Biblestudy: Matthew (Part Thirty-One)

Matthew 26:1 - end
#BS-MA31
John W. Ritenbaugh (1932-2023)
Given 02-Jan-83; 83 minutes

listen:

playlist:
Go to the Matthew (Bible study series) playlist

download:

[John Ritenbaugh answers several questions before getting back to the book of Matthew.]

Question and Answer:

But this first question is from Acts 13:1.

Acts 13:1-2 Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, "Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."

The question involves this statement that they ministered to the Lord. How does one minister to the Lord? Now, seemingly that is a very difficult thing for us to do. How can we as human beings, do that?

Well, I looked this phrase up in several modern translations, and they are divided as to how they translated it. The King James, of course, says “minister,” and one of the two modern ones also said, “minister.” Two of them that I looked into said that “they serve the Lord.”

If you look in a lexicon at the definition that they give for that word “ministered,” they will give you something like this: It means to perform the office of. Now, the phrase or the word has very wide usage. It could be, if it applies to the ministry, whatever falls within the parameters of what a minister would do. If a minister prays, if a minister preaches before a congregation, if a minister counsels people, if a minister goes out and visits and anoints the sick, he would be performing the work of, or he would be ministering to someone or for someone.

Now, the same could be said for a doctor, a lawyer, or a common laboring man. It has no particular specific application to the ministry, or anything religious. It has very broad usage. It simply means to serve or perform in an office.

Turn with me back to the book of Luke, chapter 1, where we will see another context in which this word is used. The central figure in this context is Zacharias. Zacharias was John the Baptist’s father; he was one of the priests. And as you probably understand, the priesthood did not serve at all times at the Temple. Instead, because there were so many of them, they served in courses, so that a man would serve for two weeks. And then he would not serve again until his course occurred again and that might be maybe a half a year away.

Zacharias was performing his responsibilities when the angel spoke to him.

Luke 1:22-23 But when he came out, he could not speak to them; and they perceived that he had seen a vision in the temple, for he beckoned to them and remained speechless. So it was, as soon as the days of his service were completed, that he departed to his own house.

Here is Zacharias, a priest, and he is ministering in the Temple. Here, we see the noun form of the word, “ministration” rather than the verb form ministering. But his days of ministration were accomplished.

So what does a priest do at the Temple? He no doubt had part in the offerings that were made on the brazen altar. He might have had the responsibility of offering the incense on the incense altar. He may have had any one of a dozen other responsibilities. But in performing his office, he was ministering to the Lord. He was doing it because this was the Lord's house. This was the Lord's work, and he was ministering to the Lord on behalf of the people.

Now let us go back to the book of Philippians. This is another very interesting usage of this word. Philippians the second chapter. I told you earlier that a couple of the modern translations used the word service. It was not “service,” it was “worshipping,” as they were worshipping the Lord there in Acts 13:2. Philippians 2, let us go back to the beginning of the sentence which begins in verse 14:

Philippians 2:14-15 Do all things without complaining and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world.

Jesus said earlier, in Matthew 5, “to let your light so shine before men that they see your good works.” Now light is that example which comes from what we do. It illuminates what a Christian is to the unbeliever. And it should also illuminate to the unbeliever what God is like.

Now, Jesus was so good in His illumination that He told Thomas, “If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father.” Well, that is how good of an illumination—a light, an example—that He set. We are supposed to shine as lights in the world.

Philippians 2:16 Holding fast the word of life, so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ [One holds forth the word of life by the way one lives.] that I have not run in vain or labored in vain.

Let us go back to verse 15 again and pick something up there because I think it is quite interesting. That last phrase that Paul used in that verse, “that you shine as lights in the world,” he is using an illustration there that he is drawing from the beacon lights that were set at the entrance of a harbor, you know, just like harbor lights, you might call them, or beacon lights; a signal light that was intended to give the pilot of a ship, a mariner, a sea captain, the direction that he needed to head his ship in order to have a safe passage into the harbor.

Using that metaphor, what Paul is saying is that people ought to be able to receive guidance for their life by the example that we set in our life, that it ought to be a light to them so that they would be able to see the direction that they need to go. And if we do that, Paul says, then he is going to be able to rejoice, because he will know then that he has not worked in vain, has not been useless. But a good example has been set.

Philippians 2:17 Yes, and if I am being poured out as a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.

