\nWe learn a function that takes as input a candidate grasp and a depth image and outputs an estimate of robustness\n\nDexNet is a function $$f(\\text{candidate grasp}, \\text{depth image}) = P(\\text{success})$$.","date":"2021-02-27 21:56:14","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.9134198427200317, \"perplexity\": 3514.367803756195}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": false, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.3, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2021-10\/segments\/1614178359497.20\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20210227204637-20210227234637-00619.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
{"url":"https:\/\/www.jobilize.com\/precalculus\/section\/writing-the-point-slope-form-of-a-linear-equation-by-openstax?qcr=www.quizover.com","text":"# 2.1 Linear functions \u00a0(Page 4\/17)\n\n Page 4 \/ 17\n\nAre the units for slope always ?\n\nYes. Think of the units as the change of output value for each unit of change in input value. An example of slope could be miles per hour or dollars per day. Notice the units appear as a ratio of units for the output per units for the input.\n\n## Calculate slope\n\nThe slope, or rate of change, of a function $m$ can be calculated according to the following:\n\nwhere ${x}_{1}$ and ${x}_{2}$ are input values, ${y}_{1}$ and ${y}_{2}$ are output values.\n\nGiven two points from a linear function, calculate and interpret the slope.\n\n1. Determine the units for output and input values.\n2. Calculate the change of output values and change of input values.\n3. Interpret the slope as the change in output values per unit of the input value.\n\n## Finding the slope of a linear function\n\nIf $f\\left(x\\right)$ is a linear function, and $\\left(3,-2\\right)$ and $\\left(8,1\\right)$ are points on the line, find the slope. Is this function increasing or decreasing?\n\nThe coordinate pairs are $\\left(3,-2\\right)$ and $\\left(8,1\\right).$ To find the rate of change, we divide the change in output by the change in input.\n\nWe could also write the slope as $m=0.6.$ The function is increasing because $m>0.$\n\nIf $f\\left(x\\right)$ is a linear function, and and are points on the line, find the slope. Is this function increasing or decreasing?\n\n$m=\\frac{4-3}{0-2}=\\frac{1}{-2}=-\\frac{1}{2}$ ; decreasing because $m<0.$\n\n## Finding the population change from a linear function\n\nThe population of a city increased from 23,400 to 27,800 between 2008 and 2012. Find the change of population per year if we assume the change was constant from 2008 to 2012.\n\nThe rate of change relates the change in population to the change in time. The population increased by $27,800-23,400=4400$ people over the four-year time interval. To find the rate of change, divide the change in the number of people by the number of years.\n\nSo the population increased by 1,100 people per year.\n\nThe population of a small town increased from 1,442 to 1,868 between 2009 and 2012. Find the change of population per year if we assume the change was constant from 2009 to 2012.\n\n## Writing the point-slope form of a linear equation\n\nUp until now, we have been using the slope-intercept form of a linear equation to describe linear functions. Here, we will learn another way to write a linear function, the point-slope form \u00a0 \u00a0.\n\n$y-{y}_{1}=m\\left(x-{x}_{1}\\right)$\n\nThe point-slope form is derived from the slope formula.\n\nKeep in mind that the slope-intercept form and the point-slope form can be used to describe the same function. We can move from one form to another using basic algebra. For example, suppose we are given an equation in point-slope form, $y-4=-\\frac{1}{2}\\left(x-6\\right)$ . We can convert it to the slope-intercept form as shown.\n\ncan you not take the square root of a negative number\nSuppose P= {-3,1,3} Q={-3,-2-1} and R= {-2,2,3}.what is the intersection\ncan I get some pretty basic questions\nIn what way does set notation relate to function notation\nAma\nis precalculus needed to take caculus\nIt depends on what you already know. Just test yourself with some precalculus questions. If you find them easy, you're good to go.\nSpiro\nthe solution doesn't seem right for this problem\nwhat is the domain of f(x)=x-4\/x^2-2x-15 then\nx is different from -5&3\nSeid\nAll real x except 5 and - 3\nSpiro\nhow to prroved cos\u2074x-sin\u2074x= cos\u00b2x-sin\u00b2x are equal\nDon't think that you can.\nElliott\nhow do you provided cos\u2074x-sin\u2074x = cos\u00b2x-sin\u00b2x are equal\nWhat are the question marks for?\nElliott\nSomeone should please solve it for me Add 2over \u00d7+3 +y-4 over 5 simplify (\u00d7+a)with square root of two -\u00d7root 2 all over a multiply 1over \u00d7-y{(\u00d7-y)(\u00d7+y)} over \u00d7y\nFor the first question, I got (3y-2)\/15 Second one, I got Root 2 Third one, I got 1\/(y to the fourth power) I dont if it's right cause I can barely understand the question.\nIs under distribute property, inverse function, algebra and addition and multiplication function; so is a combined question\nAbena\nfind the equation of the line if m=3, and b=-2\ngraph the following linear equation using intercepts method. 2x+y=4\nAshley\nhow\nWargod\nwhat?\nJohn\nok, one moment\nUriEl\nhow do I post your graph for you?\nUriEl\nit won't let me send an image?\nUriEl\nalso for the first one... y=mx+b so.... y=3x-2\nUriEl\ny=mx+b you were already given the 'm' and 'b'. so.. y=3x-2\nTommy\nPlease were did you get y=mx+b from\nAbena\ny=mx+b is the formula of a straight line. where m = the slope & b = where the line crosses the y-axis. In this case, being that the \"m\" and \"b\", are given, all you have to do is plug them into the formula to complete the equation.\nTommy\nthanks Tommy\nNimo\n0=3x-2 2=3x x=3\/2 then . y=3\/2X-2 I think\nGiven\nco ordinates for x x=0,(-2,0) x=1,(1,1) x=2,(2,4)\nneil\n\"7\"has an open circle and \"10\"has a filled in circle who can I have a set builder notation\nWhere do the rays point?\nSpiro\nx=-b+_\u0413b2-(4ac) ______________ 2a\nI've run into this: x = r*cos(angle1 + angle2) Which expands to: x = r(cos(angle1)*cos(angle2) - sin(angle1)*sin(angle2)) The r value confuses me here, because distributing it makes: (r*cos(angle2))(cos(angle1) - (r*sin(angle2))(sin(angle1)) How does this make sense? Why does the r distribute once\nso good\nabdikarin\nthis is an identity when 2 adding two angles within a cosine. it's called the cosine sum formula. there is also a different formula when cosine has an angle minus another angle it's called the sum and difference formulas and they are under any list of trig identities\nstrategies to form the general term\ncarlmark\nconsider r(a+b) = ra + rb. The a and b are the trig identity.\nMike\nHow can you tell what type of parent function a graph is ?\ngenerally by how the graph looks and understanding what the base parent functions look like and perform on a graph\nWilliam\nif you have a graphed line, you can have an idea by how the directions of the line turns, i.e. negative, positive, zero\nWilliam\ny=x will obviously be a straight line with a zero slope\nWilliam\ny=x^2 will have a parabolic line opening to positive infinity on both sides of the y axis vice versa with y=-x^2 you'll have both ends of the parabolic line pointing downward heading to negative infinity on both sides of the y axis\nWilliam\ny=x will be a straight line, but it will have a slope of one. Remember, if y=1 then x=1, so for every unit you rise you move over positively one unit. To get a straight line with a slope of 0, set y=1 or any integer.\nAaron\nyes, correction on my end, I meant slope of 1 instead of slope of 0\nWilliam\nwhat is f(x)=\nI don't understand\nJoe\nTypically a function 'f' will take 'x' as input, and produce 'y' as output. As 'f(x)=y'. According to Google, \"The\u00a0range\u00a0of a function is the complete set of all possible resulting values of the dependent variable (y, usually), after we have substituted the\u00a0domain.\"\nThomas\nSorry, I don't know where the \"\u00c2\"s came from. They shouldn't be there. Just ignore them. :-)\nThomas\nDarius\nThanks.\nThomas\n\u00c2\nThomas\nIt is the \u00c2 that should not be there. It doesn't seem to show if encloses in quotation marks. \"\u00c2\" or '\u00c2' ... \u00c2\nThomas\nNow it shows, go figure?\nThomas","date":"2020-03-29 18:54:26","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 18, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.7230284810066223, \"perplexity\": 878.8216344289326}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2020-16\/segments\/1585370495413.19\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20200329171027-20200329201027-00034.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
In the face of craziness beyond satire, here's today's default, depicting nothing less than Exceptionalism Against the American Grain – as we reluctantly, summarily Hail to the Chief.
In terms of national mental health, we enter dangerous territory when President Perversity makes satire so much harder than starting the impeachment process. Time is not on our side when investigations that will forever redefine "high crimes" – well splayed out for all to see – plod well into the third calamitous year. There's something to be said for a tad less scrupulousness: how many more months of surging mayhem can America survive? Come on Mr. Mueller, impeachment and trial take time, making little sense in the fourth year as raucous campaigning kicks off.
Oh, the irony of Trump pushing American Exceptionalism when his unhinged, circus presidency keeps making exactly the opposite point. America's not even competing with average banana republics but only those truly teeming with corruption, spanning Trump, his family, business partners, thuggish appointments, lackey enablers, and the vast, deranged white, right-wing conspiracy. What other nation now prompts such justified global mockery or such a farcical, endless laugh track? As Dana Milbank quips, this country spit out "a slapstick genius for the comically disastrous way in which he runs the country." Some call this the gang that can't shoot straight – but I don't: these yokels can even find pistols to aim.
Time to rename the busted "beacon on the hill" as America the Exceptionally Bizarre. Not even dead-end dictatorships match today's unending stream of clownish, self-inflicted absurdity. Who needs foreign threats with the unraveling menace in the White House? So, to acknowledge the earth has shifted, morally and intellectually, today let's forego more logical "arguments" detailing the nature of defective leadership. Instead, I invite others to add to my modest catchphrases below, an attempt to encircle the disease that infects the body politic. In the face of craziness beyond satire, here's today's default, depicting previously unthinkable Exceptionalism Against the American Grain. Excuse the inevitable repetitions.
Conspirer in chief, Russian Asset in chief, Bankrupt in chief, Tweeter in chief, Incompetent in chief, Conspiracy Inventor in chief, Spoiled Brat in chief, Brawler in chief, Insulter in chief, Deceiver in chief, Worst-chief in chief, Skinflint in chief, Finance-Campaign-violator in chief, Sleazer in chief, Dirty Dealer in chief, Anti-diplomat in chief, Tariff-blaster in chief, Pettifogger in chief, Juvenile in chief, Tantrum Thrower in chief, Pied Piper in chief, Worst Deal Maker in chief – and many more I wager that savvy readers can throw in the pot. Blast away: the mine field seems, to our horror, infinite.
Next articleThe wall: Barrier or symbol? | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 9,568 |
/**
* @author Pedro Sanders
* @since v1
*
* Unit Test for the "Utils Module"
*/
const assert = require('assert')
const config = require('@routr/core/config_util')()
const {
buildAddr,
protocolTransport,
nearestInterface
} = require('@routr/utils/misc_utils')
describe('Utils Module', () => {
it('Get transport object for a protocol', function (done) {
const transport = protocolTransport(config, 'tcp')
assert.equal(transport.protocol, 'tcp')
done()
})
it('Get transport object for a protocol(fail)', function (done) {
try {
protocolTransport(config, 'wss')
done(new Error(`Force the test to fail since error wasn't thrown`))
} catch (error) {
// Constructor threw Error, so test succeeded.
done()
}
})
it("Target's nearest interface", function (done) {
const inf = nearestInterface('0.0.0.0', 5060)
const inf2 = nearestInterface('0.0.0.0', 5060, '10.0.0.1', 42323)
assert.ok(inf.host === '0.0.0.0')
assert.ok(inf.port === 5060)
assert.ok(inf2.host === '10.0.0.1')
assert.ok(inf2.port === 42323)
done()
})
})
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,723 |
using JetBrains.Annotations;
using LinFx.Extensions.Setting;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace LinFx.Extensions.SettingManagement
{
public static class GlobalSettingManagerExtensions
{
public static Task<string> GetOrNullGlobalAsync(this ISettingManager settingManager, [NotNull] string name, bool fallback = true)
{
return settingManager.GetOrNullAsync(name, GlobalSettingValueProvider.ProviderName, null, fallback);
}
public static Task<List<SettingValue>> GetAllGlobalAsync(this ISettingManager settingManager, bool fallback = true)
{
return settingManager.GetAllAsync(GlobalSettingValueProvider.ProviderName, null, fallback);
}
public static Task SetGlobalAsync(this ISettingManager settingManager, [NotNull] string name, [CanBeNull] string value)
{
return settingManager.SetAsync(name, value, GlobalSettingValueProvider.ProviderName, null);
}
}
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,205 |
HOWARD COUNTY, MO. (KPLR) – This past fall a man from southeast Missouri killed what he thought was coyote on his property in Howard County, which is near Columbia, Missouri. But, after a closure inspection of the animal, he thought it was something else.
The Missouri Department of Conservation says that the man killed a Gray Wolf. This is a Federally protected species. DNA confirms the wolf is from the Great Lake states. Officials think the wolf may have wandered down from Minnesota, Wisconsin or Michigan. The animal was not tagged and is not believed to have been a captive animal.
This is the third Gray Wolf killed in Missouri over the past 13 years. Many of them were shot by hunters mistaking the wolves as coyotes.
How about just stop shooting everything? | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 1,512 |
Q: SQLAlchemy: fill object with stored procedure or more complicated sql statement I have an sql alchemy class that I use called Feature.
class Feature(DBConnect.Base):
__tablename__ = 'feature'
id = Column(Integer, primary_key=True)
name = Column(String(500), nullable=False, default='')
In other code I can get a feature by doing:
feature = db.session.query(Feature).get(10)
And I end up with a feature object. Is there away to do a stored procedure or more complicated query like so:
select * from feature f
join aligned_data_column a on a.id=f.aligned_Data_column_id and
a.aligned_data_id=76
where a.aligned_data_id=70
union
select * from feature f
join aligned_data_column a on a.aligned_data_id=76
where json_contains(json_extract(f.column_mappings, '$.*'),CAST(a.id as JSON))
I was hoping to be able to just input that query into a stored procedure or some where in code. I am using MySQL and python 3.x
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 7,781 |
Ellsworth King of Arms
Revision as of 22:42, 14 February 2021 by Westarctica (talk | contribs)
The Ellsworth King of Arms is the person who serves as the Chief Herald of Westarctica. They are responsible for creating coats of arms for Westarctica's citizens and noble peers, as well as creating arms on behalf of Westarctica's government agencies. The holder of the post is entitled to a seat on the Royal Council and heads the Westarctican College of Arms.
Creation of office
Although the office of Chief Herald had existed since 2004, the nation had been without an official herald since the 2010 coup that overthrew Grand Duke Jon-Lawrence. In 2015, Michael Richards, the proprietor of Assume Arms, approached Grand Duke Travis and offered his services creating Letters Patent and possibly coats of arms for the Hereditary Nobles. The Grand Duke reviewed some of Michael's work and accepted his offer to become Westarctica's new Chief Herald. Mr. Richards assumed the post of King of Arms in March 2015.
Name of office
The name of the position, Ellsworth King of Arms, was chosen in the spirit of the great heralds of the United Kingdom, each of whom carries a regional name attached to their job (i.e. Lord Lyon King of Arms, Clarenceux King of Arms, Norroy and Ulster King of Arms). "Ellsworth" was selected as an homage to Ellsworth Land on the far eastern border of Westarctica.
The first King of Arms, Sir Michael Richards, was responsible for creating the Greater Arms of Westarctica in early 2015, and these arms adorn all the Letters Patent for new peers of Westarctica. Since beginning his tenure, Sir Michael has created Letters Patent for over 100 of Westarctica's peers.
The second King of Arms, the Baron of Abele, was appointed to the position on 25 January 2020. Prior to assuming the role, he had previously designed armorial achievements for several Peers of Westarctica as well as institutions such as the Grand Ducal Court.
Retrieved from "https://www.westarctica.wiki/index.php?title=Ellsworth_King_of_Arms&oldid=9279"
Cabinet of Westarctica | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 4,891 |
(CNN) — After publishing a report Tuesday on the record low teen birth rate, the National Center for Health Statistics is releasing more numbers on babies in America.
Gladys Martinez and her colleagues at the NCHS have written a report on the fertility of men and women aged 15 to 44 in the U.S. based on numbers from the National Survey of Family Growth that was taken between 2006 and 2010. The survey collected data from more than 22,000 face-to-face interviews.
A few interesting tidbits emerged from the report. The NCHS survey found that a greater proportion of births to unmarried couples are happening in households with cohabitating partners than in years past.
