MATTHEW 27 AND 28
Rem The prophet says, “the price of him that was set a price on, whom they who were of the sons of Israel had set a price on” (verse 9).
CAC Yes, being the prophet, it was their very notion of what He was worth. They were all tested in that way. He says, as it were, scornfully, “I took the thirty silver pieces”. It was “a goodly price that I was prized at by them”.
Rem “Give me my hire” the prophet says, Zechariah 1:12.
CAC It is the great test for us all — what value do we set upon Christ? It becomes historically the price of His betrayer, as brought out in regard to Israel, especially the heads of the nation, the value they set upon Him. And these were venerable men, who had given up themselves to the service of God, and to the study of Scripture, men I suppose of much prayer, but this was the valuation that they put upon Jesus. The two things that God has set up in the earth come up for judgment here, one, Israel in its divinely given place of privilege, and then, the government as entrusted to the Gentiles.
Ques Is one thought in the purchase of the field, the perpetuation of this terrible act?
CAC Yes, I think it became a witness against the people. What is striking in all these chapters is the divine testimony that is rendered all through.
Rem A burial place is very permanent.
CAC Yes, it was a permanent witness to what had been done — of a permanent value that had been put upon Christ, and a witness too to the fact that Judas himself had [p. 176] given a true testimony.
God did not suffer him to hang himself until he had given a true testimony. He is the figure of apostate christianity, because he was one of the twelve. He was compelled to own publicly before his employers that he had sinned, for he had delivered up innocent blood. In the wisdom of God it was allowed to come out in the circle that was most familiar with Christ. That is, Judas had been admitted to three-and-a-half years of close intimacy with Christ; he worked miracles and received apostleship, yet, there was not one spark of love in his heart for the Saviour who was about to die for him. He would use even his intimacy with the Lord to deliver Him up with the prospect of a paltry gain of a few shillings.
Ques Why does Matthew speak of His being delivered up in a special way: there are many instances, why is it stressed there?
CAC Well, all are brought into the natural responsibility. He was “given up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2: 23); that was behind it all, but the full responsibility of man is maintained.
Rem “Jesus stood before the governor” — it is the final issue.
CAC Yes, the Gentile powers had become responsible before God, as entrusted with government, and they have to be tested. So we get the testing of both before God, the religious elements and the Gentile government.
Ques I was wondering whether this lies at the bottom of things at the great white throne — what men have done with Christ?
CAC Well, it does, but it is rather remarkable that at the great white throne they are judged according to their works — not exactly for what they have done to Christ, but their own moral condition, of course. Probably by far the most have heard [p. 177] of Christ.
Ques Why do you say that?
CAC Because it is true. At the great white throne all men are there. They will all be judged according to their works. The greater part of them will not have come under the responsibility of rejecting Christ.
Rem They will have had the witness of creation.
CAC But here it is the responsibility of those who have to do directly with Christ, and the state of Israel, exposed in their leaders and the corrupted state of the governing power in the world; that was exposed, showing the absolute necessity of the sin-offering and the trespass offering, because we are viewing the Lord here (in Matthew and Mark) as moving into that position.
Ques Why do you say that Matthew is the trespass offering?
CAC Because Matthew speaks of the trespass offering in chapter 18. The sin-offering is wider. The trespass offering refers to those who have stood in relation to God under some defined responsibility. The trespass offering would apply therefore to both the Jews and Gentiles as having delegated authority. But in Mark the gospel is to be preached to all nations. Well, that is on the ground of the sin-offering; it is wider still.
Ques Would trespasses be the thought of offences?
CAC They refer to positive violations of the will of God. At the great white throne they will be judged out of the things written in the book, whether they have had to do with Christ or not — so much the worse if they have, I was going to say. And God gives testimony in the midst of all this terrible hardness of heart and refusal of what is good. God gives testimony through Pilate’s wife; we hope it was for her eternal blessing. It was given her from God, anyway a testimony, so that Pilate knew very well that he was doing wrong. In one sense he rightly represented government, his moral judgment of the Lord was right, but he had not the [p. 178] moral courage to stand up against the judgment of the leaders of the people. Pilate tried his best — up to a certain point — to get Him out of their hands.
Rem Who before Pilate witnessed “the good confession” (1 Timothy 6: 13).
CAC He does not say much in this gospel, does He? His silence was largely His testimony, but He says, “Thou sayest”, as much as to say, ‘what you say is right’.
Rem He says nothing but six words on the Cross.