Do you see that word service? It is that word “ministering,” or as it is translated in some modern translations, “worshiping.” Now, if one is serving in this context, he is performing the work that is required of his responsibility. Now, ours is a work of faith that we obey God by faith.

Did you ever think that as you obey to God, as you yield to Him, as you submit to Him, as you follow the instructions in the Bible, you are not only showing forth your light, but you are also serving Him. You are ministering to him. That is what you are doing by the use of your faith.

Now, Paul says that he was willing (verse 17) to be offered as a libation (KJV). You know what a libation was? It was a drink, usually an alcoholic drink, that was poured on top of the sacrifice. It became a part of the sacrifice. Whenever a burnt offering was made, oftentimes a drink was poured on top of it as well. Paul said he was willing to do that upon the sacrifice and service of their faith—the Philippians faith—or in our context, of our faith.

So then we are actually ministering to God. We are serving Him by being an example by letting our light shine. We are performing the works required of a son of God.

Now, go back to Acts13:2. The answer to that, then, would be that these men were carrying out their responsibility to the congregation there at Antioch. Some of them, no doubt, all of them, I am sure, were ordained ministers. And so they were carrying out—performing—the duties and responsibilities of ordained ministers. They were shepherding the flock. They were counseling, they were preaching, they were administering whatever had to be done in their office. And so in the carrying out of their responsibilities, God inspired them to set apart those men, and send them out on some kind of evangelistic responsibility.

So to minister to the Lord is to perform our responsibility of our office.

Question and Answer:

Acts 15:24—another question that really deserves a very long answer. I have given this answer in a series of sermons (previously). So tonight, I am going to give just a couple of principles in understanding how to answer, or to find answers sometimes to puzzling, or difficult questions.

Acts 15:24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law"—to whom we gave no such commandment.

Now the “we” are the apostles, specifically the apostles at the church in Jerusalem. They, of course, sent others out on evangelistic campaigns, established churches, and then taught more specifically and thoroughly the responsibilities that the membership was to perform. So an argument arose within the congregations that is stated back in verse 1,

Acts 15:1 And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."

Acts 15:5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."

Now verse 24 says that the apostles gave no such commandment at all. Now the question that arises is over the term, “law.” Are the Ten Commandments implied? Are not the Ten Commandments included in the law of Moses? And what about circumcision?

The world has generally concluded that what was at stake here was obedience to the Ten Commandments because there is a tendency among those groups of people to lump all laws together, especially I think in the evangelical groups—the Pentecostal Holiness people—they tend to lump all of the laws together. You know in a practical civil situation, all laws do not apply to all situations. The laws, for instance in South Carolina regarding alcohol do not apply in Georgia. And the laws that pertain to alcohol in South Carolina do not pertain to school because different laws or different bodies of laws are enacted in order to cover specific situations.

Well, it is the same way in the Bible. The word law is very broad and general, and the way one has to tell what law or what body of laws is intended is generally by the context.

Let me take you to another scripture back in Romans 3 where the context shows very clearly the body of laws, the group of laws that is intended. In this case, Paul makes it very clear what law he is talking about in verse 20.

Romans 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Now, what laws define sin? Well, the Ten Commandments define sin. Do the ritualistic laws define sin? No, they do not define sin at all. They are a reminder of sin, but they do not define sin. Turn with me to the book of Galatians the third chapter. Paul is talking about a different group of laws in verse 17.

Galatians 3:17-19 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise. What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.

Now, the law that Paul is talking about in this context was a law that was added because of sin. The Ten Commandments define sin. What law was added because of sin? Well, it was the ritualistic law that was added because of sin. It was a reminder of sin and it was designed to bring people to an understanding of the need for a Savior.

So the Bible shows very clearly that there are times when the word “law” might include the whole body of law that God has given. There are other times that the context shows that the law or body of laws that the author is talking about might be very narrow and specific, as in Galatians 3. It was a law that was added because of transgressions. In Romans 3 it was a law that defined sin.

Now here in Acts 15 it was a law that had a relationship to circumcision, and as Acts 21:21 shows it had something to do with customs, it had something to do with the law of Moses.

For us to research the whole thing, as I said, would take an entire sermon. But in this case, the law that is in question does not define sin. Now surely logic, the mind of Christ ought to tell you that if there is no law that defines sin, there is no sin. That is what Romans 5 tells you, where there is no law, there is no transgression.