We know that the number of children born to unmarried couples has increased dramatically over the last several decades. In 2009, 41% of all babies born were to unmarried women compared to 11% in 1970. Approximately one-fourth of women aged 15 to 44 between 2006 and 2010 had a baby before their first marriage; an additional 5.2% had a baby within 7 months of the wedding.
But between 2006 and 2010, cohabitating couples accounted for 22% of first births, up from 12% in 2002. Of all pre-marital births, nearly half were to cohabitating couples.
"The primary reason that we even look at that is because studies have shown that there's differences in the resources available to children born in families with only one parent," Martinez said. Children born to unmarried mothers statistically have less stability and therefore, more environmental stressors in their lives.
The survey was also, for the first time, able to distinguish between foreign-born Hispanics and U.S.-born Hispanics. For instance, 78% of foreign-born Hispanic women surveyed had a biological child compared with 51% of U.S.-born Hispanic women.
"In general, U.S.-born Hispanics look [more] like non-Hispanic whites than other groups," Martinez said.
Most of the rest of the statistics remain similar to those reported in 2002, according to Martinez. The mean age of women having their first child is 23 years old; the mean age for men is 25. On average, women in America have 2.1 children. White women are less likely to have children and are less likely to expect to have children than other races.
Higher-education women and men waited longer in life to have children and on average had fewer. Women with household incomes lower than 150% of the poverty level were more likely to have four or more children.
Martinez also found an increase in the number of women who started having children after the age of 35 who went on to have two or more kids. Unfortunately her team couldn't really see the full expanse of the increase because they only surveyed women under 44 years old.
The statistics in this report were weighted to reflect the 124 million men and women in the U.S. The data was self-reported so results may be subjected to some "recall error," where the person being surveyed makes mistakes about their past experiences. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 3,279 |
Neurogenesis and Neural Transplantation Laboratory
Our laboratory is interested in the idea that stem cells can repair the damaged brain.
There are two broad strategies we are pursuing.
The first is neural transplantation. It is an approach that has had some success clinically for Parkinson's disease and involves the transplantation of new neurons directly into the patient's brain in order to functionally compensate for those lost to the disease. We are continuing to explore and optimise this as a therapeutic option not only for Parkinson's disease but also for other neurological conditions such as stroke and motor neuron disease.
The second strategy is based on the idea that the brain retains some capacity for 'self-repair' through neurogenesis. Part of our research program seeks to characterise the brain's own capacity to generate new neurons in response to injury and to manipulate this response in favour of therapeutic outcomes.
Head Dr Lachlan Thompson
Members Dr Charlotte Ermine Mr Stefano Frausin Dr Jennifer Hollands Mr Brett Kagan Dr Lachlan Thompson Ms Mong Tien
Modelling transient ischemic attack
Development of Stem Cell based therapies for Motor Neurone Disease
Rebuilding the brain after stroke
Parkinson's disease in a dish
Neurogenesis
For a long time it was thought the adult brain lacked the capacity to generate new neurons. We now know that adult neurogeneis occurs in very restricted regions in the mammalian brain throughout life and may become comprimised in age-related neurological conditions. This has lead to the idea that neurogenesis can be manipulated to facilitate 'brain repair' after injury or stimulated to offset age-related cognitive decline.
Neural Transplantation
Our laboratory is pursuing a number of projects that seek to understand the capacity for neurons generated from human stem cells to structurally and functionally replace neuronal circuitry after intra-cerebral transplantation. This may lead to theapies that restore function to patients with neurological conditions arising from injury or brain disease. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 5,050 |
Regions › Central Virginia
Apple Hospitality REIT buys new Hampton Inn & Suites in Phoenix for $44 million
Richmond-based Apple Hospitality Inc. said Thursday that it has acquired the newly constructed 210-room Hampton Inn & Suites by Hilton Phoenix Downtown for a about $44 million, or $210,000 per room.
"The new Hampton Inn & Suites Phoenix Downtown is a great addition to our portfolio of select-service hotels," Nelson Knight, executive vice president and chief investment officer of Apple Hospitality, said in a statement. "The hotel is sure to benefit from its prime location … Our attractive [per room] purchase price for this hotel is another example of the benefits we achieve from our ability to enter into a fixed-price contract with the developer prior to construction."
The Hampton Inn & Suites by Hilton located at 77 East Polk St. is adjacent to Arizona State University's Downtown Phoenix campus and is less than a mile from the University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix and Northern Arizona University's Phoenix Biomedical Campus. The hotel is also close to many corporate offices and attractions including the Phoenix Convention Center, Symphony Hall, Talking Stick Resort Arena and Chase Field.
Following this acquisition, Apple Hospitality said its portfolio includes 242 hotels with more than 30,700 guest rooms throughout 34 states.
4,500 acres in Albemarle placed in conservation easement
Richmond tourism industry promotes LGBTQ inclusivity
by M.J. McAteer
Gaming software developer adding more than 100 jobs in Central Virginia
Charlottesville social club enters the River City
by Veronica Garabelli
Richmond firm scores pair of St. Louis office towers
Darden receives its biggest gift
Startup nonprofit gets $100K grant
Bank changes its name
Central Virginia store sells for $1 million
Charlottesville property gets new owner | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8,444 |
Q: How to avoid unnecessary uglifying in GruntJS? I have a grunt file with the following definition:
uglify: {
build: {
src: 'www/temp/application.js', // a concatenation of files via grunt-contrib-concat
dest: 'www/temp/application.min.js'
}
},
what I would really like to do is to recompute the final application.min.js only in case that application.js file was changed. More precisely, I want to add the condition:
# pseudocode
if (getFileContents(application.js) == getFileContents(previously.uglified.application.js)) {
// do nothing
} else {
// run uglifying on application.js
}
Reason:
*
*I deploy my project by git and uglifying is relatively slow (3+ seconds) and moreover, it is unnecessary since I don't change JS files often.
A: There are several possible solutions:
You can create your own grunt task that will check files for last modify time using for example fs.stat then run uglify task through grunt.task.run with prepared options as argument.
Or you can build files object dynamically passing it through filter function:
var fs = require('fs');
module.exports = function (grunt) {
function filterChanged(files) {
var mtime = '',
stats;
for (var dest in files) {
stats = fs.statSync(files[dest]);
try {
mtime = fs.readFileSync(files[dest] + '.mtime', 'utf8');
}
catch (ex) {
fs.writeFileSync(files[dest] + '.mtime', stats.mtime, 'utf8');
return files;
}
if (stats.mtime == mtime || !mtime) {
delete files[dest];
}
else {
fs.writeFileSync(files[dest] + '.mtime', stats.mtime, 'utf8');
}
}
return files;
}
grunt.initConfig({
uglify: {
build: {
files: filterChanged({
'www/temp/application.min.js': 'www/temp/application.js'
})
}
}
});
};
This causes invoke of filterChanged function every time uglify task runs.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 3,383 |
Мелитополь — топоним и ряд названий.
Название населённых пунктов
Казахстан
Мелитополь — село в Кокпектинском районе Восточно-Казахстанской области.
Мелитополь — село в Сарыкольском районе Костанайской области.
Украина
Мелитополь — город областного значения в Запорожской области.
Другое
«Мелитополь» — телерадиокомпания города Мелитополя.
«Мелитополь» — локомотивное депо в городе Мелитополь.
«Мелитополь» — базовый тральщик ВМФ СССР.
См. также
Милетополь (значения) | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 1,688 |
Palenque is a Maya archeological site which is a medium-sized site, containing some of the finest architecture, sculpture, and bas-relief carvings which Maya has produced. Tourists get to see this and lots more when one visits the city and to complement it there are excellent Palenque Hotels. The city's accommodation offers old-world charm in its hotels as well as modern, high-style lodgings. For choosing the right Palenque Hotels visit our site StayResMexico.com. We are an online provider for hotel reservations so you can have a wonderful experience while in the city. There is a wide range of hotels available which match up to the city with the finest facilities offered to its guests. Palenque Hotels offer hotels ranging from budget hotels to high luxury hotels. You can be sure of a comfortable stay during your visit to this part of the country.
Copyright © StayResMexico.com. All Rights Reserved. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 2,039 |
Mulheres Perfeitas () é um filme estadunidense de 2004, dirigido por Frank Oz, com roteiro de Paul Rudnick baseado no livro de Ira Levin The Stepford Wives.
Enquanto o livro e a cultura do filme original tiveram um tremendo impacto, o remake foi marcado por lutas internas nos bastidores, comentários pobres por muitos críticos, e uma perda financeira de aproximadamente $40 milhões em bilheteria.
Estrelado por Nicole Kidman, Matthew Broderick, Bette Midler, Christopher Walken, Faith Hill e Glenn Close, o filme é um remake do filme homônimo de 1975.
Resumo
Joanna (Nicole Kidman) é uma executiva bem-sucedida que, após o fracasso de um programa de televisão idealizado por ela, é despedida e sofre um colapso nervoso.
Para poder descansar é levada pelo seu marido (Matthew Broderick) para uma cidade do interior, Stepford, localizada no subúrbio de Connecticut, juntamente com os seus dois filhos. Lá ela torna-se amiga de Bobbie (Bette Midler) e começa a notar uma estranha coincidência: todas as mulheres dessa localidade obedecem com grande dedicação aos seus maridos, mostrando-se felizes com a situação.
Joanna começa então a investigar o estranho caso e descobre a existência de um plano mirabolante que evita os problemas familiares.
Elenco
Nicole Kidman como Joanna Eberhart
Matthew Broderick como Walter Kresby
Bette Midler como Bobbie Markowitz
Christopher Walken como Mike Wellington
Roger Bart como Roger Bannister
Faith Hill como Sarah Sunderson
Glenn Close como Claire Wellington
Jon Lovitz como Dave Markowitz
Matt Malloy como Herb Sunderson
David Marshall Grant como Jerry Harmon
Kate Shindle como Beth Peters
Lorri Bagley como Charmaine Van Sant
Robert Stanton como Ted Van Sant
Mike White como Hank
KaDee Strickland como Tara
Larry King como ele mesmo
Produção
Relatos de problemas no set entre o diretor Frank Oz e as estrelas Kidman, Midler, Christopher Walken e Glenn Close foram comuns na imprensa. Oz confirmou em uma entrevista que havia "tensão no set" e que ele "usou palavras" com Walken. Ele também culpou Midler por estar sob um monte de estresse por outros projetos e "cometeu o erro de levar seu stress no set."
Em uma entrevista com Ain't It Cool, Frank Oz falou que o filme era "Eu estraguei tudo ... Eu tinha muito dinheiro, e eu era muito responsável e preocupado com a Paramount. Eu estava muito preocupado com os produtores. E eu não segui meus instintos." Em entrevistas recentes, Kidman, Broderick e produtor Scott Rudin lamentaram terem participado no filme.
A maior parte do filme foi rodado em Darien, Connecticut e New Canaan, Connecticut.
Recepção
O filme teve recepção mista pelos críticos; no Metacritic tem uma pontuação de 42%, o Rotten Tomatoes deu ao filme uma de 26%
Rolling Stone disse, "Burburinho de problemas no set... não se pode comparar com a bagunça na tela."
Entertainment Weekly disse, "O remake é, de fato, abandonado em um pântano de acampamento inconsequente."
The New York Times disse "o filme nunca faz jus ao seu potencial satírico, caindo no final na incoerência e insosso, tem-tudo sentimentalista."
Havia também as críticas receptivas. Roger Ebert, por exemplo, chamou o roteiro de Paul Rudnick de "rico em frases memoráveis", e deu ao filme três estrelas. Os visitantes do seu site foram menos caridosos, conferindo-lhe uma média de apenas duas estrelas. No entanto, no "Piores Filmes de 2004", episódio de At the Movies with Ebert and Roeper Ele admitiu que, enquanto dava ao filme "polegares para cima," não seria "o primeiro filme que [ele] defenderia".
Além disso, teaser do filme ganhou vários Golden Trailer Prêmios, nas categorias de "Blockbuster do Verão de 2004" e "Mais Original", bem como "Melhor do Show".
Bilheteria
O filme não foi bem sucedido, bruto do fim de semana de abertura dos EUA foi um respeitável $21,406,781; No entanto, as vendas caíram um fim de semana de forma rápida e que representam, em última instância a partir de mais de um terço do produto interno bruto do filme de $59,484,742. O filme arrecadou $42,428,452 internacionalmente; seu orçamento de produção foi de $100 milhões por mais um adicional estimado de $46 milhões para os custos de marketing e distribuição.