CAC The Lord actually said much that is recorded in the gospels as we know. The Lord confessed the true character of His kingdom. “Every one that is of the truth hears my voice” (John 18: 37), He says, but we do not get that here.
Ques It seems the side of man’s responsibility here.
CAC There are the remarkable testimonies of Judas, of Pilate’s wife, and Pilate himself, and then there is the centurion’s remarkable testimony to the One who was there.
Rem It makes us realise what every kind of man has done to Jesus. It is striking in that way; the same kind of thing remains in the world today.
Rem Here it is a scarlet cloak, in Mark and John it is purple.
CAC It has been said that scarlet represents human glory. Everything that was morally glorious was there in Him, but it was there as a subject of mockery.
Rem He was the only One who could rightly be arrayed in it in the gospel.
Ques Are not the materials of the veil in mind in that?
CAC Those who have received Him and believed on Him, see every glorious right investing Him, but here it is a scene of mockery. In the midst of this heart-breaking sorrowful scene, we see one man singled out to have this precious honour of bearing the cross of Jesus. He [p. 179] represents those I think who would be identified with the Lord’s cross. We are not told that he was a believer, but we should rather gather that he was, because we are told he was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15: 21), men well-known amongst the brethren. It is one of those unique honours that we find accorded to men. No other man ever had the privilege of actually bearing the cross of Jesus. It is like another man — Joseph of Arimathaea who had the privilege of making preparation for His burial. These are recorded that we might covet some such distinctive honour. Each in some distinctive way was bearing the reproach of Christ. Everyone round was contributing to His reproach, but Simon of Cyrene was bearing His reproach in bearing His cross. It is remarkable that they compelled him to do it; is that not often the case? We should often avoid the reproach of Christ unless we are compelled to do it. Young believers come up against it sometimes. I know with my first confession, I was compelled to it, and I had a feeling that if I did not stand up to it, it would be all over with me. I had not really come into the knowledge of salvation then, but I was up against such evil that I felt forced to it. And what a mercy it is when we are compelled to bear His cross. It is good if we do it willingly, but it is a divine favour even when we become identified with it under compulsion. All these things ought to affect our hearts very much; they show us there arrives in our lives a moment of opportunity. If Simon had not just been on the spot, he would have missed it for all eternity. He was possibly a lover of Jesus and a black man. There are moments in the lives of every one of us of being identified with the reproach of Christ that may never come again, and we ought to be alert so as not to miss the opportunity.
Rem It is touching that the chief priests and the Pharisees seal the stone.
CAC Yes. They added to the testimony. What we [p. 180] find in this closing part of the gospel is that there are additions to the testimony from unexpected quarters — from Judas, Pilate’s wife, Pilate himself, and the centurion. But these unhappy men brought home to themselves the testimony of resurrection in a way that it was impossible to deny. It was the testimony of their own appointed witnesses, and there is no record that it produced any moral effect whatever. Testimony itself does not effect anything, in results I mean, if the heart is hardened. I think there is a feeling in the mind of men generally, and it lingers in our own minds, that if a sufficient amount of undeniable evidence were brought before them, they would believe it. So this supplies disillusion. Hundreds of volumes have been published of what are called ‘Evidences’, but no-one has been converted through their instrumentality. It is solemn to think that the more certainly you can prove the truth of God, the more certainly the natural man will reject it.
Rem It is striking in Luke 16, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, not even if one rise from among the dead will they be persuaded”.
CAC Yes, if there is anything of God in a man, the testimony of Moses and the prophets will suffice; that is the moral testimony is far greater than any testimony of signs and wonders.
Rem Paul reasons in the Acts.
CAC Well, that is the moral line — that is right. He did not show people miracles. And God has seen to it that there is undeniable evidence. No fact is better established on evidence than the Lord’s resurrection.
Rem It is the only thing that is described as infallible in Scriptures: “By many infallible proofs”, Acts 1:3 (A.V.).
CAC Yes, and something like thirty years afterwards there were over two hundred and fifty people who remembered it personally.
Ques Would you say the truth of the reality of [p. 181] resurrection is that which we are slow to come to? Paul rehearses it in 1 Corinthians 15 as if we need a great deal on our side to come to it.
CAC Because it is a thing entirely outside the experience of man. F.E.R. used to say he did not wonder at people observing ‘Good Friday’ but he wondered very much that they observed ‘Easter Sunday’. That is, the death of the Lord is a fact that comes within the knowledge of man; he has seen Him die. But the resurrection is outside the domain of human knowledge altogether, and man’s reasoning powers are utterly at fault. We know that the Lord as risen never appeared to anybody except His own during the forty days. He said, “The world sees me no longer; but ye see me”. It was the peculiar privilege of His own to see Him as risen, and it still is the privilege of faith to see Him risen.