Surely the apostles would have taught the people about the meaning of the death of Jesus Christ. Why did Jesus Christ die? He died to cleanse us from our transgression, to clear us of guilt, to remove the death penalty from us. Therefore, there must be a law that defines sin, a law which we have broken. Therefore, there is a law still in existence that if we break, we sin.

Therefore, the law in question in Acts 15 is not the Ten Commandments. It is another law that has nothing to do with our salvation. If it had something to do with our salvation, the apostles would have spoken about it.

Now, the law in question is the body of ritualistic laws that contain very fine principles, very good teaching. It is the law that we learn very much from, but the keeping of which has nothing to do with our salvation. So I think that that will suffice to that point for that question anyway. But it is a question that really involves enough to give an entire sermon on.

Back to Matthew the 26th chapter.

The last time we got to verse 13. But I want to go over something that I gave you the last time and clarify something. I went through this section, Matthew 26:6-13 about the woman pouring the very expensive ointment—perfume—on Jesus’ head while He was sitting at dinner in one Simon's home. And I said at that time that there was a possibility that the accounts in Matthew 26, Mark 14, John 12, and Luke 7 were all differing accounts of the same thing.

Well, in the meantime, I have re-studied it and I have come to a different conclusion that I feel is right.

Now, if you would study those three chapters on those sections and write down all of the similarities between the three accounts, you will find this: that they all agree on the disciples’ reaction to what occurred—that is, that there was indignation or anger because of the waste as they perceived it. They all agree that what Mary had done would be preached around the world, wherever the gospel was preached. They all agree that the anointing took place at a table where Jesus was sitting. They all say the same thing about Jesus’ remark about the poor—the poor you always have with you—and that the anointing was for His burial. And all three put the episode in the same chronological area [period] just before the final Passover of Jesus’ life.

Luke 7, on the other hand, shows in the context that it appears to take place in Galilee, not in Judea. All three of the other accounts say that this took place in Bethany. Bethany is in Judea. The context of Luke the seventh chapter begins with Jesus in Capernaum. There is nothing in the chapter that indicates that Jesus left Capernaum when the episode took place in the book of Luke.

Second, there is no connection in Luke the seventh chapter with Jesus burial.

Third, whereas the others say that it took place at the home of Simon the Leper, Luke says that it took place at the home of Simon the Pharisee (Simon being a very common name).

Fourth (and I think it is very significant), Matthew is not arranged always in chronological order. Even though there is a general chronological order to what he writes, not everything is in chronological order. Instead, he tends to put things together topically, that is, according to subject matter.

Now, Luke on the other hand, says very specifically at the beginning of his book that he set things down in order. Therefore, the occurrence in Luke the seventh chapter is very early in Jesus' ministry. Now, exactly when, I do not know—whether it was in the first year, second year or whatever—but it was much earlier than the occurrence in Matthew 26, Mark 14, or John 12, which took place just before the final Passover.

Therefore, we have two different events, two different times, and two different ladies. The one in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12, says specifically that she anointed His head. Whereas the one in Luke 7 says that she anointed His feet.

So there are two different occurrences. I am positive that is correct. I doubt very much whether it was the same woman. In fact, the woman in Luke 7 is not even named; only that she was a notorious sinner. But the woman in the other three is named, it was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus.

On to Matthew 26, verse 14:

Matthew 26:14-16 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests and said, "What are you willing to give me if I deliver Him to you?" And they counted out to him thirty pieces of silver. So from that time he sought opportunity to betray Him.

I do not know whether it has ever popped into your head to consciously betray Christ. It is a thought that is foreign to us. So one might ask, “Why would somebody in Judas' position, having spent three and a half years with the greatest Teacher this world has ever seen, the greatest leader, the kindest, nicest, strongest individual who had ever been on earth, why in the world would he ever even get it into his head to betray Him?” I do not know the answer to that. I do not think anybody knows the answer to that, because the Bible does not say. The best we can do is speculate on what human nature is like. You know, just from our understanding of what it is like, why would he do such a thing?

Well, turn with me back to the book of John, and I will give you a couple of thoughts on it anyway. And just please remember, these are nothing more than speculation. In John the 12th chapter, verse 4 it says, Judas Iscariot, so he is mentioned. And in verse 6, it says this:

John 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.

Did Judas betray Jesus because of greed? It is certainly a possibility. I think it needs to be considered. But to me, it hardly needs to be considered for a very long time.