Ver também
The Stepford Wives (1975)
Asterisk animation - animação fornecida para este filme
Filmes dos Estados Unidos de 2004
Filmes de suspense dos Estados Unidos
Filmes de comédia dramática dos Estados Unidos
Filmes de ficção científica dos Estados Unidos
Filmes com trilha sonora de David Arnold
Filmes com temática LGBT dos Estados Unidos
Filmes gravados em Connecticut
Filmes gravados em Nova Jérsei
Filmes com temática feminista
Filmes baseados em romances
Filmes gravados em Nova Iorque (estado)
Filmes baseados em obras de Ira Levin
Regravações de filmes
Filmes de humor negro
Filmes da Paramount Pictures
Filmes dirigidos por Frank Oz
Filmes de comédia dramática da década de 2000
Filmes com robôs
Filmes de ficção científica da década de 2000
Filmes em língua inglesa da década de 2000
Filmes de sátira
Filmes ambientados em Connecticut
Filmes da DreamWorks | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 5,206 |
{"url":"https:\/\/engineering-shiny.org\/","text":"# Introduction\n\nWelcome to \u201cEngineering Production-Grade Shiny Apps\u201d by Colin Fay, S\u00e9bastien Rochette, Vincent Guyader and Cervan Girard.\n\nThis book is available in print, published in the R Series by Chapman and Hall\/CRC.\n\nYou can grab a copy on routledge.com.\n\nThe online version of this book is free to read here (thanks to Chapman & Hall\/CRC), and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.\n\n## Motivation\n\nThis book will not get you started with shiny, nor talk how to work with shiny once it is sent to production. What we will be discussing in this book is the process of building an application that will later be sent to production.\n\nWhy this topic? Lots of blog posts and books talk about getting started with shiny (Chang et al. 2020) or about what to do once your application is ready to be sent to production. Very few (if any) talk about this area in-between: how to confidently work with shiny once you know the basics, and before you send it to production.\n\nThis is what this book is going to talk about: building robust shiny applications that are ready to be sent to production. We\u2019ll focus on the process, the workflow, and the necessary tools for building production-grade shiny applications.\n\n## Audience for this book\n\nIf you are starting to read this book, we assume you have a working knowledge of how to build a small application using shiny, and want to know how to go one step further. In other words, you already have some knowledge about how shiny works, are able to build a small working application, and want to know how to build a serious, production-grade application that can be sent to production.\n\nThe content of this book oscillates between conceptual discussions (e.g., what is complexity?), exploration of project-management questions (e.g., how do we organize work when building production shiny applications?), and technical topics (e.g.\u00a0what are shiny modules, or how do I optimize shiny?), with a large portion of the book being dedicated to technical questions.\n\nThis book will then be of interest to two groups:\n\n\u2022 Team managers who want to help to organize work, and shiny developers who want to learn about project management. This group will find relevant content in the first 1\/3 of this book (roughly until Chapter 5).\n\n\u2022 Developers who want to cover medium to advanced shiny topics that will be relevant to production. This group will be more interested in the rest of the book, which roughly spans from Chapter 6 to the end. Note that the technical elements covered in this book range from intermediate to advanced topics, and we hope that you will find relevant topics for your current goals, whatever your level is.\n\nIn practice, we\u2019ve come to realize that a lot of shiny projects are built by small teams with a large number of these \u201cteams\u201d being composed of only one developer. In this context, we have realized that project management and development are often assigned to the very same person,1 making these two skills deeply integrated when carrying production projects.\n\nThat\u2019s why this book tries to reconcile both these worlds, as building production-grade software needs a reliable and operational code-base which is made possible by having solid technical skills, but also reliable and operational team work and project management.\n\n## What is \u201cproduction\u201d?\n\nAll throughout this book, we will be using the term \u201cproduction\u201d to refer to the way we build and deploy our application. But what is \u201cproduction\u201d?\n\nThere have been a lot of definitions of what production is, and even today if you ask around you will get a wide range of different answers. We like to think that a piece of software is in production when it combines the three following properties, not only for the users, but also the engineers working on it:\n\n\u2022 It is used, even if only by one person.\n\n\u2022 It is relied upon by its user(s).\n\n\u2022 It has real life impact if something goes wrong.\n\nThese three properties impact two specific groups: users and the developers.\n\nIndeed, the users rely on the app to work so that they can do their job, and expect it to deliver meaningful results that they can count on. From the engineering point of view, a production-grade software can be relied upon in the sense that developers count on it to run as expected, and they need to rely on the software to be resilient to change, i.e to be modular, documented, and strongly tested so that changes can be integrated with confidence.\n\nA production software also has real-life impact if something goes wrong: users will make wrong decisions, they might be unable to do their day-to-day work, and there are all the things that can happen when the software you use on a daily basis fails to run. From the engineering point of view, a production-grade software has real impact when something goes wrong: someone has to fix the bug, the company selling the software might lose money, data can be lost, and so on.\n\nGiven these two properties, you can understand why being in production doesn\u2019t necessarily mean being served to gazillions of users,2 and serving trillions of gigabytes of data: even software that is used by one person who relies on this application to do their job is a production software.\n\nThis is what this book is about: building shiny applications that can be used, on which you and your users can rely, and including all the tools that will help you prevent things from going wrong, and when they eventually do, making sure you are equipped to quickly fix the bugs.\n\n## Book structure\n\n\u2022 Part 1, \u201cBuilding Successful shiny Apps\u201d gives a general context for what we mean by \u201cproduction-grade\u201d and \u201csuccessful\u201d shiny applications, and what challenges arise when you are dealing with a large-scale application designed for production. In this part, we will define what we mean by \u201cSuccessful\u201d, stress the importance of project management, develop how to structure your project for production, and introduce the golem (Fay et al. 2021) package. We will finally, briefly introduce to our development workflow: a workflow that will be explored in Parts 2 to 6.\n\n\u2022 Part 2 through 6 explore the workflow for building successful applications.\nPart 2: Design (Step 1) underlines the centrality of the user experience when engineering an application, and emphasizes the importance of designing before coding.\nPart 3: Prototype (Step 2) stresses the importance of prototyping, explores the setting of a golem-based application, and presents shinipsum, fakir, and the \u201cRmd First\u201d development methodology.\nPart 4: Build (Step 3) explores the building step of the application, i.e the core engineering of the application once the prototyping phase is finished.\nPart 5: Strengthen (Step 4) explores in-depth testing, continuous integration, and version control.\nPart 6: Deploy (Step 5) develops the various possibilities for preparing your application to be deployed.\n\n\u2022 Part 7, \u201cOptimizing\u201d tackles the question of optimization, first by introducing the general concepts about optimization, then by presenting some common caveats of shiny apps, and then showing how to optimize R code, and how to use JavaScript to lighten R work. This part ends with a gentle introduction to CSS (Cascading Style Sheets).\n\n### Colin Fay\n\nColin has written the vast majority of this book. He\u2019s responsible for its general structure, and for the original design of the workflow described. Most of the time (if not every time) \u201cwe\u201d actually refers to him. He is the lead developer of the golem framework, and creator of many tools described in this book.\n\nColin works at ThinkR, a French agency focused on everything R related. During the day, he helps companies to take full advantage of the power of R, by building tools (packages, web apps, etc.) and setting up infrastructure. His main areas of expertise are data and software engineering, infrastructure, web applications (front-end and back-end), and R in production.\n\nDuring the night, Colin is also a hyperactive open-source developer and an open-data advocate. You can find a lot of his work on his GitHub account (https:\/\/github.com\/ColinFay) and on ThinkR\u2019s account (https:\/\/github.com\/thinkr-open).\n\nHe is also active in the R and Data community, and is an international speaker.\n\n### S\u00e9bastien Rochette\n\nS\u00e9bastien has been instrumental in the review of most of this book\u2019s chapters. He has also written the section about prototyping in RMarkdown, a concept he initiated.\n\nS\u00e9bastien is a data scientist at ThinkR, where he teaches anything R related from beginner to expert level, guides R developers towards implementation of best practices, and creates tailor-made R solutions for the needs of his customers.\n\nVincent is the founder of ThinkR. He created the first proof-of-concept framework for shiny applications inside packages; an idea which has led to the creation of golem. If you feel like a GitHub archaeologist, this very first version is still available with a little bit of exploration!\n\nWith more than ten years of experience with R, and a scientific and technical background, Vincent is an R enthusiast. He still has his hands in the code, whether to develop applications, analyze data, or build packages. When he\u2019s not coding, he plays with Docker and manages servers. He strongly believes that meeting highly technical challenges is not incompatible with pedagogy: he passionately trains very diverse learner profiles in R.\n\n### Cervan Girard\n\nCervan has worked on some of the example applications that are used inside this book, namely {shinipsumdemo}, {databasedemo}, {grayscale}, {bs4dashdemo}, and {shinyfuture}.\n\nCervan is a Data Scientist at ThinkR. He is enthusiastic and motivated when it comes to rolling up his sleeves for new challenges, even if it means venturing dangerously into the depths of R, learning new languages, and experimenting outside your comfort zone.\n\nWhatever the challenge, he remains reliable, constructive, and efficient when it comes to using his skills to train or develop. He also enjoys training learners of all levels in the R language.\n\n## Disclaimer\n\nOpen source is moving (very) fast, and some of the tools described in this book are still under active development. But good news! A large portion of this book is about the methodology, and not purely the technology, so even if some of the packages and code sections used in this book can (and will) become obsolete, a significant part of what is described in this book will still be relevant.\n\nWhen reading this book, remember that they are a \u201csnapshot\u201d of various technologies and packages, which might someday become out of date, have breaking changes, or even disappear. The last revisions of the pages you\u2019re reading now have been done on August 27, 2022. We will try to update the online version whenever changes are made to the packages used in this book, so feel free to browse the online version3 for up-to-date information.\n\n## Software information and conventions\n\nThis book was built with knitr (Xie 2021b) and bookdown (Xie 2021a).\n\nPackage names are in curly brackets in code format (e.g., rmarkdown), and inline code and file names are formatted in a typewriter font (e.g., knitr::knit('doc.Rmd')). Function names are formatted in a typewriter font and followed by parentheses (e.g., render_book()). Larger code blocks are formatted in a typewriter font and have a gray backgroud, e.g.:\n\ninstall.packages(\"golem\")\n\nWhen we describe a package that can be installed from GitHub, we use the install_github() function from the remotes (Hester et al. 2020) package. In other words, the following code:\n\nremotes::install_github(\"ColinFay\/dockerstats\")\n\nmeans that the package will be installed from GitHub, and that you can use the remotes package, which has to be installed on your machine if not already there.\n\n## Want to help?\n\nAny feedback on the book is very welcome. Feel free to open an issue, or to make a Pull Request if you spot a typo.\n\n## Other resources\n\nOne single book could not cover everything there is to know about shiny. Here are some resources you can use in addition to this book. You can also find more resources in the bibliography.\n\n### Putting {shiny} into production\n\nFeel free to suggest a resource!\n\n## Acknowledgments\n\n### Special thanks\n\nWe want to thank ThinkR for allowing us time to write this book, and for always being supportive during the project.\n\nColin wants to personally thank Christophe Dervieux for all his help with this book and any other projects, and for being such an awesome person. He also wants to thank Eric Nantz for taking the time to write the Foreword, for being one of the first golem adopters, and for always being enthusiastic about all things gravitating around the golemverse. A big thanks also to David Granjon for his precious feedback on this book.\n\n### Contributors to this book\n\nWe want to thank all the people that have contributed to this book, either via Pull Requests, Issues on the book\u2019s GitHub repository, or via direct conversation.","date":"2022-10-02 00:12:18","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.23182733356952667, \"perplexity\": 1382.5572473467669}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2022-40\/segments\/1664030336978.73\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20221001230322-20221002020322-00644.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
\section{Introduction}
Most current public-key cryptographic schemes in use, which are based on the hardness assumptions of factoring large integers and solving (elliptic curve) discrete logarithms, will suffer from quantum attack, if practical quantum computers are built. These cryptosystems play an important role in ensuring the confidentiality and authenticity of communications on the Internet. With the increasing cryptographic security risks of quantum computing in recent years, post-quantum cryptography (PQC) has become a research focus for the crypto community. There are five main types of post-quantum cryptographic schemes: hash-based, code-based, lattice-based, multivariable-based, and isogeny-based schemes, among which lattice-based cryptography is commonly viewed as amongst the most promising one due to its outstanding balanced performance in security, communication bandwidth, and computational efficiency.
In the post-quantum cryptography standardization competition held by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), lattice-based schemes account for 26 out of 64 schemes in the first round~\cite{nist-round-1-submissions}, 12 out of 26 in the second round~\cite{nist-round-2-submissions}, and 7 out of 15 in the current third round~\cite{nist-round-3-submissions}. Most of these lattice-based schemes are based on one of the following types: plain lattice and algebraically structured lattice (ideal lattice, NTRU lattice, and module lattice). They are mainly instantiated from the following two categories of hardness assumptions. The first category consists of \emph{Learning With Errors} (LWE)~\cite{lwe-regev09} and its variants with algebraic structures such as \emph{Ring-Learning With Errors} (RLWE)~\cite{rlwe-LPR10} and \emph{Module-Learning With Errors} (MLWE)~\cite{mlwe-LS15}, as well as \emph{Learning With Rounding} (LWR)~\cite{lwr-BPR12} and its variants such as \emph{Ring-Learning With Rounding} (RLWR)~\cite{lwr-BPR12} and \emph{Module-Learning With Rounding} (MLWR)~\cite{mlwr-AA16}. The second category is the \emph{NTRU} assumption~\cite{ntru-HPS98}.
NTRU, which stands for ``\emph{$\underline{N}^{th}$-Degree \underline{T}runcated Polynomial \underline{R}ing \underline{U}nits}'', was first proposed by Jeffrey Hoffstein at the rump session Crypto96~\cite{ntru-Hof96}, and it survived a lattice attack in 1997~\cite{ntru-attack-CS97}. With some improvements on security, NTRU was published by Hoffstein, Pipher and Silverman in 1998~\cite{ntru-HPS98}, which is named NTRU-HPS in this work. NTRU-HPS was the first practical public key cryptosystem based on the lattice hardness assumptions over polynomial rings. There have been many variants of NTRU-HPS such as those proposed in \cite{ntru-variant-etru-JN15,ntru-variant-bqtru-BSP18,nttru-LS19,ntru-nist-round3,ntru-prime-nist-round3,ntru-variant-bat-FKPY22}. And NTRU has played a basic role in many cryptographic protocols, e.g.,~\cite{ntrusign-HGP03,ntru-in-fhe-LATV12,ntru-in-multilinear-GGH13,ntru-in-multilinear-LSS14,ntru-in-ibe-DLP14,falcon-nist-round3}. In particular, NTRU-based schemes have achieved impressive success in the third round of NIST PQC standardization. Specifically, NTRU KEM (including NTRU-HRSS and NTRUEncrypt)~\cite{ntru-nist-round3} and Falcon signature scheme ~\cite{falcon-nist-round3} are two of the seven finalists, and NTRU Prime KEM (including SNTRU Prime and NTRU LPRime)~\cite{ntru-prime-nist-round3} is one of the alternate candidates in NIST PQC Round 3.
There are several reasons for using NTRU-based KEM schemes. The first is about its security. As the first practical lattice-based cryptographic scheme, until now NTRU-based KEM schemes have survived attacks and cryptanalysis over 24 years.
Some efforts on provable security have been made in~\cite{ntru-secure-as-ideal-lattice-SS11,ntru-secure-YXW17-eprint,ntru-secure-YXW17-pkc17,ntru-secure-WW18}. But their resulting NTRU-based schemes are impractical since they have large parameters. In general, most current NTRU-based schemes remain unbroken. The second reason is that all the patent threats against NTRU have expired. However, there are some known patents that arguably threaten other lattice-based finalists such as Kyber~\cite{kyber-nist-round3} and Saber~\cite{saber-nist-round3}. For example, besides more latent patent threats, U.S. patent 9094189~\cite{patent-us-9094189} threatens their ``noisy Diffle-Hellman with reconciliation'' structure, and U.S. patent 9246675~\cite{patent-us-9246675} threatens their decryption mechanisms. The patent threats are deemed a critical factor for consideration when deploying PQC standardized algorithms in reality. The third reason is that NTRU-based KEM schemes admit more flexible key sizes to be encapsulated (corresponding to the message space $\mathcal{M}$ in this work), varying according to the degree of the underlying quotient polynomial. In comparison, the KEM schemes based on MLWE and MLWR like Kyber and Saber encapsulate keys of fixed size that is restricted to the underlying quotient polynomial that is of degree 256 for Kyber and Saber.
On the other hand, currently there are also some drawbacks to NTRU-based KEM schemes. The first is about ciphertext compression. The importance of reducing ciphertext size is self-evident, since low communication bandwidth is friendly to internet protocols (e.g., TLS) and constrained devices in the internet of things (IoT). Though ciphertext compression is a quite mature technique for \{R,M\}LWE-based KEM schemes, it is at a very rusty stage for NTRU-based KEM constructions. Common NTRU-based encryption schemes \cite{ntru-HPS98,ntru-nist-round3,ntru-secure-as-ideal-lattice-SS11,ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21} consist of the ciphertext of the form $c=phr+m \bmod q$, where $p$ is the message space modulus, $h$ is the public key, $r$ is the randomness, and $m$ is the message to be encrypted. In the decryption process, one could compute $cf \bmod q = pgr + m f$, and clean out the term $pgr$ via reduction modulo $p$. In order to obtain $m$, one can multiply the inverse of $f$ modulo $p$, or directly reduce modulo $p$ if $f=pf'+1$. It can be viewed as a unidimensional error-correction mechanism.
However, if the ciphertext is further compressed, the error term in each component can not be eliminated via reduction modulo $p$ and consequently the messages can not be recovered correctly. Without ciphertext compression, as a consequence, at about the same security level, the bandwidth of NTRU-based KEM schemes is usually larger than that of \{R,M\}LWE-based KEM schemes.
The second drawback is about security reduction.
For most NTRU-based KEM constructions, their chosen ciphertext attack (CCA) security is usually reduced to the one-way (OW-CPA) secure encryption instead of the traditional IND-CPA encryption. Above all, IND-CPA is a strictly stronger security notion than OW-CPA. OW-CPA can be transformed into IND-CPA, but at the price of further loosening the reduction bound particularly in the quantum random oracle model (QROM)~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}. One can also have a tight reduction from CCA security to OW-CPA \emph{deterministic} public-key encryption (DPKE), but at the cost of a more complicated decapsulation process~\cite{ntru-nist-round3,ntru-prime-nist-round3}. More detailed discussions and clarifications on CCA security reduction of KEM in the ROM and the QROM are presented in Appendix~\ref{app-sec-reduction}. As a consequence, it is still desirable for NTRU-based KEM constructions to have security reduction from CCA security to IND-CPA security, as is in \{R,M\}LWE-based KEM schemes.
\subsection{Our Contributions}
In this work, we present a new variant of NTRU-based cryptosystem, called CTRU, which can achieve scalable ciphertext compression and has CCA provable security reduced directly to IND-CPA. It consists of an IND-CPA secure public-key encryption, named CTRU.PKE, and an IND-CCA secure key encapsulation mechanism, named CTRU.KEM constructed through $\text{FO}_{ID(pk),m}^{\not\bot}$ that is an enhanced variant of Fujisaki-Okamoto transformation~\cite{fo-transform-FO99,fo-transform-HHK17} with a short prefix of the public key into the hash function~\cite{fo-transform-prefix-hash-DHK+21}.
Our CTRU.PKE demonstrates a novel approach to constructing NTRU-based PKE. The description of CTRU is over the NTT-friendly rings of the form $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n-x^{n/2}+1)$. We choose $n\in\{512,768,1024\}$ for NIST recommended security levels I, III and V, respectively, with the same $q=3457$ set for all the three dimensions for ease of implementation simplicity and compatability. We recommend the case of $n=768$ which could have a moderate post-quantum security and performance in reality.
\subsubsection{New construction}
The key generation algorithm in CTRU is similar to the exiting NTRU-based KEM schemes such as~\cite{ntru-HPS98,ntru-nist-round3,ntru-prime-nist-round3,ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}. CTRU uses $h=g/f$ as its public key and $f$ as its secret key. We develop a new encryption algorithm which breaks through the limitation of ciphertext compression for NTRU-based KEM, such that we can compress the ciphertexts in the case of one single polynomial. To be specific, we encode every 4-bit messages into a scalable $\text{E}_8$ lattice point and hide its information by an RLWE instance, after which we compress the resulting ciphertext as many as possible. As for the decryption algorithm, we multiply the ciphertext polynomial by the secret polynomial, and finally recover the messages correctly with the aid of our decoding algorithm in the scalable $\text{E}_8$ lattice whenever the $\ell_2$ norm of the error term is less than the sphere radius of the scalable $\text{E}_8$ lattice. An important point to note is that, different from most existing NTRU-based KEM schemes such as~\cite{ntru-HPS98,ntru-nist-round3,ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}, in CTRU the message space modulus $p$ is removed in the public key $h$ and in the ciphertext $c$, as it is not needed there to recover the message $m$ with our CTRU construction. The only reserved position for $p$ is the secret key $f$, which has the form of $f=pf'+1$. We show that the above steps constitute an IND-CPA secure PKE scheme: CTRU.PKE, based on the NTRU assumption and the RLWE assumption. Finally, we then apply the $\text{FO}_{ID(pk),m}^{\not\bot}$ transformation~\cite{fo-transform-prefix-hash-DHK+21} to get the IND-CCA secure CTRU.KEM.