Rem False ideas prevailed about it, as when Herod thought that John the Baptist was risen from the dead.
CAC But then, Herod’s idea of a man risen from the dead was a man going about doing miracles and preaching. He had an idea that John had come back as a man on earth. So people today think that they are going to rejoin their friends in a better and another world.
Rem In basic English resurrection is ‘come to life again’.
CAC We ought to pray more for capacity to take in the thought of resurrection. You do not see it really in those whom the Lord raised. You do not see it in Lazarus, except as a picture of it. He was brought back into a condition where he could be killed by men and die again; that is, it was resuscitation rather than resurrection. It sets forth most wonderfully the power of resurrection resident in the Lord, but He restored him to his sisters.
Rem So it was in all cases before the Lord’s own death. It was so with Elijah and [p. 182] the boy.
CAC No one as far as we know witnessed the actual resurrection. The angel came down and rolled away the stone — not to let the Lord out, but to show He was not in the tomb!
Rem The resurrection is a thing that could not be witnessed.
CAC The Lord would be seen as risen, but His actual rising was not witnessed by anybody; it was a matter, we might say, between Himself and the Father, was it not?
Rem Quite so! Why did you say just now that we should pray for more capacity to take in the resurrection?
CAC I thought it was most important in view of one taking up the position of being risen with Him. It is apprehended “through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead”. It is a matter of faith, so risen with Christ is a faith position. None of us are actually risen with Christ, but it is a spiritual position to be entered upon by the faith of the wonderful working of God who raised Him from among the dead. So the working of it in the soul is a very influential thing.
Ques So that the features of resurrection should apply to us. Is it the same as an out-of-the-world condition?
CAC Well, that is something like it, I should think.
Rem It would help us as it would give us a sphere of things in which to live. Sometimes saints are found in a sphere of things that they should not be living in; the sphere of resurrection should be the sphere of their activities in life.
Rem Abraham had the faith of resurrection.
Ques What do we learn from the attitude of these two women?
CAC Well, they were seeking Jesus, “the crucified one”, but they were too late!
Rem They were unable to take in the truth of resurrection at this juncture.
[p. 183] CAC Yes! It is very affecting to see that they clung to the Lord, even as dead, in a way that the brothers did not.
Rem They were ready for this disclosure.
CAC The fact that they were the first to get the light of resurrection would intimate that the state of our affections is very important in connection with this matter. Many things would become clear to us if we loved the Lord with more personal affection. I suppose it would solve every doctrinal difficulty for us. And His leading here was not exactly to heaven, it was to Galilee.
Ques The resurrection scene is to be enjoyed by those who have not yet left the earth physically; is that what you have in mind?
CAC And He was to be known in the place of reproach — Galilee — far away from all that was great in Judaea. It was in keeping with the character of the Lord’s own ministry.
Ques Why did the angel say to the women “Come, see the place where the Lord lay”?
CAC Well, is that not a very important matter indeed for us? I suppose that it would hardly be wrong to say that His death was greater than His resurrection.
Ques This is true at the Supper, would you say — this comes into it?
CAC I was thinking of that. As we look at the loaf and the cup on the table they say nothing to us of His resurrection; they speak simply and only of where the Lord lay. It is most important, because apart from that, how could we possibly touch the resurrection side?
Ques Does the thought of burial in Corinthians come in here?
CAC Yes, it is a part of the gospel. But the angel directed their attention to “the place where the Lord lay” and we need to ponder very much the fact that the Lord [p. 184] has lain in death. What it must have been to the angels to have seen Him in death and buried, to those who knew so well whom He was!
Rem What follows would be in answer to their affections. It says, “Go quickly”, that is, after they had done so. And if we are ready to go this way, we shall get the Lord’s personal confirmation.
CAC I thought so; that is very encouraging.
Rem They are to move forward, and there is the meeting with the Lord Himself.
CAC And He makes Himself available to them for personal contact, in a way He did not to Mary Magdalene. “They ... took him by the feet”.
Rem They had learnt Him in a new way, taking account of how the angels speak of Him. It says they “did him homage”. It is the right attitude here, it is rather different from John 20.
CAC It would suggest an apprehension of how He was moving, would it not?
Rem He was moving away from Jerusalem and all that order of things.
CAC Yes.