First of all, the amount of money involved was very small. According to what I saw in a commentary, which I will give it for what it is worth. They said that this amount of money was probably only about $15. However, they did say that it does have some symbolic significance in that it was probably the amount of money that one would spend to buy a slave, about $15—thirty pieces of silver.

It hardly seems possible that that would occur. Now, if it did occur, it certainly must be one of the most dreadful examples in all of history of the length to which some will go in order to satisfy their greed.

A second reason, and I think this is a little bit stronger, worthy of a little bit more consideration, that by this time, after spending three and a half years with Jesus, after seeing Him do many, many miracles, after, no doubt, being excited by the political and civil possibilities that lay within following this Man, that Judas, beginning to see the drift of the way that Jesus was headed, and that He was on a collision course with disaster (if He continued to go in that way), that a hatred was building within him because of disillusionment.

Now, remember it was the dream of the Jewish nation for centuries based upon the Scriptures; they were looking for a messiah that was going to liberate them from their bondage as Moses had liberated them some 1,500 years before. They were looking for that prophet that Moses prophesized of. Jesus (Judas might have been able to perceive) was turning out to be not the messiah that Judas thought He ought to be, the civil and political and military leader that was going to lead the Jews out of their bondage. And so maybe this was an attempt of Judas to kind of create Christ in his own image.

A third possibility is that Judas betrayed Him out of a misplaced zeal; that it was a ploy to compel Jesus to act; that maybe he thought if he just forced Jesus’ hand, that he might be able to get Him to move in the direction that Judas wanted Him to move in.

Now, one of the reasons why I feel that has possibilities is because of Judas’ reaction after Jesus was taken captive. To me, his reaction was not the reaction of a man filled with bitter hatred, because if it was bitter hatred, it would seem to me that Judas reaction would be He is getting what He deserves. “Good for him! Kill Him! String Him up! Get rid of the bum!” But that was not his reaction.

Judas' reaction was shown, maybe he was just feeling so guilty for what he did that he went out and committed suicide because he condemned an innocent Man.

And so I think that third one has possibilities that it was really part of his refusal to accept Jesus as He was, and to try to make Jesus into the messiah that Judas wished Him to be. So maybe it was a ploy to compel Jesus to act.

As I said, the Bible does not say why. Those are purely speculative.

Now, verse 17:

Matthew 26:17-19 Now on the first day of the Feast of the Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying to Him, "Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?" And He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, 'The Teacher says, "My time is at hand; I will keep the Passover at your house with My disciples."'" So the disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover.

I think what these verses show is that it indicates that Jesus had already made some prior arrangements for the keeping of the Passover; that somebody within the larger group that was following Him had a place that Jesus could use. Perhaps in a conversation, he offered it to Him. And Jesus said, “If I have need of it, I will send My disciples to you. And this will be the password.” The same thing could have very easily happened with the man with the donkey or whatever, and the master has need of it, and that was the password. And so then he opened up his place to Jesus.

Now, the Passover in that crucifixion week would have begun on a Tuesday evening as we count time. Then Jesus was crucified on Wednesday afternoon, and the feast would have begun on Wednesday evening, about six o'clock at sunset. So that is the time setting here.

Matthew 26:20-25 When evening had come, He sat down with the twelve. Now as they were eating, He said, "Assuredly, I say to you, one of you will betray Me." And they were exceedingly sorrowful, and each of them began to say to Him, "Lord, is it I?" He answered and said, "He who dipped his hand with Me in the dish will betray Me. The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born." Then Judas, who was betraying Him, answered and said, "Rabbi, is it I?" He said to him, "You have said it."

I want you to notice that the disciples did not know what was going on. That Judas was able to hide his nefarious scheme from the others, from the eyes of men, but he did not hide it from Christ.

Now, that is very important, because the same is true today. Jesus Christ knows the hearts of all men. But we might feel that we are getting away with something if we are seemingly able to hide things—flaws in our character from other people. As long as we keep it from their eyes somewhere hidden maybe behind the four walls of our home—the way that we live our life in our attitude, in our dealings with our employer, our employees; in the way that we handle our money; in the way that we run our life; in our relationship with husband and wife, in our child rearing practices or lack thereof.

Now, those things can very easily be hidden from men, but they cannot be hidden from God, they cannot be hidden from Jesus Christ. We need to understand that and really understand we are dealing with a great God who knows men from the inside out.

But I want you to notice that Jesus Christ knowing who was going to betray Him did not just blast the man out of existence. How long did Christ know who was going to betray Him? It says in John 6 that He knew from the beginning and yet He allowed the man to continue to fellowship with Him.