\subsubsection{Unified NTT}
The NTT-based polynomial operations over $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n -x^{n/2} + 1)$ are very efficient. However, as the dimension $n$ varies with CTRU, we have to equip with multiple NTT algorithms with different input/output lengths in accordance with each $n\in \{512, 768, 1024\}$.
This brings inconvenient issues for software implementation and especially for hardware implementation. In this work, we overcome this problem by presenting the methodology of using a unified NTT technique to compute NTTs over $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n-x^{n/2}+1)$ for all $n\in \{512,768,1024\}$ with $q=3457$. Technically speaking, we split $f \in \mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n-x^{n/2}+1)$ into $\alpha \in \{2,3,4\}$ sub-polynomials of lower degrees, each of which is in $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{256}-x^{128}+1)$. We then design a 256-point unified NTT based on the ideas from~\cite{nttru-LS19,incomplete-ntt-moenck76}, and apply it to each sub-polynomial. Finally, their intermediate NTT results are combined to generate the final results. In this case, in order to obtain the public key (the quotient of two $n$-dimension polynomials), we need to compute the inversions in the rings of the form $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{2\alpha } - \zeta)$, where $\zeta$ is some primitive root of unity in $\mathbb{Z}_q$. We use Cramer's Rule~\cite{cramer-rule-linear-algebra-book} to compute the inverse of polynomials of low degree.
\subsubsection{Performance and comparisons}
By careful evaluation and selection, we provide a set of parameters for CTRU, and present the recommended parameter sets in Section \ref{sec-parameters}. Here, we make comparisons between CTRU on the recommended parameters and other prominent practical NTRU-based KEM schemes: NTRU-HRSS~\cite{ntru-variant-HRSS17,ntru-nist-round3}, SNTRU Prime~\cite{ntru-prime-nist-round3}, NTTRU~\cite{nttru-LS19} and $\text{NTRU-C}_{3457}^{768}$~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}, as well as Kyber~\cite{kyber-nist-round3}. The comparisons are summarized in Table \ref{tab-comparisons-of-schemes}.
To the best of our knowledge, CTRU
is the first NTRU-based KEM scheme with scalable ciphertext compression via only one single ciphertext polynomial.
From the comparisons, CTRU has the smallest bandwidth and the strongest security guarantees among all the practical NTRU-based KEM schemes. The error probabilities of CTRU are set according to the security level targeted by each set of parameters, which can be viewed as negligible in accordance with the security level. For example, when compared to the NIST Round 3 finalist NTRU-HRSS~\cite{ntru-nist-round3}, our CTRU-768 has $15\%$ smaller ciphertext size and its security is strengthened by $(45,40)$ bits for classical and quantum security, respectively.
When compared to the NIST Round 3 finalist Kyber~\cite{kyber-nist-round3} that is based on the MLWE assumption, the security of CTRU is slightly reduced for about 1 or 2 bits, due to the modulus $q=3457$ in CTRU that is slightly larger than $q=3329$ in Kyber. But roughly at the same level of security, CTRU has both smaller bandwidth and lower error probabilities.
To the best of our knowledge, CTRU is the first NTRU-based KEM that enjoys all these advantages.
\textbf{On negligible error vs. zero error.}
The error probability of CTRU-768 is set to be $2^{-187}$, while that of NTRU-HRSS~\cite{ntru-nist-round3} is zero. Since the target security level of CTRU-768 is 164, the error probability of $2^{-187}$ is sufficiently low. In our opinion, it is quite paranoid that some NTRU-based KEM schemes, e.g., NTRU-HRSS, reduce the error probability to zero. One can see that the tradeoffs for no error vs. negligible error $2^{-187}$ are more than 40 bits of security and $15\%$ smaller ciphertext size when compared to NTRU-HRSS. We also stress that we do not know how to have the well balance achieved by CTRU by simply adjusting parameters for the existing NTRU-based KEM schemes.
\textbf{On security reduction.}
Our CTRU.PKE can achieve the IND-CPA security under the NTRU assumption and the RLWE assumption, while most of the existing practical NTRU-based PKEs only achieve OW-CPA security. The reduction advantage of CCA security of our CTRU.KEM is tighter than those of NTTRU~\cite{nttru-LS19} and $\text{NTRU-C}_{3457}^{768}$~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}. For example, in the quantum setting, the CCA reduction bound of CTRU.KEM is dominated by $O(\sqrt{q' \epsilon_{CPA}})$, while those of NTTRU and $\text{NTRU-C}_{3457}^{768}$ are $O(q'\sqrt{\epsilon_{OW}})$ and $O(q'^{1.5} \sqrt[4]{\epsilon_{OW}})$ respectively, where $\epsilon_{CPA}(\epsilon_{OW})$ is the advantage against the underlying IND-CPA (resp., OW-CPA) secure PKE and $q'$ is the total query number.
However, NTRU-HRSS has a tight CCA reduction bound starting from OW-CPA \emph{deterministic} PKE (DPKE), at the cost of more complicated and time-consuming decryption process~\cite{ntru-nist-round3}. In any case, IND-CPA is a strictly stronger security notion than OW-CPA.
\subsubsection{Reference implementation and benchmark}
We provide C reference implementation for CTRU-768, and perform benchmark comparisons with the related lattice-based KEM schemes (for those whose reference implementation codes are online available). The benchmark comparisons show that the encapsulation and decapsulation algorithms of CTRU-768 are among the most efficient. When compared to the reference implementation of NTRU-HRSS in NIST PQC Round 3, CTRU-768 is faster by 15X in KeyGen, 39X in Encaps, and 61X in Decaps, respectively.
More details and discussions about the implementation and benchmark comparisons are referred to Section \ref{sec-implementation-benchmark}.
\input{table/tab-comparisons-of-schemes.tex}
\subsection{Related Work}
In recent years, many NTRU variants have been proposed. Jarvis and Nevins~\cite{ntru-variant-etru-JN15} presented a new variant of NTRU-HPS~\cite{ntru-HPS98} over
the ring of Eisenstein integers $\mathbb{Z}[\omega]/(x^n-1)$ where $\omega=e^{2 \pi i /3}$, which has smaller key sizes and faster performance than NTRU-HPS.
Bagheri et al.~\cite{ntru-variant-bqtru-BSP18} generalized NTRU-HPS over bivariate
polynomial rings of the form $(-1,-1)/(\mathbb{Z}[x,y]/(x^n-1,y^n-1))$ for stronger security and smaller public key sizes. H{\"{u}}lsing et al.~\cite{ntru-variant-HRSS17} improved NTRU-HPS in terms of speed, key size, and ciphertext size, and presented NTRU-HRSS, which is one of the finalists in NIST PQC Round 3 now~\cite{ntru-nist-round3}. Bernstein et al.~\cite{ntru-prime-BCLV17} proposed NTRU Prime, which aims for ``an efficient implementation of high security prime-degree large-Galois-group inert-modulus ideal-lattice-based cryptography''. It tweaks the textbook NTRU scheme to use some rings with less special structures, i.e., $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n - x -1)$, where both $n$ and $q$ are primes.
In order to obtain better performance of NTRU encryption, Lyubashevsky and Seiler~\cite{nttru-LS19} instantiated it over $\mathbb{Z}_{7681}[x]/(x^{768} - x^{384}+1)$. Then Duman et al.~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21} generalized the rings $\mathbb{Z}_{q}[x]/(x^{n} - x^{n/2}+1)$ with various $n$ for flexible parameter selection. But all of them follow the similar structure of NTRU-HPS and do not support ciphertext compression.
Very recently, Fouque et al.~\cite{ntru-variant-bat-FKPY22} proposed a new NTRU variant named BAT. It shares many similarities with Falcon signature~\cite{falcon-nist-round3} where a trapdoor basis is required in the secret key, which makes its key generation complicated. BAT uses two linear equations in two unknowns to recover the secret and error, without introducing the modulus $p$ to extract message. It reduces the ciphertext sizes by constructing its intermediate value as an RLWR instance (with binary secrets), and encrypts the message via $\text{ACWC}_0$ transformation~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}. However, $\text{ACWC}_0$ transformation consists of two terms, causing that there are some dozens of bytes in the second ciphertext.
Another disadvantage is about the inflexibility of selecting
parameters. Since BAT applies power-of-two cyclotomics $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n+1)$, it is inconvenient to find an underlying cyclotomic polynomial of some particular degree up to the next power of two. For example, BAT chooses $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{512}+1)$ and $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{1024}+1)$ for NIST recommended security levels I and V, but lacks of parameter set for level III, which, however, is the aimed and recommended security level for most lattice-based KEM schemes like Kyber~\cite{kyber-nist-round3} and our CTRU. Although BAT has an advantage of bandwidth, its key generation is 1,000 times slower than other NTRU-based KEM schemes, and there are some worries about its provable security based on the RLWR assumption with binary secrets which is quite a new assumption tailored for BAT. For the above reasons, we do not make a direct comparison between CTRU and BAT.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec-preliminaries}
\subsection{Notations and Definitions}\label{sec-notation-definition}
Let $ \mathbb{Z} $ and $ \mathbb{R}$ be the set of rational integers and real numbers, respectively. Let $n$ and $q$ be some positive integers. Denote $ \mathbb{Z}_q = \mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z} \cong \{0,1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $ \mathbb{R}_q = \mathbb{R}/q\mathbb{R} $. Let $\mathbb{Z}_q^{\times}$ be the group of invertible elements of $ \mathbb{Z}_q$. For any $x \in \mathbb{R}$, $\lfloor x \rceil $ denotes the closest integer to $x$. We denote $\mathbb{Z}[x]/(x^{n}-x^{n/2}+1)$ and $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{n}-x^{n/2}+1)$ by $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{R}_q$ respectively in this work. The elements in $\mathcal{R}$ or $\mathcal{R}_q$ are polynomials, which are denoted by regular font letters such as $f,g$. The polynomial, e.g., $f$, in $\mathcal{R}$ (or $\mathcal{R}_q$) can be represented in the form of power series: $f=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}{f_i x^i}$, or in the form of vector: $f=(f_0, f_1,\ldots,f_{n-1})$, where $f_i \in \mathbb{Z}$ (or $f_i \in \mathbb{Z}_q$), $i=0,1,\ldots,n-1$. A function $\epsilon: \mathbb{N} \to [0,1] $ is negligible, if $\epsilon(\lambda) < 1/\lambda^c$ holds for any positive $c$ and sufficiently large $\lambda$. Denote a negligible function by $negl$.
\textbf{Cyclotomics.} More details about cyclotomics can be found in \cite{cyclotomic-fields}. Let $m$ be a positive integer, $\xi_m=\exp(\frac{2 \pi i}{m})$ be a $m$-th root of unity. The $m$-th cyclotomic polynomial $\Phi_m(x)$ is defined as $\Phi_m(x)=\prod_{j=1,\gcd(j,m)=1}^{m} { ( x - \xi_m^j)}$. It is a monic irreducible
polynomial of degree $\phi(m)$ in $\mathbb{Z}[x]$, where $\phi$ is the Euler function. The $m$-th cyclotomic field is $\mathbb{Q}(\xi_m)\cong \mathbb{Q}[x]/(\Phi_m(x))$ and its corresponding ring of integers is exactly $\mathbb{Z}[\xi_m] \cong \mathbb{Z}[x]/(\Phi_m(x))$. Most of cryptographic schemes based on algebraically structured lattices are defined over power-of-two cyclotomic rings, $\mathbb{Z}[x]/(x^{n}+1)$ and $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{n}+1)$, where $n=2^e$ is a power of two such that $x^n+1$ is the $2^{e+1}$-th cyclotomic polynomial. We use non-power-of-two cyclotomic rings $\mathbb{Z}[x]/(x^{n}-x^{n/2}+1)$ and $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{n}-x^{n/2}+1)$, where $n=3^{l}\cdot 2^e, l \ge 0, e \ge 1$ throughout this paper and in this case $x^n - x^{n/2} + 1$ is the $3^{l+1}\cdot 2^e$-th cyclotomic polynomial.
\textbf{Modular reductions.} In this work, we expand the definition of modular reduction from $\mathbb{Z}$ to $\mathbb{R}$. For a positive number $q$, $r'=r \bmod^{\pm} q$ means that $r'$ is the representative element of $r$ in $[- \frac{q}{2} , \frac{q}{2} )$. Let $r'=r \bmod q$ denote as the representative element of $r$ in $[0, q)$.
\textbf{Sizes of elements.} Let $q$ be a positive number. For any number $w \in \mathbb{R}$, denote by $\|w\|_{q,\infty}=|w \bmod^{\pm} q|$ its $\ell_\infty$ norm. If ${w}$ is an $n$-dimension vector, then its $\ell_2$ norm is defined as $ \|{w}\|_{q,2} = \sqrt{\|w_0\|_{q,\infty}^2 + \cdots+\|w_{n-1}\|_{q,\infty}^2 } $. Notice that $ \|w\|_{q,2} = \|w\|_{q,\infty}$ holds for any number $w \in \mathbb{R}$.
\textbf{Sets and Distributions.} For a set $D$, we denote by $x \xleftarrow{\$} D$ sampling $x$ from $D$ uniformly at random. If $D$ is a probability distribution, $x \gets D$ means that $x$ is chosen according to the distribution $D$. The centered binomial distribution $B_\eta$ with respect to a positive integer $\eta$ is defined as follows: $ \text{Sample } (a_1,\ldots,a_\eta,b_1,\ldots,b_\eta) \xleftarrow{\$} \{0,1\}^{2\eta}$, and output $\sum_{i=1}^{\eta}{( a_i - b_i)} $. Sampling a polynomial $f \gets B_\eta$ means sampling each coefficient according to $B_\eta$ individually.
\subsection{Cryptographic Primitives}\label{sec-cryptographic-primitives}
A public-key encryption scheme contains PKE = (KeyGen, Enc, Dec), with a message space $\mathcal{M}$. The key generation algorithm KeyGen returns a pair of public key and secret key $(pk,sk)$. The encryption algorithm Enc takes a public key $pk$ and a message $m \in \mathcal{M}$ to produce a ciphertext $c$. Denote by Enc$(pk,m;coin)$ the encryption algorithm with an explicit randomness $coin$ if necessary. The deterministic decryption algorithm Dec takes a secret key $sk$ and a ciphertext $c$, and outputs either a message $m \in \mathcal{M}$ or a special symbol $\perp$ to indicate a rejection. The decryption error $\delta$ of PKE is defined as E[$\max_{m \in \mathcal{M}}$Pr[Dec($sk$,Enc($pk,m$))] $\neq m$]$ < \delta$. The advantage of an adversary $\mathsf{A}$ against \emph{indistinguishability under chosen-plaintext attacks} (IND-CPA) for public-key encryption is defined as $\textbf{Adv}_{\text{PKE}}^{\text{IND-CPA}}(\mathsf{A})=$
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\left| \text{Pr} \left[
b'=b:
\begin{array}{c}
(pk,sk) \gets \text{KeyGen}(); \\
(m_0,m_1,s) \gets \mathsf{A}(pk);\\
b \xleftarrow{\$} \{0,1\}; c^* \gets \text{Enc}(pk,m_b);\\
b' \gets \mathsf{A}(s,c^*)
\end{array}
\right]
- \frac{1}{2} \right|.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
A key encapsulation mechanism contains KEM = (KeyGen, Encaps, Decaps) with a key space $\mathcal{K}$. The key generation algorithm KeyGen returns a pair of public key and secret key $(pk,sk)$. The encapsulation algorithm Encaps takes a public key $pk$ to produce a ciphertext $c$ and a key $ K \in \mathcal{K}$. The deterministic decapsulation algorithm Decaps inputs a secret key $sk$ and a ciphertext $c$, and outputs either a key $ K \in \mathcal{K}$ or a special symbol $\perp$ indicating a rejection. The error probability $\delta$ of KEM is defined as Pr[Decaps$(sk,c) \neq K:(c,K) \gets$ Encaps($pk$)] $ < \delta$. The advantage of an adversary $\mathsf{A}$ against \emph{indistinguishability under chosen-ciphertext attacks} (IND-CCA) for KEM is defined as $\textbf{Adv}_{\text{KEM}}^{\text{IND-CCA}}(\mathsf{A})= $
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\left| \text{Pr} \left[
b'=b:
\begin{array}{c}
(pk,sk) \gets \text{KeyGen}(); \\
b \xleftarrow{\$} \{0,1\}; \\
(c^*,K_0^*) \gets \text{Encaps}(pk);\\
K_1^* \xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{K}; \\
b' \gets \mathsf{A}^{ \text{ Decaps}( \cdot ) }(pk,c^*,K_b^*)
\end{array}
\right]
- \frac{1}{2} \right|.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Hardness Assumptions}
As the lattice cryptography evolved over the decades, the security of NTRU and its variants can be naturally viewed as two assumptions. One is the \emph{NTRU} assumption~\cite{ntru-HPS98}, and the other is the \emph{Ring-Learning with error} (RLWE) assumption~\cite{rlwe-LPR10}, which are listed as follows. In some sense, the NTRU assumption can be viewed as a special case of the RLWE assumption. More details about NTRU cryptosystem and its applications can be seen in the excellent survey~\cite{ntru-survey-Ste14}.
