Matthew 27d

 Matthew describes the crucifixion without elaboration, unlike some preachers and movie directors. If the details were important, then Matthew or one of the gospel writers would have told us more. No one had to dramatize the event for a first century audience; they had seen people crucified because the Romans made sure that the victims were hung alongside a well-traveled road for all to see.

 27: 38-44.   Then two rebels were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left. Those who passed by derided him, shaking their heads and saying, “You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.” In the same way the chief priests also, along with the scribes and elders, were mocking him, saying, “He saved others; he is unable to save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he wants to, for he said, ‘I am God’s Son’.” The rebels who were crucified with him also taunted him in the same way.

 The soldiers tempted Jesus to numb the suffering with mixed wine; he refused. Now Jesus is tempted to use his supernatural power to come down from the cross; he refused again. Both the people and the leaders fail to understand that suffering can be a path to salvation and death can be a victory. It is the spiritual side of life that is under-developed in their lives. They say that they will only believe if a miracle happens. But previous experience shows that even if Jesus steps down from the cross, some people still won’t believe. Remember that Jesus performed miracles, and the religious leaders said that he did it by the power of the devil (Matthew 12: 24). 

 Neither Matthew nor Mark tells the story of the penitent thief, here called a rebel. Only Luke tells that story (Luke 23: 39-43).

 Notice the layers of meaning in the words that the passersby, the onlookers, and the religious leaders use. First, they recast his words to mean something that Jesus did not say. In context, Jesus was speaking of the destruction of his body (Matthew 26: 61). Twisting an opponent’s words is a common ploy, used often today by politicians, as you well know. Second, the leaders use the same categories, for example, ‘the Son of God’, but they attribute different characteristics to the category. Although in the Jews own history God has not acted just because Israel demanded it, they still think that they can define and limit the Son of God. ‘If you are the Son of God, then do this’. God will not be put to the test.

 Next, the religious leaders seem to accept that Jesus saved others, but they belittle the many healings Jesus has performed, including bringing people back from the dead. This is a “Gotcha!” strategy. One perceived mistake, and everything else that you have done is judged by that. That allows the leaders, in their minds, to take titles such as ‘the King of Israel’ and ‘the Son of God’ and turn them into taunts. However, doing so puts them on the same level as the Roman soldiers.  

27: 45-50.  From noon on, darkness came over the whole land (or earth) until three in the afternoon. And about three o’clock Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” When some of the bystanders heard it, they said, “This man is calling for Elijah.” At once one of them ran and got a sponge, filled it with sour wine, put it on a stick, and gave it to him to drink. But the others said, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him” (‘another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and blood’). Then Jesus cried again with a loud voice and breathed his last. 

 Darkness is a sign of judgment and anguish (for example, Isaiah 59: 9). It is not clear when Jesus was put on the cross, but early morning seems likely. Hanging unsupported for hours causes water to fill the chest (edema) and breathing becomes impossible. 

 The cry of Jesus seems to be in Aramaic, which makes sense since that was the language that Jesus habitually spoke (not Hebrew and not Greek). We cannot be certain because the verbal sentence is transliterated (writing one language in another language’s letters) into written Greek (Ben Witherington III, Matthew, 2006. Page 519, footnote 61). Mark records the address as “Eloi, Eloi.” Either way, the word is a shortened form of Elohim ‘God’. Matthew seems to be writing to readers who are primarily Greek speakers, and so he translates the Aramaic for them.  

 This sentence is actually the first verse of Psalm 22. There are two ways to read this, or perhaps two layers of meaning. First, Jesus speaks out of anguish and the feeling of abandonment. He draws on a familiar passage of Scripture to voice his despair. Second, as I have noted before, it was the practice of first century Jews to quote the first line of a passage and then expect the hearers to go read the passage. Remember there are no verse markers and, other than Psalm numbers, no chapters. So hearers would have to know where it came from, unroll the scroll, and find the place to read. 

 And what would they read? I suggest you go find Psalm 22 and read through it yourself. There you will find what seems to be a description of the condition of a crucified man (for example, “I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax; it is melted within my breast”). However, towards the end of the Psalm, things change. The writer concludes that God has come: “He did not despise or abhor the affliction of the afflicted; he did not hide his face from me but heard when I cried to him.” Read it. 

 Not for the final time, Jesus is misunderstood. Some thought that his cry of “Eli” was a cry to Elijah to come. Others want to offer him wine again. But the end is near; Jesus looks dead. Only John includes that a soldier pierced his side to see if he was dead, although later manuscripts of Matthew also include the incident. The presence of water with the blood makes sense. As I note above, there is a buildup of water in the chest. 

27: 51-54.   At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, “Truly this man was God’s Son!” (or a son of God).

 Only Matthew has this story about the resurrection of the saints, and it seems out of place here. Jesus has just died. The resurrection is three days away, but Matthew jumps ahead and describes something that happened “after the resurrection.” Perhaps he does this because he links the earthquake with the tombs opening. Neither Mark, Luke, nor John mentions the earthquake, or the resurrection of the saints buried in Jerusalem. So, why does Matthew include this story? 

 Matthew seems to be searching for words and phrases to convey to the reader how earth-shatteringly impactful Jesus’ death was. The supernatural power of resurrection was so strong that it spilled over and woke up the dead. The power of the resurrection even shook nature itself. The power of the resurrection rattled the established religion. The curtain that separated the people from the Holy of Holies was torn from top (God did that) to bottom. With the death of Jesus, the barrier of sins was removed. The way was then open for communion with God person to person. Jesus is the mediator. The job of the priest or the pastor is to introduce people to Jesus who, in turn, introduces them to the merciful Father.