Now, it is very likely that He saw a flaw in Judas very early; a flaw in his attitude maybe that He knew was going to cause trouble later on. John says that Judas was a thief, and maybe it was the revelation of that flaw that led Jesus to understand who was most likely to be the one who would betray Him.

What I want you to see out of this is that God is extremely patient in working with us; that He does not just bomb us out of existence. He continues to allow us to use our free moral agency. He gives us ample opportunity to repent. It says in Romans 2 that it is the goodness of God that leads us to repent. God mercifully gives us time to turn around and go the other way.

I am sure that in the times that Judas spent with Jesus that he too heard Jesus’ teaching. I am sure that many of the things that Jesus said applied directly to Judas, and Judas' character flaw. And so He confronted Judas with teachings to give him the opportunity to use his own mind. And here, at the last moment, Jesus arranged the situation whereby there would have to be an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation between the two.

John 13:26 Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give a piece of bread when I have dipped it." And having dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

Can you get the picture of what happened there? Here are all the disciples saying, “Is it I? Is it I?” Jesus forced Judas to actually be sanctified, set apart. before all the others, and to make Judas look Him right in the eyes while handing him the sop. I do not think that Jesus would get behind him, and hand it to him over His shoulder. You can bet your bottom dollar that Jesus looked him right in the eyeball, and gave him that piece of bread, and said, “Here.”

And then what? Judas spun on his heel, and continued right on, which gives a very ominous portent to what Judas did. It begins to show that his betrayal was very calculated, willfully entered into. Now, do you think that God will not in principle follow the same thing with us? Sure, He will.

There are parables to show that He gives us ample time, and he confronts us.

Matthew 26:26-30 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

Now it is here that Jesus changed the symbols of Passover. And the key word here is testament, or covenant. He says, “For this is My blood of the new testament (KJV).” So we have a New Covenant and new symbols to go with that New Covenant.

Let us think about Passover for just a minute, because that is what they were celebrating here. And that is what we are studying about. What does Passover symbolize? It symbolizes deliverance. It provided the means by which the children of Israel were delivered from Egypt.

What is another word that it symbolizes? Now think of the children of Israel partaking of that very first Passover. What did they have to do? They put the blood on the door posts and on the lintel. And what did that blood then provide? Protection! It provided protection or safety from the death angel who was going to go through the land slaying all the firstborn. So we see Passover is a symbol of deliverance and safety.

Now we have here, Jesus and his disciples celebrating a Passover which symbolizes deliverance and safety. But new symbols are made a part of the ritual.

Now let us define something else.

What is a covenant, or a testament? (Really, a covenant.) It is an agreement. A covenant is an agreement. Now, what does a covenant do? It sets terms, binds parties to terms of the agreement. So what a covenant actually does is it establishes a relationship between parties in a specific situation or a specific circumstance. If you go to the bank and you borrow money, you sign a covenant with those people, you enter into an agreement that establishes the basis of your relationship. They are the lender, you are the borrower, the agreement says that you are going to pay back the money that you have borrowed at $50 a month for 24 months. That is the basis of your relationship.

Let us go back to the book of Exodus, the 13th chapter. Exodus 13 follows right on the heels of the events of chapter 12 where the Passover is described, and they keep the Passover, and the firstborn are killed.

Now, in chapter 13, beginning in verse 12, God is giving instructions regarding something that the children of Israel are to do:

Exodus 13:12-14 “That you shall set apart to the LORD all that open the womb, that is, every firstborn that comes from an animal which you have; the males shall be the LORD's. But every firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb; and if you will not redeem it, then you shall break its neck. And all the firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem. So it shall be, when your son asks you in time to come, saying, 'What is this?' that you shall say to him, 'By strength of hand the LORD brought us out of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.’

How was that deliverance achieved?

Exodus 13:15 ‘And it came to pass, when Pharaoh was stubborn about letting us go, that the LORD killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man and the firstborn of beast. Therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all males that open the womb, but all the firstborn of my sons I redeem.'

Now the Old Covenant was between God and the nation of Israel. And it established a relationship made possible because God delivered them from political bondage by the slaying of the firstborn.

They were given safety and deliverance by the blood of the lamb and the killing of the firstborn. That deliverance was symbolized by the lamb that represented God's firstborn, Jesus Christ, and also the firstborn of Egypt. So it was through blood, then, that the Old Covenant was established.