\begin{definition}[NTRU assumption~\cite{ntru-HPS98}]
Let $\Psi$ be a distribution over a polynomial ring R. Sample $f$ and $g $ according to $\Psi$, and $f$ is invertible in R. Let $h=g/f$. The decisional NTRU assumption states that $h$ is indistinguishable from a uniformly-random element in R. More precisely, the decisional NTRU assumption is hard if the advantage $\textbf{Adv}_{R, \Psi}^{\text{NTRU}}(\mathsf{A})$ of any probabilistic polynomial time (PPT) adversary $\mathsf{A}$ is negligible, where $\textbf{Adv}_{R, \Psi}^{\text{NTRU}}(\mathsf{A}) =$
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\bigg| \text{Pr} \left[
b'=1:
\begin{array}{c}
f,g \leftarrow \Psi \land f^{-1} \in R\\
h=g/f \in R; b' \leftarrow \mathsf{A}(h)
\end{array}
\right] \\
-
\text{Pr} \left[ b'=1: h \xleftarrow{\$} R; b' \leftarrow \mathsf{A}(h) \right]
\bigg|.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[RLWE assumption~\cite{rlwe-LPR10}]
Let $\Psi$ be a distribution over a polynomial ring R. The (decisional) Ring-Learning with error (RLWE) assumption over R is to distinguish uniform samples $({h},c) \xleftarrow{\$} R \times R$ from samples $({h},c) \in R \times R$ where ${h} \xleftarrow{\$} R$ and $c = {h} {r} + e $ with $r,e \leftarrow \Psi$. It is hard if the advantage $\textbf{Adv}_{R,\Psi}^{\text{RLWE}}(\mathsf{A})$ of any probabilistic polynomial time adversary $\mathsf{A}$ is negligible, where $\textbf{Adv}_{R,\Psi}^{\text{RLWE}}(\mathsf{A}) =$
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\Bigg| \text{Pr} \left[
b'=1:
\begin{array}{c}
{h} \xleftarrow{\$} R; r,e \leftarrow \Psi; \\
c = {h} {r} + e \in R ; b' \gets \mathsf{A}({h}, {c})
\end{array}
\right] \\
-
\text{Pr} \left[ b'=1: {h} \xleftarrow{\$} R; {c} \xleftarrow{\$} R; b' \gets \mathsf{A}({h}, {c}) \right]
\Bigg|.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\section{The Lattice Coding}\label{sec-the-lattice-coding}
Before introducing our proposed NTRU-based KEM scheme, we present simple and efficient lattice coding algorithms. The motivation is that a dense lattice with efficient decoding algorithm is needed in our construction for better efficiency on recovering message and low enough error probability. The coding algorithms should satisfy the following conditions.
\begin{itemize}
\item The operations should be simple enough, and can be implemented by efficient arithmetic (better for integer-only operations).
\item The decoding bound is large enough such that it leads to a high fault-tolerant mechanism.
\end{itemize}
We note that an 8-dimension lattice, named $\text{E}_8$ lattice (see~\cite{e8-lattice-decoding-book-CS13}, Chapter 4) could satisfy the above requirements to some extent.
As for its density, there is a remarkable mathematical breakthrough that sphere packing in the $\text{E}_8$ lattice is proved to be optimal in the sense of the best density when packing in $\mathbb{R}^{8}$~\cite{e8-lattice-Via18}. As for the efficiency on coding, there has been simple executable encoding and decoding algorithms of the $\text{E}_8$ lattice in~\cite{e8-lattice-decoding-CS82,e8-lattice-decoding-book-CS13}.
However, the known coding algorithms in~\cite{e8-lattice-decoding-CS82,e8-lattice-decoding-book-CS13} cannot be directly applied here. To work in our setting, we need to specify a one-to-one mapping from binary strings to the $\text{E}_8$ lattice points to encode messages. In this work, we specify such a mapping by choosing a basis for the scalable version of the $\text{E}_8$ lattice, which can transform the lattice points to the binary strings without involving Gaussian Elimination.
\subsection{Coding with Scalable $\text{E}_8$ Lattice}
The scalable $\text{E}_8$ lattice is constructed from the Extended Hamming Code with respect to dimension 8, which is defined as $H_8 = \{ \mathbf{c} \in \{0,1\}^8 \mid \mathbf{c} = \mathbf{z} \mathbf{H} \bmod 2, \mathbf{z} \in \{0,1\}^4\}$
where the binary matrix $\mathbf{H}$ is
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{H} = \begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
Let $C = \{(x_1, x_1, x_2, x_2, x_3, x_3, x_4, x_4) \in \{0,1\}^8 \mid \sum{x_i} \equiv 0 \bmod 2 \}$, where $C$ is spanned by the up most three rows of $\mathbf{H}$. Then the scalable $\text{E}_8 $ lattice (named $\text{E}'_8$ lattice) is constructed as
$$\text{E}'_8 = \lambda \cdot [ C \cup (C + \mathbf{c}) ] \subset [0,\lambda]^8$$
where $\mathbf{c} = (0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1)$ is the last row of $\mathbf{H}$, $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}^+$ is the scale factor and $\lambda \cdot C$ means that all the elements in $C$ multiply by $\lambda$.
\subsubsection{Encoding algorithm of the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice.}
The encoding algorithm of the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice (see Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-encoding}) is to calculate $\lambda \cdot (\mathbf{k} \mathbf{H} \bmod 2)$, given a 4-bit binary string $\mathbf{k}$, where $(\mathbf{k} \mathbf{H} \bmod 2)$ can be computed efficiently by bitwise operations.
\input{algorithm/algo-e8-encoding.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-e8-decoding-e8.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-e8-decoding-c.tex}
\subsubsection{Decoding algorithm.}
Given any $\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^8$, the decoding algorithm is to find the solution of the closest vector problem (CVP) of $\mathbf{x}$ in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice, which is denoted by $ \lambda \cdot \mathbf{k}' \mathbf{H} \bmod 2$, and it outputs the 4-bit string $\mathbf{k}'$. To solve the CVP of $\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^8$ in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice, we turn to solve the CVP of $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{x}-\lambda \mathbf{c}$ in the lattice $C' = \lambda \cdot C$. The one that has smaller distance is the final answer.
We briefly introduce the idea of solving the CVP in the lattice $C'$ here. Given $\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^8$, for every two components in $\mathbf{x}$, determine whether they are close to $(0,0)$ or $(\lambda,\lambda)$. Assign the corresponding component of $\mathbf{k}$ to 0 if the former is true, and 1 otherwise. If $\sum{k_i} \bmod 2 = 0 $ holds, it indicates that $\lambda \cdot (k_0,k_0,k_1,k_1,k_2,k_2,k_3,k_3)$ is the solution. However, $\sum{k_i} \bmod 2$ might be equal to 1. Then we choose the secondly closest vector, $\lambda \cdot (k'_0,k'_0,k'_1,k'_1,k'_2,k'_2,k'_3,k'_3)$, where there will be at most one-bit difference between $(k_0,k_1,k_2,k_3)$ and $(k'_0,k'_1,k'_2,k'_3)$. The detailed algorithm is given in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-e8}, along with Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-c} as its subroutines. Note that in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-c}, $mind$ and $mini$ are set to store the minimal difference of the components and the corresponding index, respectively.
Finally, $\mathsf{Decode}_{C'}$ in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-e8} will output the 4-bit string $(k_0,k_1,k_2,k_3)$ such that the lattice point $\lambda \cdot(k_0 , k_0 \oplus b, k_1 , k_1 \oplus b,k_2 , k_2 \oplus b, k_3 , k_3 \oplus b)$ is closest to $\mathbf{x}$ in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice. Since the lattice point has the form of $\lambda \cdot (\mathbf{k} \mathbf{H} \bmod 2)$, the decoding result $\mathbf{k}$ can be obtained by tweaking the solution of the CVP in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice, as in line~\ref{line-e8-decoding-e8-output} and line~\ref{line-e8-decoding-e8-output-tweak} in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-e8}.
\subsection{Bound of Correct Decoding}
Theorem~\ref{thm-correctness-of-e8-lattice} gives a bound of correct decoding w.r.t. Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-e8}. Briefly speaking, for any 8-dimension vector which is close enough to the given $\text{E}'_8$ lattice point under the metric of $\ell_2$ norm, it can be decoded into the same 4-bit string that generates the lattice point. This theorem is helpful when we try to recover the targeted message from the given lattice point with error terms in our schemes.
\begin{theorem}[Correctness bound of the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice decoding]\label{thm-correctness-of-e8-lattice}
For any given $\mathbf{k}_1 \in \{0,1\}^4$, denote $\mathbf{v}_1 :=\text{Encode}_{E'_8}(\mathbf{k}_1)$. For any $\mathbf{v}_2 \in \mathbb{R}^8$, denote $\mathbf{k}_2:=\text{Decode}_{E'_8}(\mathbf{v}_2)$. If $\| \mathbf{v}_2 - \mathbf{v}_1 \|_{2\lambda,2} < \lambda$, then $\mathbf{k}_1 = \mathbf{k}_2 $.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
According to the construction of the Extended Hamming Code $H_8$, we know that its minimal Hamming distance is 4. Thus, the radius of sphere packing in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice we used is $\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{4 \cdot \lambda^2 } = \lambda$. As shown in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-encoding}, $\mathbf{v}_1$ is the lattice point generated from $\mathbf{k}_1$. As for $\mathbf{v}_2 \in \mathbb{R}^8$, if $\| \mathbf{v}_2 - \mathbf{v}_1 \|_{2\lambda,2} < \lambda$, the solution of the CVP about $\mathbf{v}_2$ in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice is $\mathbf{v}_1$. Since $\text{Decode}_{E'_8}$ in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-decoding-e8} will output the 4-bit string finally, instead of the intermediate solution of the CVP, $\mathbf{v}_1$ is also generated from $\mathbf{k}_2$, i.e., $\mathbf{v}_1= \lambda \cdot (\mathbf{k}_2 \mathbf{H} \bmod 2) $, which indicates that $\mathbf{k}_1 = \mathbf{k}_2 $.
\end{proof}
\section{CTRU: Construction and Analysis}\label{sec-ctru-proposal}
In this section, we propose our new cryptosystem based on NTRU lattice, named CTRU, which contains an IND-CPA secure public-key encryption (CTRU.PKE) and an IND-CCA secure key encapsulation mechanism (CTRU.KEM). CTRU has a similar form of public key and secret key to those of the traditional NTRU-based KEM schemes, but the method to recover message in CTRU is significantly different from them.
With our construction, CTRU will achieve smaller ciphertext sizes with scalable ciphertext compression.
\subsection{Proposal Description}
Our CTRU.PKE scheme is specified in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-keygen}-\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-dec}.
Restate that $\mathcal{R}_{q}= \mathbb{Z}_{q}[x]/(x^n - x^{n/2} +1)$, where $n$ and $q$ are the ring parameters. Let $q_2$ be the ciphertext modulus, which is usually set to be a power of two. Let $p$ be the message space modulus, satisfying $\gcd(q,p)=1$. We fix $p=2$ in this work. Let $\Psi$ be the distribution over $\mathcal{R}$. For presentation simplicity, the secret terms, $f^\prime$, $g$, $r$ and $e$, are all taken from $\Psi$. In general, they can taken from different distributions. Let $\mathcal{M}=\{0,1\}^{n/2}$ denote the message space, where each $m \in \mathcal{M}$ can be seen as a $\frac{n}{2}$-dimension polynomial with coefficients in $\{0,1\}$.
\input{algorithm/algo-ctru-e8-pke-keygen.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-ctru-e8-pke-enc.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-ctru-e8-pke-dec.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-e8-poly-encoding.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-e8-poly-decoding.tex}
The $\text{PolyEncode}$ algorithm and $\text{PolyDecode}$ algorithm are described in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-poly-encoding} and~\ref{algo-e8-poly-decoding}, respectively. Specifically, we construct the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice with the scale factor $\frac{q}{2}$ in Algorithm~\ref{algo-e8-poly-encoding}. That is, the encoding algorithm works over $\text{E}'_8 :=\frac{q}{2} \cdot [ C \cup (C + \mathbf{c}) ]$. The $\text{PolyEncode}$ algorithm splits each $m \in \mathcal{M}$ into some quadruples, each of which will be encoded via $\text{Encode}_{E'_8}$. As for $\text{PolyDecode}$ algorithm, the decoding algorithm works over the lattice $\text{E}''_8 :=\frac{q_2}{2} \cdot [ C \cup (C + \mathbf{c}) ]$. It splits $v \in \mathcal{R}_{q_2}$ into some octets, each of which will be decoded via $\text{Decode}_{E''_8}$. The final message $m$ can be recovered by combining all the 4-bit binary strings output by $\text{Decode}_{E''_8}$.
We construct our CTRU.KEM=(Keygen, Encaps, Decaps) by applying $\text{FO}_{ID(pk),m}^{\not\bot}$, a variant of Fujisaki-Okamoto (FO) transformation~\cite{fo-transform-HHK17,fo-transform-FO99} aimed for the strengthened IND-CCA security in multi-user setting ~\cite{fo-transform-prefix-hash-DHK+21}. Let $\iota,\gamma$ be positive integers. We prefer to choose $\iota,\gamma \ge 256$ for strong security. Let $\mathcal{H} :\{0,1\}^* \rightarrow \mathcal{K} \times \mathcal{COINS} $ be a hash function, where $\mathcal{K}$ is the shared key space of CTRU.KEM and $\mathcal{COINS}$ is the randomness space of CTRU.PKE.Enc. Note that we make explicit the randomness in CTRU.PKE.Enc here. Define $\mathcal{H}_1(\cdot)$ as $\mathcal{H}(\cdot)$'s partial output that is mapped into $\mathcal{K}$. Let $\mathcal{PK}$ be the public key space of CTRU.PKE. Let $ID: \mathcal{PK} \rightarrow \{0,1\}^{\gamma}$ be a fixed-output length function. The algorithms of CTRU.KEM are described in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-kem-keygen}-\ref{algo-ctru-e8-kem-decaps}.
\input{algorithm/algo-ctru-e8-kem-keygen.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-ctru-e8-kem-encaps.tex}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\input{algorithm/algo-ctru-e8-kem-decaps.tex}
\subsection{Correctness Analysis}\label{sec-error}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis-equation}
It holds that $ c f \bmod^{\pm} q_2 = \frac{q_2}{q} ( (\frac{q}{q_2} c) f \bmod^{\pm} q ) $.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since polynomial multiplication can be described as matrix-vector multiplication, which keeps the linearity, it holds that $(\frac{q}{q_2} c) f = \frac{q}{q_2} (c f )$.
There exits an integral vector $\theta \in \mathbb{Z}^n$ such that $\frac{q}{q_2} c f \bmod^{\pm} q = \frac{q}{q_2} c f + q \theta $ and $ -\frac{q}{2} \le \frac{q}{q_2} c f + q \theta < \frac{q}{2}$. Thus, we have $ -\frac{q_2}{2} \le c f + q_2 \theta < \frac{q_2}{2}$. Hence, we obtain
$$ c f \bmod^{\pm} q_2 = c f + q_2 \theta = \frac{q_2}{q}(\frac{q}{q_2} c f + q \theta ) = \frac{q_2}{q} ( (\frac{q}{q_2} c) f \bmod^{\pm} q ).$$
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis}
Let $\Psi$ be the distribution over the ring $\mathcal{R}$, and $q,q_2,p$ be positive integers.
Let $f',g,r,e \leftarrow \Psi$. Let $\varepsilon_1 \leftarrow \chi_1$, where $\chi_1$ is the distribution over $\mathcal{R}$ defined as follows: Sample $s \xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{R}_{2}$ and output $\left( \big\lfloor \frac{q}{2}s \big\rceil - \frac{q}{2}s \right) \bmod^{\pm} q$. And, let $\varepsilon_2 \leftarrow \chi_2$, where $\chi_2$ is the distribution over $\mathcal{R}$ defined as follows: Sample $\sigma \xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{R}_{q}$ and $s \xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{R}_{2}$ and output $\left[ \Big\lfloor \frac{q_2}{q} ( \sigma + \big\lfloor\frac{q}{2}s\big\rceil ) \Big\rceil - \frac{q_2}{q} ( \sigma + \big\lfloor\frac{q}{2}s\big\rceil ) \right] \bmod^{\pm} q_2$. Let $\text{Err}_i$ be the $i$-th octet of $gr+ef+(\varepsilon_1+\frac{q}{q_2}\varepsilon_2 )f $.
Denote $1-\delta=\text{Pr}\left[ \| \text{Err}_i \|_{q,2} < \frac{q}{2} \right] $. Then, the error probability of CTRU is $\delta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Scale the $\text{E}''_8$ lattice and $c f \bmod^{\pm} q_2$ by the factor $q / q_2$. According to Lemma~\ref{lemma-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis-equation}, we have
\begin{align}\label{equ-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis-equation-m}
\begin{split}
m &= \text{PolyDecode}_{E''_8}\left( c f \bmod^{\pm} q_2 \right) \\
&= \text{PolyDecode}_{E'_8}\left( (\frac{q}{q_2} c) f \bmod^{\pm} q \right)
\end{split}
\end{align}
in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-dec}. Since $m\xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{M}$ in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-kem-encaps}, the result of $\text{PolyEncode}(m)$ in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-enc} can be denoted by $\frac{q}{2}s $ where $s\xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{R}_{2}$. Based on the hardness of the NTRU assumption and the RLWE assumption, $\sigma$ in line~\ref{line-ctru-e8-enc-sigma} in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-enc} is pseudo-random in $\mathcal{R}_{q}$.
Therefore, the value of $c$ in line~\ref{line-ctru-e8-enc-ciphertext-c} in Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-enc} is
$$ c= \Big\lfloor \cfrac{q_2}{q} ( \sigma + \big\lfloor\cfrac{q}{2}s\big\rceil ) \Big\rceil \bmod q_2 = \cfrac{q_2}{q} ( \sigma + \cfrac{q}{2}s +\varepsilon_1) + \varepsilon_2 \bmod q_2 .$$
With $\sigma = hr + e$, $h=g/f$ and $f=2 f' +1$, for the formula (\ref{equ-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis-equation-m}) we get
\begin{align}\label{equ-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis-equation-whole}
\begin{split}
(\frac{q}{q_2} c) f \bmod^{\pm} q &= \frac{q}{q_2} [\cfrac{q_2}{q} ( \sigma + \cfrac{q}{2}s +\varepsilon_1) + \varepsilon_2 ] \cdot f \bmod^{\pm} q \\
&= \cfrac{q}{2}s (2 f' +1) + \sigma f + (\varepsilon_1+\cfrac{q}{q_2} \varepsilon_2) f \bmod^{\pm} q\\
&= \cfrac{q}{2}s + gr + ef + (\varepsilon_1+\cfrac{q}{q_2} \varepsilon_2) f \bmod^{\pm} q
\end{split}
\end{align}
Each octet of $\frac{q}{2}s$ in (\ref{equ-ctru-kem-correctness-analysis-equation-whole}) is essentially a lattice point in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice, which we denoted by $\frac{q}{2} (\mathbf{k}_i \mathbf{H} \bmod 2)$. From Theorem~\ref{thm-correctness-of-e8-lattice} we know that to recover $\mathbf{k}_i$, it should hold $\| \text{Err}_i \|_{q,2} < \frac{q}{2}$, where $\text{Err}_i$ is the $i$-th octet of $gr+ef+(\varepsilon_1+\frac{q}{q_2}\varepsilon_2) f $.
\end{proof}
The form of polynomial product in the ring $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n - x^{n/2} + 1 )$ is presented in detail in Appendix~\ref{app-sec-form-of-polynomial-product}. The error probability is estimated by using a Python script. The results for the selected parameters are given in Table~\ref{tab-ctru-e8-recommended-parameter-set}.
\subsection{Provable Security}
We prove that CTRU.PKE is IND-CPA secure under the NTRU assumption and the RLWE assumption.
\begin{theorem}[IND-CPA security]\label{thm-ctru-pke-ind-cpa-security}
For any adversary $\mathsf{A}$, there exits adversaries $\mathsf{B}$ and $\mathsf{C}$ such that $\textbf{Adv}_{\text{CTRU.PKE}}^{\text{IND-CPA}}(\mathsf{A}) \le \textbf{Adv}_{\mathcal{R}_q, \Psi}^{\text{NTRU}}(\mathsf{B}) + \textbf{Adv}_{\mathcal{R}_q,\Psi}^{\text{RLWE}}(\mathsf{C}) $.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We complete our proof through a sequence of games $\textbf{G}_0$, $\textbf{G}_1$ and $\textbf{G}_2$. Let $\mathsf{A}$ be the adversary against the IND-CPA security experiment. Denote by $\textbf{Succ}_i$ the event that $\mathsf{A}$ wins in the game $\textbf{G}_i$, that is, $\mathsf{A}$ outputs $b'$ such that $b'=b$ in $\textbf{G}_i$.
Game $\textbf{G}_0$. This game is the original IND-CPA security experiment. Thus, $\textbf{Adv}_{\text{CTRU.PKE}}^{\text{IND-CPA}}(\mathsf{A}) = | \text{Pr}[ \textbf{Succ}_0] -1/2 |$.
Game $\textbf{G}_1$. This game is the same as $\textbf{G}_0$, except that replacing the public key $h=g/f$ in the KeyGen by $ h \xleftarrow{\$} \mathcal{R}_q$. To distinguish $\textbf{G}_1$ from $\textbf{G}_0$ is equivalent to solve an NTRU problem. More precisely, there exits an adversary $\mathsf{B}$ with the same running time as that of $\mathsf{A}$ such that $| \text{Pr}[ \textbf{Succ}_0] - \text{Pr}[ \textbf{Succ}_1] | \le \textbf{Adv}_{\mathcal{R}_q, \Psi}^{\text{NTRU}}(\mathsf{B}) $.
Game $\textbf{G}_2$. This game is the same as $\textbf{G}_1$, except that using uniformly random elements from $ \mathcal{R}_q$ to replace $\sigma$ in the encryption. Similarly, there exits an adversary $\mathsf{C}$ with the same running time as that of $\mathsf{A}$ such that $| \text{Pr}[ \textbf{Succ}_1] - \text{Pr}[ \textbf{Succ}_2] | \le \textbf{Adv}_{\mathcal{R}_q,\Psi}^{\text{RLWE}}(\mathsf{C}) $.
In Game $\textbf{G}_2$, for any given $m_b$, according to Algorithm~\ref{algo-ctru-e8-pke-enc} and~\ref{algo-e8-poly-encoding}, $m_b$ is split into $n/8$ quadruples. Denote the $i$-th quadruple of $m_b$ as $m_b^{(i)}$, which will later be operated to output the $i$-th octet of the ciphertext $c$ that is denoted as $c^{(i)}$, $i=0,1,\ldots,n/8-1$. Since $c^{(i)}$ is only dependent on $m_b^{(i)}$ and other parts of $m_b$ do not interfere with $c^{(i)}$, our aim is to prove that $c^{(i)}$ is independent of $m_b^{(i)}$, $i=0,1,\ldots,n/8-1$. For any $i$ and any given $m_b^{(i)}$, $\lfloor \text{Encode}_{E'_8}(m_b^{(i)}) \rceil$ is fixed. Based on the uniform randomness of $\sigma$ in $ \mathcal{R}_q$ , its $i$-th octet (denoted as $\sigma^{(i)}$) is uniformly random in $\mathbb{Z}_q^{8}$, so is $\sigma^{(i)} + \lfloor \text{Encode}_{E'_8}(m_b^{(i)}) \rceil$. Therefore, the resulting $c^{(i)}$ is subject to the distribution $ \lfloor \frac{q_2}{q}u \rceil \bmod q_2$ where $u$ is uniformly random in $\mathbb{Z}_q^{8}$, which implies that $c^{(i)}$ is independent of $m_b^{(i)}$. Hence, each $c^{(i)}$ leaks no information of the corresponding $m_b^{(i)}$, $i=0,1,\ldots,n/8-1$. We have $ \text{Pr}[ \textbf{Succ}_2] = 1/2$.
Combining all the probabilities finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
By applying the $\text{FO}_{ID(pk),m}^{\not\bot}$ transformation and adapting the results given in \cite{fo-transform-prefix-hash-DHK+21}, we have the following results on CCA security of CTRU in the random oracle model (ROM)~\cite{rom-BR93} and quantum random oracle model (QROM)~\cite{qrom-BDF+11}.
\begin{theorem}[IND-CCA security in the ROM and QROM~\cite{fo-transform-prefix-hash-DHK+21}]~\label{thm-ctru-kem-ind-cca-security}
Let $\ell$ be the min-entropy~\cite{fo-transform-FO99} of $ID(pk)$, i.e., $\ell = H_{\infty}(ID(pk))$, where $(pk,sk)$$\leftarrow$CTRU.PKE.KeyGen. For any (quantum) adversary $\mathsf{A}$, making at most $q_D$ decapsulation queries, $q_H$ (Q)RO queries, against the IND-CCA security of CTRU.KEM, there exits a (quantum) adversary $\mathsf{B}$ with roughly the same running time of $\mathsf{A}$, such that:
\begin{itemize}
\item In the ROM, it holds that $\textbf{Adv}_{\text{CTRU.KEM}}^{\text{IND-CCA}}(\mathsf{A}) \le$
$$ 2\left( \textbf{Adv}_{\text{CTRU.PKE}}^{\text{IND-CPA}}(\mathsf{B}) + \frac{q_H+1}{|\mathcal{M}|} \right) + \frac{q_H}{2^{\iota}} + (q_H+q_D) \delta + \frac{1}{2^{\ell}};$$
\item In the QROM, it holds that $\textbf{Adv}_{\text{CTRU.KEM}}^{\text{IND-CCA}}(\mathsf{A}) \le$
$$ 2 \sqrt{q_{HD} \textbf{Adv}_{\text{CTRU.PKE}}^{\text{IND-CPA}}(\mathsf{B}) }+ \frac{4 q_{HD}}{\sqrt{|\mathcal{M}|}}+ \frac{4(q_H+1)}{\sqrt{2^{\iota}}}+ 16 q_{HD}^{2}\delta + \frac{1}{|\mathcal{M}|} +\frac{1}{2^{\ell}},$$
where $q_{HD}:=q_H + q_D+1$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
The detailed discussions and clarifications on CCA security reduction of KEM in the ROM and the QROM are given in Appendix~\ref{app-sec-reduction}.
\subsection{Discussions and Comparisons}
\textbf{The rings.}
As in~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21,nttru-LS19},
we choose non-power-of-two cyclotomics $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n-x^{n/2}+1)$ with respect to $n=3^{l}\cdot 2^e$ and prime $q$, This type of ring allows very fast NTT-based polynomial multiplication if the ring moduli are set to be NTT-friendly. Moreover, it also allows very flexible parameter selection, since there are many integral $n$ of the form $3^{l}\cdot 2^e, l \ge 0, e \ge 1$.
\textbf{The message modulus.}
Note that the modulus $p$ is removed in the public key $h$ (i.e., $h = g/f$ ) and in the ciphertext $c$ of our CTRU, for the reason that $p$ is not needed in $h$ and $c$ to recover the message $m$ in our construction.
The only reserved position of $p$ is the secret key $f$, which has the form of $f=pf'+1$. Since $\gcd(q,p)=1$ is required for NTRU-based KEM schemes, we can use $p=2$ instead of $p=3$. A smaller $p$ can lead to a lower error probability. Note that for other NTRU-based KEM schemes with power-of-two modulus $q$ as in NTRU-HRSS~\cite{ntru-nist-round3}, $p$ is set to be $3$ because it is the smallest integer co-prime to the power-of-2 modulus.
\textbf{The decryption mechanism.}
Technically speaking, the ciphertext of NTRU-based PKE schemes~\cite{ntru-HPS98,ntru-nist-round3,ntru-secure-as-ideal-lattice-SS11,ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21} has the form of $c=phr+m \bmod q$. One can recover the message $m$ through a unidimensional error-correction mechanism, after computing $cf \bmod q$. Instead, we use a multi-dimension coding mechanism. We encode each 4-bit messages into a lattice point in the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice. They can be recovered correctly with the aid of the $\text{E}'_8$ decoding algorithm if the $\ell_2$ norm of the error term is less than the sphere radius of the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice.
\textbf{The ciphertext compression.} To the best of our knowledge, CTRU is the first NTRU-based KEM with scalable ciphertext compression via a single polynomial.
The ciphertext modulus $q_2$ is adjustable, depending on the bits to be dropped. The reason that most NTRU-based KEM schemes fail to compress ciphertext is that the message cannot be recovered via reduction modulo $p$ once the ciphertext is compressed.
\section{Concrete Hardness and Parameter Selection}\label{sec-attack-analysis}
In this section, we first estimate and select parameters for CTRU, by applying the methodology of core-SVP hardness estimation~\cite{newhope-usenix-ADPS16}. Then, we present the refined gate-count estimate, by using the scripts provided by Kyber and NTRU Prime in NIST PQC Round 3. Finally, we overview and discuss some recent attacks beyond the core-SVP hardness.
\subsection{Parameter Selection with Core-SVP
\subsubsection{Primal attack and dual attack.}
Currently, for the parameters selected for most practical lattice-based cryptosystems, the dominant attacks considered are the lattice-based primal and dual attacks.
The primal attack is to solve the \emph{unique-Short Vector Problem} (u-SVP) in the lattice by constructing an integer \emph{embedding lattice} (Kannan embedding~\cite{lattice-embedding-Kan87}, Bai-Galbraith embedding~\cite{lattice-embedding-BG14}, etc). The most common lattice reduction algorithm is the BKZ algorithm~\cite{bkz-SE94,bkz-CN11}. Given a lattice basis, the \emph{blocksize}, which we denote by $b$, is necessarily chosen to recover the short vector while running the BKZ algorithm. NTRU problem can be treated as a u-SVP instance in the NTRU lattice~\cite{ntru-attack-CS97}, while a u-SVP instance can also be constructed from the LWE problem. The dual attack~\cite{MDO08} is to solve the \emph{decisional} LWE problem, consisting of using the BKZ algorithm in the dual lattice, so as to recover part of the secret and infer the final secret vector.
\subsubsection{Core-SVP hardness of CTRU}
Following the simple and conservative methodology of the core-SVP hardness developed from~\cite{newhope-usenix-ADPS16}, the best known cost of running SVP solver on $b$-dimension sublattice is $2^{0.292 b}$ for the classical case and $2^{0.265 b}$ for the quantum case. These cost models can be used for conservative estimates of the security of our schemes. Note that the number of samples is set to be $2n$ for NTRU problem (resp., $n$ for LWE problem),
since the adversary is given such samples. We estimate the classical and quantum core-SVP hardness security of CTRU via the Python script from~\cite{newhope-usenix-ADPS16,kyber-BDK+18,kyber-nist-round3}. The concrete results are given in Table~\ref{tab-ctru-e8-recommended-parameter-set}.
\subsubsection{Parameter sets}\label{sec-parameters}
The parameter sets of CTRU are given in Table~\ref{tab-ctru-e8-recommended-parameter-set}, where those in red are the recommended parameters also given in Table~\ref{tab-comparisons-of-schemes}. Though the parameters in red are marked as recommended, we believe the other parameter sets are still very useful in certain application scenarios. Note that in Table ~\ref{tab-comparisons-of-schemes} we did not list the security against the dual attack. The reason is that the dual attack was considered less realistic than the primal attack, and was not taken for concrete hardness estimates in many lattice-based cryptosystems including Kyber in NIST PQC Round 3~\cite{kyber-nist-round3}. For ease of a fair comparison, the security estimate against the dual attack was not listed in Table ~\ref{tab-comparisons-of-schemes}.
The ring dimension $n$ is chosen from $\{512,768,1024\}$, corresponding to the targeted security levels I, III and V recommended by NIST.
We stress that selecting these $n$'s for CTRU is only for simplicity.
The ring modulus $q$ is set to 3457, and $q_2$ is the ciphertext modulus. Recall that we fix the message space modulus $p=2$ and the underlying cyclotomic polynomial $\Phi(x) = x^n - x^{n/2} + 1$, which are omitted in Table~\ref{tab-ctru-e8-recommended-parameter-set}. $\Psi$ is the probability distribution which is set to be the centered binomial distribution $B_2$ or $B_3$. The public key sizes $|pk|$, ciphertext sizes $|ct|$ and B.W. (bandwidth, $|pk|+|ct|$) are measured in terms of bytes. ``Sec.C'' and ``Sec.Q'' mean the estimated security level expressed in bits in the classical and quantum settings respectively, where all the types of NTRU attack, LWE primal attack, and LWE dual attack are considered.