Now, when you go back to Exodus the 24th chapter (which we will not turn to), you will find that the Old Covenant was confirmed by blood as well. That Moses had to take the blood of a bull, catch it in a bowl, and then he dipped his fingers in it and he sprinkled the blood of the bull on the people. So the Old Covenant established a relationship and it was made possible by blood, the blood of the firstborn of Egypt, and the blood of the symbolic lamb that was splashed upon the door post and the lintel.

Is there anything familiar in that? Well, absolutely. Those things symbolize the spiritual deliverance and the spiritual safety that we receive from the blood of God's firstborn Jesus Christ. The wages of sin is death. Paul also said in Hebrews 9: 22 that almost all things are purged by blood.

In this case, someone has to pay the penalty for sin in order for God's justice, for God's law to be satisfied. Since the law says that if we sin, we die, there had to be a means by which that could be circumvented and God's plan is continued and eternal life given. He allows that through the death, the shed blood of Jesus Christ. But it does not give us political freedom, rather it gives us spiritual freedom in that it delivers us from the bondage to sin and from the penalty of sin as well. So we have both deliverance and safety as well.

Now, why the change of symbol? I will give you two reasons that I feel are very good. First of all, it distinguishes it very clearly from the Old Covenant, from the ritual that was required under the Old Covenant, where they slew a lamb and ate it with the bitter herbs, and other things that were necessary according to the ritual established by God in Exodus 12. So the first thing that it does is clearly distinguish it from the Old Covenant, because a New Covenant is being entered into.

And secondly, it also accommodates the change of relationship between God and His group. Under the Old Covenant, His relationship was with a political entity that was established in one location in the nation of Israel, in the land of Canaan, in Palestine; they had one place at which the sacrifices could be made, at the Temple. And so, they were a nation that was rooted in one spot.

But we are what? We are not a political nation. We are a spiritual nation, a spiritual organism that is spread all around the world that does not have one place to worship, but many places to worship; many places where God has put His name. So that accommodates that as well.

And of course, there are the symbols themselves which very clearly accommodate the broken body of Jesus Christ (or symbolize that) and His shed blood as well. So I think there are three good reasons.

[Reaction to audience interjection: Yes, that is a good thought; that we are not only a spiritual organism, we are a spiritual organism made up of both Israelite and Gentile. Very good.]

Matthew 26:31-35 Then Jesus said to them, "All of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night, for it is written: 'I will strike the Shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.' But after I have been raised, I will go before you to Galilee." Peter answered and said to Him, "Even if all are made to stumble because of You, I will never be made to stumble." Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you that this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times." Peter said to Him, "Even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You!" And so said all the disciples.

There are a couple of interesting contrasts here. First of all, there is a very obvious overconfidence of Peter. He just felt so cocky and so sure of his own strength. He said in verse 33, “Though all men shall be offended, I will never be offended!” Pretty cocky, was he not? He also said, “Though I should die with You, I will not deny You.”

Now contrast this to Jesus. First of all, notice how realistic Jesus was. He expected His disciples to be offended and to be scattered. Jesus knew human nature. He knew the scripture. Zechariah 13:8 said that he would smite the shepherd, and the sheep would be scattered. And Jesus applied that to His circumstance, because it is a general and true principle that if the leadership is taken away, the flock tends to go in scattered direction. Now, He was very realistic about the weaknesses of the men who were following Him. He did not shut His eyes to that fact. He was not a dreamy eyed, unrealistic dreamer.

Secondly, even though we might say He was very realistic, and He perceived that His men were going to betray Him and be offended, He was also very confident in God. He says, “After I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.” So there is a certainty there as well.

A third thing. And I think this is very important. Again, Jesus shows His patience. He is sure these men are going to be offended, that they are going to betray Him, that they are going to be scattered, but He is sympathetic to their weaknesses. He did not get bitter, nor did He despise them because of their weakness.

There is a great deal of character there, because it is difficult for us to look at another person, converted or unconverted, and not self-righteously look down upon that person or persons, because of weaknesses that we know that they have, especially if there is any kind of a feeling of antagonism or bitterness between you and this other person.

If you know that that person has a weakness, it is awfully hard to keep yourself from looking down on that person. “You crumb! You know better than that! Why are you still doing that?” Do you know what you're saying? “I’m good. He’s bad. I’m up here. He’s down there.”