The last column ``$\delta$'' indicates the error probability, which is evaluated by a script according to the analysis given in Section \ref{sec-error}.
\input{table/tab-ctru-e8-recommended-parameter-set.tex}
\input{table/tab-ctru-e8-gate-count-estimate.tex}
\subsection{Refined Gate-Count Estimate}
As for the quantum gates and space complexity related to the LWE problem,
we use the same gate number estimation method as Kyber, NTRU KEM, and SNTRU Prime in NIST PQC Round 3. Briefly speaking, it uses the probabilistic simulation of~\cite{DSD+20} rather than the GSA-intersect model of~\cite{newhope-usenix-ADPS16,AGV+17} to determine the BKZ blocksize $b$ for a successful attack.
And it relies on the concrete estimation for the cost of sieving in gates from~\cite{AGP+19}. It also accounts for the ``few dimensions for free'' proposed in~\cite{Duc18}, which permits to solve SVP in dimension $b$ by sieving in a somewhat smaller dimension $b_0 = b - O(b)$. Finally, it dismisses the dual attack as realistically more expensive than the primal attack. In particular, in the dual attack, exploiting the short vectors generated by the Nearest Neighbor Search used in lattice sieving is not compatible with the ``dimension for free'' trick~\cite{Duc18}.
The scripts for these refined estimates are provided in a git branch of the leaky-LWE estimator~\cite{DSD+20}\footnote{\url{https://github.com/lducas/leaky-LWE-Estimator/tree/NIST-round3}}. The results of CTRU parameter sets are shown in Table~\ref{tab-ctru-e8-gate-count-estimate}. It is estimated in \cite{kyber-nist-round3}
that the actual cost may not be more than 16 bits away from this estimate in either direction.
\subsection{Attacks Beyond Core-SVP Hardness}
\subsubsection{Hybrid attack}
The works~\cite{HHH+09,nist-round-2-submissions,nist-round-3-submissions} consider the hybrid attack as the most powerful against NTRU-based cryptosystems. However, even with many heuristic and theoretical analysis on hybrid attack ~\cite{Wun19,BGP+16,HHH+09,How07}, so far it still fails to make significant security impact on NTRU-based cryptosystems partially due to the memory constraints. By improving the collision attack on NTRU problem, it is suggested in ~\cite{Ngu21} that the mixed attack complexity estimate used for NTRU problem is unreliable, and there are both overestimation and underestimation. Judging from the current hybrid and meet-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks on NTRU problem, there is an estimation bias in the security estimates of NTRU-based KEMs, but this bias does not make a big difference to the claimed security. For example, under the MITM search, the security of NTRU KEM in NIST PQC Round 3 may be $2^{-8}$ less than the acclaimed value in the worst situation~\cite{Ngu21}.
\subsubsection{Recent advances on dual attack}
There are some recent progress on the dual attack, and we discuss their impacts on CTRU. Duc et al.~\cite{DAF+15} propose that fast Fourier transform (FFT) can be useful to the dual attack. As for the small coefficients of the secrets, various improvements can also be achieved~\cite{AM17,BGP+16,CJM+19}. Albrecht and Martin~\cite{AM17} propose a re-randomization and smaller-dimensional lattice reduction method, and investigate the method for generating coefficients of short vectors in the dual attack. Guo and Thomas~\cite{GT21} show that the current security estimates from the primal attacks are overestimated. Espitau et al.~\cite{ETA+20} achieve a dual attack that outperforms the primal attack. These attacks can be combined with the hybrid attack proposed in~\cite{HM07} to achieve a further optimized attack under specific parameters~\cite{SC19,overstretched-ntru-attacks-KF17,BGP+16}. Very recently, MATZOV~\cite{MAT22} further optimizes the dual attack, and claims that the impact of its methods is larger than those of Guo and Thomas's work~\cite{GT21}. It is also mentioned in~\cite{MAT22} that the newly developed methods might also be applicable to NTRU-based cryptosystems (e.g., by improving the hybrid attack). The improvements of dual attacks mentioned above have potential threats to the security of CTRU (as well as to other cryptosystems based on algebraically structured lattices). This line of research is still actively ongoing, and there is still no mature and convincing estimate method up to now.
\subsubsection{S-unit attack}
The basis of the S-unit attack is the unit attack: finding a short generator. On the basis of the constant-degree algorithm proposed in~\cite{Hal05,EHK+14}, Biasse et al.~\cite{BS16} present a quantum polynomial time algorithm, which is the basis for generating the generator used in the unit attack and S-unit attack. Then, the unit attack is to shorten the generator by reducing the modulus of the unit, and the idea is based on the variant of the LLL algorithm~\cite{Coh12} to reduce the size of the generator in the S-unit group. That is, it replaces $y_i$ with $y_i/\epsilon$, thereby reducing the size of $y_i$, where $y_i$ refers to the size of the generator and $\epsilon$ is the reduction factor of the modulus of the unit. The S-unit attack is briefly recalled in Appendix~\ref{app-sec-s-unit-attack}. Campbell et al.~\cite{CGS14} consider the application of the cycloid structure to the unit attack, which mainly depends on the simple generator of the cycloid unit. Under the cycloid structure, the determinant is easy to determine, and is larger than the logarithmic length of the private key, which means that the private key can be recovered through the LLL algorithm.
After establishing a set of short vectors, the simple reduction repeatedly uses $v-u$ to replace $v$, thereby reducing the modulus of vector $v$, where $u$ belongs to the set of short vectors. This idea is discovered in~\cite{AH17,Coh12}. The difference is that the algorithm proposed by Avanzi and Howard~\cite{AH17} can be applied to any lattice, but is limited to the $\ell_2$ norm, while the algorithm proposed by Cohen~\cite{Coh12} is applicable to more norms. Pellet-Mary et al.~\cite{PGD19} analyze the algorithm of Avanzi and Howard~\cite{AH17}, and apply it to S-unit. They point out that the S-unit attack could achieve shorter vectors than existing methods, but still with exponential time for an exponentially large approximation factor.
Very recently, Bernstein and Tanja~\cite{BT21} further improve the S-unit attack.
Up to now, it is still an open problem to predict the effectiveness of the reduction inside the unit attacks. The statistical experiments on various $m'$-th cyclotomics (with respect to power-of-two $m'$) show that the efficiency of the S-unit attacks is much higher than a spherical model of the same lattice for $m'\in \{128, 256, 512\}$~\cite{Ber16}. The effect is about a factor of $2^{-3}$, $2^{-6}$ and $2^{-11}$, respectively. Therefore, even with a conservative estimate, the security impact on CTRU may not exceed a factor of $2^{-11}$.
\subsubsection{BKW attack}
For cryptographic schemes to which the BKW method can be applied, the combined methods proposed in~\cite{BAA+03,AMC+15,GTP15,KPP15}, which extend the BKW method, can be the most efficient method for specific parameters. These methods require a large number of samples, and their security estimates are based on the analysis of lattice basis reduction, either by solving the encoding problem in the lattice or by converting to a u-SVP problem~\cite{AMR+13,LRC11,LMP13}. These attacks do not affect the security of CTRU, because the parameters chosen for CTRU do not meet the conditions of BKW.
\subsubsection{Side channel attack
Ravi et al.~\cite{REB+22} construct some ciphertexts with specific structures where the key information exists in the intermediate variables, so as to recover the key through side channel attack (SCA).
They apply this attack to NTRU KEM and NTRU Prime in NIST PQC Round 3, which can recover the full secret keys
through a few thousands of chosen ciphertext queries. This type of SCA-aided chosen ciphertext attack is not directly applicable to CTRU, but might be possible to be improved against CTRU.
\subsubsection{Other attacks}
Algebraic attacks~\cite{CGS14,BS16,CDP+16,CDW17} and dense sublattice attacks~\cite{overstretched-ntru-attacks-KF17} also provide new ideas for LWE-based cryptographic analysis. However, these attacks do not currently affect the acclaimed security of the proposed CTRU parameters.
\section{Polynomial Operations in CTRU}\label{sec-poly-operations-in-ctru}
From a computational point of view, the fundamental and also time-consuming operations in NTRU-based schemes are the multiplications and divisions of the elements in the rings $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(\Phi(x))$. Number theoretic transform (NTT) is a special case of fast Fourier transform (FFT) over a finite field~\cite{ntt-Pol71}. NTT is the most efficient method for computing polynomial multiplication of high degrees, due to its quasilinear complexity $O(n \log n)$. The complete NTT-based multiplication with respect to $f$ and $g$ is $INTT(NTT(f) \circ NTT(g))$, where $NTT$ is the forward transform, $INTT$ is the inverse transform and ``$\circ$'' is the point-wise multiplication.
The FFT trick~\cite{ber01} is a fast algorithm to compute NTT, via the Chinese Remainder Theorem (CRT) in the ring form. Briefly speaking, given two co-prime polynomials $g$ and $h$, the CRT isomorphism is that $\varphi : \mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(gh) \cong \mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(g) \times \mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(h)$ along with $\varphi(f) = ( f \bmod g, f \bmod h)$. In the case of the radix-2 FFT trick, given $g=x^m - \zeta$ and $h=x^m+\zeta$, where $\zeta$ is invertible in $\mathbb{Z}_q$, the computation of the forward FFT tirck and inverse FFT tirck can be conducted via Cooley-Tukey butterfly~\cite{ct-butterfly} and Gentleman-Sande butterfly~\cite{gs-butterfly}, respectively. The former indicates the computation from $(f_i,f_j)$ to $(f_i + \zeta \cdot f_j, f_i - \zeta \cdot f_j)$, while the later indicates the computation from $(f'_i,f'_j)$ to $(f'_i+f'_j, (f'_i-f'_j) \cdot \zeta^{-1})$.
\subsection{Unified NTT}\label{sec-unified-ntt}
In this work, we consider $n=\alpha \cdot N$, where $\alpha\in\{2,3,4\}$ is called the splitting-parameter and $N$ is a power of two. In fact, $\alpha$ can be chosen more freely as arbitrary values of the form $2^i 3^j,i\geq 0,j\geq 0$. With the traditional NTT technique, when the dimension $n$ changes we need to use different NTT algorithms of various input/output lengths to compute polynomial multiplications over $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n -x^{n/2} + 1)$. This causes much inconvenience to software and particularly hardware implementations. To address this issue, we unify the various $n$-point NTTs through an $N$-point NTT, which is referred to as the unified NTT technique. For $n\in \{512,768,1024\}$, we fix $N=256$ and choose $\alpha\in\{2,3,4\}$. With this technique, we only focus on the implementation of the $N$-point NTT, which serves as the unified procedure to be invoked for different $n$'s. Specifically, the computation of NTT over $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^n -x^{n/2} + 1)$ is divided into three steps. For presentation simplicity, we only give the procedures of the forward transform as follows, since the inverse transform can be obtained by inverting these procedures. The map road is shown in Figure~\ref{fig-crt-split-map}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figure/crt-split-map.pdf}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{Map road for unified NTT}
\label{fig-crt-split-map}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Step 1.} Construct a splitting-polynomial map $ \varphi_1 : $
{\small
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/( x^{\alpha \cdot N} - x^{\alpha \cdot N /2} + 1) & \rightarrow \left(\mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{N} - y^{N /2} + 1 ) \right)[x]/ (x^{\alpha} - y )\\
f = \sum\limits_{i=0}^{\alpha\cdot N -1}{ f_i x^i} & \mapsto \sum_{j=0}^{\alpha-1}{ F_j x^j }
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
}where $F_j = \sum\limits_{i=0}^{N-1}{ f_{\alpha \cdot i + j } y^i} \in \mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{N} - y^{N /2} + 1 )$. Namely, the $n$-dimension polynomial is split into $\alpha$ $N$-dimension sub-polynomials.
\textbf{Step 2.} Apply the unified $N$-point NTT to $F_j$ over $\mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{N} - y^{N /2} + 1 )$, $j=0,1,\ldots,\alpha-1$. Specifically, inspired by NTTRU~\cite{nttru-LS19}, there is a mapping such that $\mathbb{Z}_q[y]/(y^{N} - y^{N /2} + 1 ) \ \cong \ \mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{N/2} - \zeta_{1}) \times \mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{N/2} - \zeta_{2})$ where $\zeta_{1} + \zeta_{2}=1$ and $ \zeta_{1} \cdot \zeta_{2}=1$. Let $q$ be the prime satisfying $\frac{3N}{2^\beta} | (q-1) $, where $\beta \in \mathbb{N}$ is called the truncating-parameter, such that it exits the primitive $\frac{3N}{2^\beta}$-th root of unity $\zeta$ in $\mathbb{Z}_q$. To apply the radix-2 FFT trick, we choose $\zeta_{1} = \zeta^{N/2^{\beta+1}} \bmod q$ and $ \zeta_{2} = \zeta_{1}^5 = \zeta^{5N/2^{\beta+1}} \bmod q$. Thus, both $y^{N/2} - \zeta_{1}$ and $y^{N/2} - \zeta_{2}$ can be recursively split down into degree-$2^\beta$ terms like $y^{2^\beta} \pm \zeta$. The idea of truncating FFT trick originates from~\cite{incomplete-ntt-moenck76}. Therefore, $\mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{N} - y^{N /2} + 1 )$ can be decomposed into $\prod\limits_{k=0}^{N/2^{\beta}-1} { \mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{2^\beta} - \zeta^{\tau(k)} ) } $, where $\tau(k)$ is the power of $\zeta$ of the $k$-th term and we start the index $k$ from zero. Let $\hat{F}_j$ be the NTT result of $F_j$ and $\hat{F}_{j,l}$ be its $l$-th coefficient, $l=0,1,\ldots,N-1$. Hence, we can write
{\small
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\hat{F}_j=( \sum\limits_{l=0}^{2^\beta -1 }{ \hat{F}_{j,l} y^{l} }, \sum\limits_{l=0}^{2^{\beta} -1 }{ \hat{F}_{j,l+2^\beta} y^{l} },\ldots, \sum\limits_{l=0}^{2^{\beta} -1 }{ \hat{F}_{j,l+N-2^\beta} y^{l} } ) \\
\in \prod\limits_{k=0}^{N/2^{\beta}-1} { \mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{2^\beta} - \zeta^{\tau(k)} ) }
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
}
\textbf{Step 3.} Combine the intermediate values and obtain the final result by the map $\varphi_2 :$
{\footnotesize
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\left( \prod\limits_{k=0}^{N/2^{\beta}-1} { \mathbb{Z}_q[y]/( y^{2^\beta} - \zeta^{\tau(k)} ) } \right) [x]/(x^{\alpha} - y) & \rightarrow \prod\limits_{k=0}^{N/2^{\beta}-1}{ \mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{\alpha \cdot 2^\beta} - \zeta^{\tau(k)}) }\\
\sum_{j=0}^{\alpha-1}{ \hat{F}_j x^j } & \mapsto \hat{f}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
}
where $\hat{f} = \sum\limits_{i=0}^{\alpha\cdot N -1}{ \hat{f}_i x^i} $ is the NTT result of $f$. Its $i$-th coefficient is $\hat{f}_i = \hat{F}_{j,l}$, where $j =i\bmod\alpha$ and $l =\lfloor \frac{i}{\alpha}\rfloor $. It can be rewritten as:
{\small
\begin{equation}\label{equ-unified-ntt-result-of-f-in-multi-ring}
\begin{split}
\hat{f}=( \sum\limits_{i=0}^{\alpha \cdot 2^\beta -1 }{ \hat{f}_i x^i}, \sum\limits_{i=0}^{\alpha \cdot 2^\beta -1 }{ \hat{f}_{i+\alpha \cdot 2^\beta} x^i} ,\ldots, \sum\limits_{i=0}^{\alpha \cdot 2^\beta -1 }{ \hat{f}_{i+n-\alpha \cdot 2^\beta} x^i} ) \\
\in \prod\limits_{k=0}^{N/2^{\beta}-1}{ \mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{\alpha \cdot 2^\beta} - \zeta^{\tau(k)}) }
\end{split}
\end{equation}
}
In this work, we choose $\beta=1$ and $q=3457$, where the primitive $384$-th root of unity $\zeta=55$ exits in $\mathbb{Z}_{3457}$. In this case, the point-wise multiplication is the corresponding $2\alpha$-dimension polynomial multiplication in $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{2\alpha } - \zeta^{\tau(k)}),\alpha \in \{2,3,4\},k=0,1,\ldots,N/2-1$.