Now, the person may very well have the weakness. But Jesus did not condone their weakness, but did not He despise it either. You see, I think if we knew that we were involved in a great cause, and we could see our hope very clearly, we could really visualize it, and here we had this group of what we thought were very enthusiastic followers around us, they were part of our team, and we were going to march there, and really accomplish this great thing, and yet we could perceive that these people were getting cold feet, that they were turning away, that their loyalty was dissipating, I think that we would begin to feel abandoned and bitter.

And what would our reaction be? Would it not be to begin to strike out? “Why are you leaving me? Where are you going? Why can’t you support me when I need you the most? Aren’t you going to be with me till the end? Aren’t you going to help me?” I think we begin to get a little bit excited but He did it not.

Now, there is one more thing. Let us go back to Peter. He is very interesting personality. I wonder if we do not sometimes do the same thing that he did here and overestimate the strength of our will. I think we do it often. We think that we are strong enough to resist the temptation that we know that we have a weakness for. Otherwise, why would we tempt ourselves? If we have a tendency to drink too much, why even tempt ourselves with alcohol? Well, the reason we do it is because we think we are strong enough to resist it. “Oh I can stop any time! All I need is a drink or two, and that’s enough.” We are doing the same thing Peter did in principle. If we have a problem with fornication, why even look at the girly magazine? “Well, I can look at those things, and it doesn’t excite me! I don’t get any kind of thoughts like that.”

I was reading of Mahatma Gandhi, and they just made a movie about his life. It is supposed to be very good. But did you know that Gandhi fairly early in his life swore off women? Now, this was after he was married, and after he already had, I believe, four children. So he became celibate even after he was married. After he had been celibate for a while he wanted to test himself. Guess what he did? He went to sleep with a couple of young ladies. He said he passed the test. Well, I hope you do not do that. I have not heard of any of you doing it.

Are there any of you who are tempted to eat too much? Yeah, gluttony is just as bad as alcoholism. I never counted it, but I would guess that there are just as many scriptures, if not more, about eating too much as there is about alcohol. Do you tempt yourself every time you sit down to eat too much? That is a very easy one that all of us could fall into.

Well, I just wanted to let you know that you probably have done the same thing as Peter. I have done it many times. So we cannot point the finger of scorn at Peter because we do the same thing in principle as well. So it is a good lesson to learn to be very careful and not overestimate the power of your will.

Matthew 26:36-46 Then Jesus came with them to a place called Gethsemane, and said to the disciples, "Sit here while I go and pray over there." And He took with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and He began to be sorrowful and deeply distressed. Then He said to them, "My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch with Me." He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will." Then He came to the disciples and found them sleeping, and said to Peter, "What! Could you not watch with Me one hour? Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak."

Again, a second time, He went away and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if this cup cannot pass away from Me unless I drink it, Your will be done." And He came and found them asleep again, for their eyes were heavy. So He left them, went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Then He came to His disciples and said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting? Behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going. See, My betrayer is at hand."

This is the beginning of Jesus’ agony, as the world calls it. And I think we need to understand that His feeling was real—just as real as your feelings are real when you are in a desperate situation; where maybe someone very close to you has died; a situation where maybe a marriage is breaking up; someone is very sick; maybe you are about to lose a job that you have had for a very long time—a situation of extreme difficulty.

Now, what have you felt in circumstances like that? Have you not tried to reach out to somebody for encouragement, or some kind of comfort; that maybe somebody was with you in this period of great trial for you. Maybe you had a sinking, terrible pressure in your chest, or in your stomach; maybe you had that kind of feeling at war—you were being shot at by the enemy just a couple 100 yards away; or maybe a couple hundred feet away, your life hung in the balance—what was the feeling that went through you?

Was Jesus just an actor on a stage? Was He just kind of walking through a park? Did He not have the feelings that a man has? Could He not feel anger? Could He not feel desperation? Could He not feel sorrow? Fear? Well, certainly He could. He was all man and a mile wide. He had everything that we have.

Hebrews 2:14 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.

Jesus Christ could die. He did die! It was possible for Him to feel all of the things that lead to death, whether it be the shedding of His blood, or whether it be the agony of stress that was brought upon by what was racing through His mind, brought upon by what lay just ahead of Him. And so His glands were churning as well. I am sure that the adrenaline was pumping through His bloodstream and through His body, that He felt all the urgency of the situation that His mind would command the organs of His body to respond to.

Hebrews 2:16-17 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren.

In everything! If somebody pinched Jesus, it hurt! If somebody kicked Him in the shin, it hurt! If somebody stabbed Him, it hurt! If somebody insulted Him, it hurt! If somebody called Him names, the same thought would come to His mind that might come to your mind. They had to be acted upon. They either had to be put out, suppressed, or some decision made. He had all the equipment that a man had. He was all man. And the reason was so He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God; to make reconciliation for the sins of the people; so that we might have a High Priest and a Judge who understood everything about a man—about how we feel, about how we react, about the way our bodies react.

Hebrews 2:18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.

He went through everything that we go through. But He went through it in spades because He never sinned. And His temptations were greater than any of us have ever been tempted with, because His faith was greater, because His ability was greater. God tests us according to our ability. He tests us according to what He understands, according to what He knows we are able to take, able to endure. It says in I Corinthians 10:13 that He will not tempt us above what we are able.

Now, do you think that He did not consider Jesus in this light as well? Certainly, He did. And since Jesus had greater ability, since He had more of God's Spirit, in fact, He had it without measure, His tests were greater. And since His body was better than ours, His feelings were more acute. And since He knew more of what was at stake, His feelings were deeper than ours. Jesus knew better than anybody what was at stake at that moment, because the whole plan of God hinged on what He did—whether there would ever be any more sons born into the plan of God; whether God's purpose would be carried out; all of the weight of that responsibility was on His shoulders. How would you like to have that thrown on you?

Turn back in Hebrews 12 to just add a little bit more to make it practical for you and me. Paul has just finished talking about the great heroes of faith, people whose lives were lived by faith, who responded to God. And so in verse 1 of chapter 12, he says,

Hebrews 12:1-3 Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus [at His example], the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider [think about] Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself.

We all deserve what we get. We have sinned. We deserve to die for those sins. We deserve the pain that comes upon us as a result of our sins. But He did not, because He had never sinned. He was clean. And yet, in His mind's eye, He could envision what was coming upon Him. It was almost as if evil were personified, maybe in the form of a great huge tidal wave, rolling toward Him, and He could not escape. Just think of yourself standing on a beach, and here is this great, huge black wave rolling toward you, and in just a moment, it is going to crush you out of existence. I tell you; you would like to be delivered from that kind of a situation, would you not? You would be screaming and running like crazy and praying to God, “Get me out of here!”

Well, that is the way Christ felt too, but He also felt the responsibility of carrying through His part.

Hebrews 12:3 For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls.

Then Paul goes on to show that every son of God is chastened, or rather disciplined is a much better word, if you look at a modern translation. Disciplined, it does not always mean punishment for mistakes or sin. Discipline includes training, like an army sergeant does to his troops, his recruits. He disciplines by putting them through rigorous training exercises.

Well, that is what God does to us. He disciplines us. He trains us, He teaches us, He makes us go through the paces.

Hebrews 12:6-8 “For whom the LORD loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives." If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.

Back to Matthew 26. Jesus, too, had to learn to accept what He could not fully understand. If you read between the lines of what Jesus said, He did not want to go through that. “O My Father! If this cup may not pass away from Me, unless I drink it, Your will be done.” But He would have liked to have gotten out of it. He would have liked to find a way around. I am sure that He did not fully understand all the ramifications of what He was asked to be responsible to go through. And so His faith was being strained to its limit, but He did it. That is what is important. He did it.

Maybe you could try to grasp His loneliness. There are decisions that only you can make. Nobody can make those decisions for you. You have to stand alone with God and make them yourself.

Now, I know that you have been in situations like that, because sometimes you have called me, and you were almost pleading with me, “Tell me what you would do,” because really what you were asking me was to make the decision for you. And I cannot do that. You have to make it. How did you feel then? Awfully lonely, did you not, all by yourself? And you wish the burden could be lifted from your shoulders too. But it cannot, because only you can make it.

One final thing, there is so much that could be gleaned out of this. Jesus prayed three times, very fervently. Luke says so fervently that He actually exuded drops of blood. It just came right through the pores of His skin. Now, that is really being intense! But you know what? When the prayers were over, He rose from off His knees, and said, “Let’s get on with it.”

Now, there are some lessons there for you and me. There is a time to pray. And there is a time to act. In prayer, you ought to be able to find the resolve to act. And then when you get up off your knees, go and do it in faith, believing that God will be with you, and give you the strength to do what you need to do.

JWR/rwu/drm