\subsection{Base Case Inversion}
Utilizing the NTT techniques to compute the public key $h=g/f$ is essentially to compute $h= INTT( \hat{g} \circ \hat{f}^{-1} )$. Here, $\hat{g}=NTT(g)$ and $\hat{f}=NTT(f)$ are of the form (\ref{equ-unified-ntt-result-of-f-in-multi-ring}), and $\hat{f}^{-1}$ is gotten by computing a series of the inverses of $2\alpha$-dimension sub-polynomials (with respect to $\hat{f}$) in $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{2\alpha } - \zeta^{\tau(k)}),\alpha \in \{2,3,4\},k=0,1,\ldots,N/2-1$. The inverse of the elements in $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{2\alpha } - \zeta^{\tau(k)})$ can be computed by Cramer's Rule~\cite{cramer-rule-linear-algebra-book}.
Take $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{4} - \zeta) $ as an example. Let $f$ be a degree-3 polynomial in $\mathbb{Z}_q[x]/(x^{4} - \zeta)$, and denote its inverse by $f'$, which implies $f \cdot f' =1 \bmod x^{4 } - \zeta$. It can be written in the form of matrix-vector multiplication:
\begin{equation}\label{equ-compute-inverse-of-f}
\left[
\begin{array}{cccc}
f_{0} & \ \zeta f_{3} & \ \zeta f_{2} & \ \zeta f_{1} \\
f_{1} & \ f_{0} & \ \zeta f_{3} & \ \zeta f_{2} \\
f_{2} & \ f_{1} & \ f_{0} & \ \zeta f_{3} \\
f_{3} & \ f_{2} & \ f_{1} & \ f_{0}
\end{array}
\right]
\cdot
\left[
\begin{array}{c}
f'_{0}\\
f'_{1}\\
f'_{2}\\
f'_{3}
\end{array}
\right]
=
\left[
\begin{array}{c}
1\\
0\\
0\\
0
\end{array}
\right] .
\end{equation}
Let $\Delta$ be the determinant of the coefficient matrix. Hence, the inverse of $f$ exits if and only if $\Delta \ne 0 $. In this case, according to Cramer's Rule, there is a unique $f'$, whose individual components are given by
\begin{equation}
f'_i = \cfrac{\Delta_i}{\Delta}, i=0,1,2,3
\end{equation}
where $\Delta_i$ is the determinant of the matrix generated by replacing the $(i+1)$-th column of the coefficient matrix with $(1,0,0,0)^T$. And $\Delta^{-1}$ can be computed by using Fermat's Little Theorem, i.e., $\Delta^{-1} \equiv \Delta^{q-2} \bmod q$.
\section{Implementation and Benchmark}\label{sec-implementation-benchmark}
We provide the portable C implementation of our CTRU for the recommended parameter set of $(n=768, q=3457, q_2=2^{10}, \Psi = B_2)$. As for the prefix $ID(pk)$ of the public key $h$ in CTRU, we use the first 33 bytes of the bit-packed NTT representation of $h$. It is reasonable, since $h$ is computationally indistinguishable from a uniformly random polynomial in $\mathcal{R}_q$ and the forward NTT transform keeps the randomness property (i.e., $h$ is random, so is $NTT(h)$). Assuming uniformly random $h$, the first 22 coefficients have the min-entropy of more than 256 bits and occupy 33 bytes in the bit-packed NTT representation since each coefficient has 12 bits.
All the benchmark tests are run on an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-10510U CPU at 2.3GHz (16 GB memory) with Turbo Boost and Hyperthreading disabled. The operating system is Ubuntu 20.04 LTS with Linux Kernel 4.4.0 and the gcc version is 9.4.0. The compiler flag is listed as follows: \emph{-Wall -march=native -mtune=native -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wno-unknown-pragmas}. We run the corresponding KEM algorithms for 10,000 times and calculate the average CPU cycles.
The source codes of NTRU-HRSS, SNTRU-Prime and Kyber are taken from their Round 3 supporting documentations or their websites, while those of NTTRU are taken from~\cite{nttru-LS19}. However, the FO transformation in Kyber has been changed to $\text{FO}_{ID(pk),m}^{\not\bot}$ as in~\cite{fo-transform-prefix-hash-DHK+21}, since it is the fastest implementation of Kyber. One regret is that the source codes of $\text{NTRU-C}_{3457}^{768}$ are not online available in~\cite{ntru-variant-eprint-1352-DHK21}, so we omit its results. The benchmark results of those schemes are shown in Table~\ref{tab-benchmark-of-schemes}. For the sake of completeness, we also provide the comparison between CTRU and Saber~\cite{saber-nist-round3} in Appendix~\ref{app-sec-comparison-with-saber}.
From Table ~\ref{tab-benchmark-of-schemes}, we can see that the encapsulation (Encaps) and decapsulation (Decaps) processes of CTRU are among the most efficient. When compared to NTRU-HRSS and SNTRU Prime-761, the efficiency improvements of CTRU-768 are benefited from the applications of NTT in polynomial operations. Note that CTRU-768 is faster than NTRU-HRSS by 15X in KeyGen, 39X in Encaps, and 61X in Decaps, respectively.
The Decaps of CTRU is slightly slower than that of NTTRU, on the following grounds: (1) the decoding algorithm of the $\text{E}'_8$ lattice costs extra time; (2) NTT is invalid in $\mathcal{R}_{q_2}$ w.r.t. power-of-two $q_2$ in the decryption process, so we turn to schoolbook algorithm instead.
The KeyGen of CTRU-768 needs to compute the inverse of degree-5 polynomials, whereas NTTRU's larger modulus $q=7681$ allows simpler degree-2 polynomial inversions. However, with the smaller $q=3457$, CTRU-768 has shorter pubic key size ($7.6\%$ shorter than that of NTTRU) and stronger security (164-bit quantum security of CTRU-768 vs. 140-bit security of NTTRU). If necessary, CTRU can choose parameter sets w.r.t. $q=7681$ to obtain a more efficient KeyGen process comparable to that of NTTRU, which also further accelerates the processes of the Encaps and Decaps, but at the cost of bandwidth or security. Note that in practice the KeyGen is run once and for all, and its computational cost is less sensitive to most cryptographic applications.
When compared to Kyber-768, the efficiency improvements in the Encaps and Decaps of CTRU-768 are mainly due to the fact that there is only one polynomial multiplication in CTRU-768's encryption process (which is also re-run with the Decaps), whereas there is a complicated polynomial matrix-vector multiplication in Kyber-768's encryption process.
\input{table/tab-benchmark-of-schemes.tex}
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 9,546 |
«Mood Swings» — песня американского рэпера Pop Smoke, выпущенная 3 июля 2020 года как 13 трек с дебютного посмертного студийного альбома Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon. Она была записана при участии Lil Tjay. Ремикс с участием Саммер Уокер был выпущен в качестве сингла, так же песня вошла в одноимённый мини-альбом.
О песне
«Mood Swings» — это песня в стиле R&B с текстом о сексе с женщинами, не пользующимися противозачаточными средствами. Песня получила смешанные отзывы - некоторые рецензенты критиковали текст Lil Tjay, в то время как другие посчитали песню романтичной и извращенной. Песня заняла 17 место в Billboard Hot 100 и 5 место в UK Singles Chart, став первым хитом Lil Tjay и вторым хитом Pop Smoke в Великобритании. На международном уровне песня вошла в пятерку лучших в трех других странах, включая Португалию, где она заняла первое место. Песня была удостоена двойного платинового сертификата Ассоциации звукозаписывающей индустрии Америки (RIAA), означающего количество продаж в эквиваленте трека, превышающее два миллиона копий.
Для песни «Mood Swings» был сделан визуальный ролик, выпущенный 20 августа 2020 года. В нем Джордин Вудс, Дилан и Дакота Гонсалес выполняют различные действия, например, позируют у бассейна и в спортивных автомобилях. На песню был снят музыкальный клип, который вышел 7 октября 2020 года. Режиссером клипа выступил Дэвид Уэпт, в нем показаны Lil Tjay и Lala Baptiste, находящиеся в длительных отношениях, а также фотографии Pop Smoke в пламени вечного голубого огня.
Ремикс с участием американской певицы Саммер Уокер был выпущен в качестве сингла 18 сентября 2020 года. Ремикс был позже включен в одноименный мини-альбом. В него также вошли «What You Know Bout Love», «Imperfections (Interlude)», «Something Special» и ремикс на песню «Diana».
Список композиций
Примечания
Песни Pop Smoke
Песни Lil Tjay
Песни, опубликованные посмертно
Синглы Republic Records | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,964 |
package com.google.devtools.kythe.analyzers.java;
import com.beust.jcommander.Parameter;
import com.google.common.base.Strings;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.analyzers.base.FactEmitter;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.extractors.shared.CompilationDescription;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.extractors.shared.IndexInfoUtils;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.platform.indexpack.Archive;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.platform.java.JavacAnalysisDriver;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.platform.shared.AnalysisException;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.platform.shared.FileDataCache;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.platform.shared.MemoryStatisticsCollector;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.platform.shared.NullStatisticsCollector;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.proto.Storage.Entry;
import com.google.devtools.kythe.proto.Storage.VName;
import com.google.protobuf.ByteString;
import java.io.BufferedOutputStream;
import java.io.FileOutputStream;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.io.OutputStream;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
/** Binary to run Kythe's Java index over a single .kindex file, emitting entries to STDOUT. */
public class JavaIndexer {
public static void main(String[] args) throws AnalysisException, IOException {
StandaloneConfig config = new StandaloneConfig();
config.parseCommandLine(args);
MemoryStatisticsCollector statistics = null;
if (config.getPrintStatistics()) {
statistics = new MemoryStatisticsCollector();
}
List<String> compilation = config.getCompilation();
if (compilation.size() > 1) {
System.err.println("Java indexer received too many arguments; got " + compilation);
usage(1);
}
CompilationDescription desc = null;
if (!Strings.isNullOrEmpty(config.getIndexPackRoot())) {
// java_indexer --index_pack=archive-root unit-key
desc = new Archive(config.getIndexPackRoot()).readDescription(compilation.get(0));
} else {
// java_indexer kindex-file
desc = IndexInfoUtils.readIndexInfoFromFile(compilation.get(0));
}
if (desc == null) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Unknown error reading CompilationDescription");
}
if (!desc.getFileContents().iterator().hasNext()) {
return;
}
try (OutputStream stream =
Strings.isNullOrEmpty(config.getOutputPath())
? System.out
: new BufferedOutputStream(new FileOutputStream(config.getOutputPath()))) {
new JavacAnalysisDriver()
.analyze(
new KytheJavacAnalyzer(
config,
new StreamFactEmitter(stream),
statistics == null ? NullStatisticsCollector.getInstance() : statistics),
desc.getCompilationUnit(),
new FileDataCache(desc.getFileContents()),
false);
}
if (statistics != null) {
statistics.printStatistics(System.err);
}
}
private static void usage(int exitCode) {
System.err.println(
"usage: java_indexer [--print_statistics] kindex-file\n"
+ " java_indexer [--print_statistics] --index_pack=archive-root unit-key");
System.exit(exitCode);
}
/** {@link FactEmitter} directly streaming to an {@link OutputValueStream}. */
private static class StreamFactEmitter implements FactEmitter {
private final OutputStream stream;
public StreamFactEmitter(OutputStream stream) {
this.stream = stream;
}
@Override
public void emit(
VName source, String edgeKind, VName target, String factName, byte[] factValue) {
Entry.Builder entry =
Entry.newBuilder()
.setSource(source)
.setFactName(factName)
.setFactValue(ByteString.copyFrom(factValue));
if (edgeKind != null) {
entry.setEdgeKind(edgeKind).setTarget(target);
}
try {
entry.build().writeDelimitedTo(stream);
} catch (IOException ioe) {
throw new RuntimeException(ioe);
}
}
}
private static class StandaloneConfig extends IndexerConfig {
@Parameter(description = "<compilation to analyze>", required = true)
private List<String> compilation = new ArrayList<>();
@Parameter(
names = "--print_statistics",
description = "Print final analyzer statistics to stderr"
)
private boolean printStatistics;
@Parameter(
names = {"--index_pack", "-index_pack"},
description = "Retrieve the specified compilation from the given index pack"
)
private String indexPackRoot;
@Parameter(
names = {"--out", "-out"},
description = "Write the entries to this file (or stdout if unspecified)"
)
private String outputPath;
public StandaloneConfig() {
super("java-indexer");
}
public final boolean getPrintStatistics() {
return printStatistics;
}
public final String getIndexPackRoot() {
return indexPackRoot;
}
public final String getOutputPath() {
return outputPath;
}
public final List<String> getCompilation() {
return compilation;
}
}
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,279 |
Victoria's Biggest-Ever Aerial Firefighting Fleet Unveiled
A record fleet of 50 firefighting aircraft will hit the skies to defend lives and property across the state over the coming months.
Minister for Police and Emergency Services Lisa Neville and Minister for Environment and Climate Change Lily D'Ambrosio joined emergency services agencies to unveil the 2019-20 fleet today at Avalon Airport today, ahead of what will be a busy fire season.
The record fleet will be critical to supporting our firefighters, including the return of two Large Air Tankers and two Aircranes.
The Large Air Tankers can each carry up to 15,000 litres of water, foam or retardant and will be based at Avalon airport.
The aircranes, which will be based at Essendon and Moorabbin airports, can carry up to 7500 litres of water and are essential in supporting other aircraft positioned across the state.
The fleet also includes a mix of fire-bombing aircraft, air supervision and air intelligence-gathering aircraft, and has a surge capacity of up to 100 that can support the Victorian core fleet and be called upon when needed.
Victoria will continue to operate fire-bombing aircraft as immediate response or pre-determined dispatch in locations across the state, which enables aircraft to respond to fires at the same time as fire trucks.
The Andrews Labor Government is delivering the resources and support to protect Victoria this fire season, with all available emergency management staff and agencies ready to respond to incidents across the state.
This includes thousands of our dedicated volunteer and career firefighters from across all agencies, as well as an investment of almost $100 million in funding for training, equipment and infrastructure in the last three years.
Victorians and communities need to start preparing themselves for the fire season. Go to www.vic.gov.au/knowfire to plan and prepare.
Quotes attributable to Minister for Police and Emergency Services Lisa Neville
"With the return of two Large Air Tankers, a record air fleet and thousands of firefighters ready to respond, Victoria is more prepared than ever for the upcoming fire season."
"Victoria's largest-ever firefighting fleet will provide crucial support to our hard-working crews on the ground this summer, responding immediately to major incidents right across the state."
Quotes attributable to Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change Lily D'Ambrosio
"It's vital that people across the state are prepared for the possibility of a bushfire – whether they're at home, visiting family or friends or away on holidays."
"All government agencies will be working together to keep Victorians safe this fire season, and the record aerial fleet will make their work even more effective."
housing planning technology police and emergency services jobs innovation regional and rural development agriculture business energy environment | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 6,516 |
Q: Publish Angular library to private Verdaccio npm repository I have a private Verdaccio npm repository.
I configured authentification for using htppasswd file
auth:
htpasswd:
file: /verdaccio/conf/htpasswd
max_users: -1
So now nobody can do npm add ... but must use npm login ...
After being logged, I can publish my library with npm publish
But there are few point I don't understand :
*
*npm login is asking me an email. But what's the point ? I don't find any trace of that email in the published package.
*After npm login a token is generated in my .npmrc file. Does it have a validity date ?
*After being published, in Verdaccio, I see anonymous as author name. The only solution I found to 'put' my name is adding an author tag in the package.json. But if we are 3 persons working on that library we have to change our name each time ? Is there a way to associate (on the server) an htpasswdd with a author name/email ?
A: here Verdaccio core maintainer. I'll try to answer all your questions.
npm login is asking me an email. But what's the point ? I don't find any trace of that email in the published package.
Verdaccio does not requires email, but unfortunately npmjs.org does, so just write any value and skip that step, we cannot do anything to avoid that.
After npm login a token is generated in my .npmrc file. Does it have a validity date ?
That depends of which auth you are using, by default the token never expires using
auth:
htpasswd:
file: /verdaccio/conf/htpasswd
but if you want to expire tokens then you would need to add the security new property introduced in Verdaccio 4.
security:
api:
jwt:
sign:
expiresIn: 29d
The example above will expire all tokens after 29 days and it overrides the default behaviour, the tokens becomes compatible with JWT compatible and share all it properties and benefits.
After being published, in Verdaccio, I see anonymous as author name. The only solution I found to 'put' my name is adding an author tag in the package.json. But if we are 3 persons working on that library we have to change our name each time ? Is there a way to associate (on the server) an htpasswdd with a author name/email ?
Author can be only one, but you have more options, either contributors or maintainers. Just add them in the package.json as follows.
The result would be this in the Verdaccio UI.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 1,078 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.