Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

In these verses we find our Lord assailed by the untiring enmity of the Pharisees and Sadducees. As a general rule these two sects were at enmity between themselves; in persecuting Christ, however, they made common cause. Truly it was an unholy alliance! Yet how often we see the same thing in the present day. Men of the most opposite opinions and habits will agree in disliking the Gospel, and will work together to oppose its progress. "?There is no new thing under the sun?" (? Ecclesiastes 1:9).

The first point in this passage which deserves special notice is the repetition which our Lord makes of words used by him on a former occasion. He says, "?a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it but the sign of the prophet Jonah." If we turn to the twelth chapter of this gospel and the thirty ninth verse, we shall find that he had said the very same thing once before.

This repetition may seem a trifling and unimportant matter in the eyes of some. But it is not so in reality. It throws light on a subject which has perplexed the minds of many sincere lovers of the Bible, and ought therefore to be specially observed.

This repetition shows us that our Lord was in the habit of saying the same things over again. He did not content himself with saying a thing once, and afterwards never repeating it. It is evident that it was his custom to bring forward certain truths again and again, and thus to impress them more deeply on the minds of his disciples. He knew the weakness of our memories on spiritual things; he knew that what we hear twice, we remember better than what we hear once. He therefore brought out of his treasury old things as well as new.

Now what does all this teach us? It teaches us that we need not be so anxious to harmonize the narratives we read in the four Gospels, as many are disposed to be. It does not follow that the sayings of our Lord which we find the same in St. Matthew and St. Luke, were always used at the same time, or that the events with which they are connected must necessarily be the same. St. Matthew may be describing one event in our Lord's life; St. Luke may be describing another: and yet the words of our Lord, on both occasions, may have been precisely alike. To attempt to make out the two events to be one and the same because of the sameness of the words used has often led Bible students into great difficulties. It is far safer to hold the view here maintained that at different times our Lord often used the same words.

The second point which deserves special notice in these verses is the solemn warning which our Lord takes occasion to give to his disciples. His mind was evidently pained with the false doctrines which he saw among the Jews, and the pernicious influence which they exercised. He seizes the opportunity to utter a caution. "?Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Sadducees?" Let us mark well what those words contain.

To whom was this warning addressed? To the twelve apostles, to the first ministers of the church of Christ, to men who had forsaken all for the Gospel's sake! Even they are warned! The best of men are only men, and at any time may fall into temptation. "?Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall!?" (? 1 Corinthians 10:12). If we love life, and would see good days, let us never think that we do not need that hint: "?Take heed and beware.?"

Against what does our Lord warn his apostles? Against the "?doctrine" of the Pharisees and of Sadducees. The Pharisees, we are frequently told in the Gospels, were self-righteous formalists; the Sadducees were skeptics, freethinkers, and half infidels.Yet even Peter, James, and John must beware of their doctrines! Truly the best and holiest of believers may well be on his guard!

By what figure does our Lord describe the false doctrines against which he cautions his disciples? He calls them leaven. Like leaven, they might seem a small thing compared to the whole body of truth; like leaven, once admitted they would work secretly and noiselessly; like leaven, they would gradually change the whole character of the religion with which they were mixed. How much is often contained in a single word!it was not merely theopen danger of heresy but "?leaven?" of which the apostles were to beware.

There is much in all this that calls loudly for the close attention of all professing Christians. The caution of our Lord in this passage has been shamefully neglected. It would have been well for the church of Christ if the warnings of the Gospel had been as much studied as its promises.

Let us then remember that this saying of our Lord's about the "?leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees?" was intended for all time. It was not meant only for the generation to which it was spoken; it was meant for the perpetual benefit of the church of Christ. He who spoke it saw with prophetically eye the future history of Christianity. The Great Physician knew well that Pharisaic doctrines and Sadducee doctrines would prove the two great wasting diseases of his church until the end of the world. He would have us know that there will always be Pharisees and Sadducees in the ranks of Christians. Their succession shall never fail; their generation shall never become extinct. Their name may change, but their spirit will always remain. Therefore he cries to us, "?Take heed and beware!?"

Finally, let us make a personal use of this caution, by keeping up a holy jealousy over our own souls. Let us remember that we live in a world where Pharisaism and Sadduceeism are continually striving for the mastery in the church of Christ. Some want to add to the Gospel, and some want to take away from it; some would bury it, and some would pare it down to nothing; some would stifle it by heaping on additions, and some would bleed it to death by subtraction from its truths. Both parties agree only in one respect: both would kill and destroy the life of Christianity if they succeeded in having their own way. Against both errors let us watch and pray, and stand upon guard. Let us not add to the Gospel, to please the Roman catholic Pharisee; let us not subtract from the Gospel, to please the neologian Sadducee. Let our principle be "?the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?:" nothing added to it, and nothing taken away.

There are words in this passage which have led to painful differences and divisions among Christians. Men have striven and contended about their meaning till they have lost sight of all charity, and yet have failed to carry conviction to one another's minds. Let it suffice us to glance briefly at the controverted words, and then pass on to more practical lessons.

What then are we to understand, when we read that remarkable saying of our Lord's, "?Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church??" Does it mean that the apostle Peter himself was to be the foundation on which Christ's church was to be built? Such an interpretation, to say the least, appears exceedingly improbable. To speak of an erring, fallible child of Adam as the foundation of the spiritual temple is very unlike the ordinary language of Scripture. Above all, no reason can be given why our Lord should not have said, "?I will build my church upon thee,?" if such had been his meaning, instead of saying, "?I will build my church upon this rock.?"

The true meaning of the "?rock?" in this passage appears to be the truth of our Lord's messiahship and divinity, which Peter had just confessed. It is as though our Lord had said, "?thou art rightly called by the name Peter, or stone, for thou hast confessed that mighty truth on which, as on a rock, I will build my church.?"

[There is nothing modern, or peculiarly Protestant, in the view here maintained. It was held by Chrysostom long ago. It was taught by Ferus, a famous Roman Catholic preacher of the Franciscan order, at Mainz in the sixteenth century, in his homilies on St. Matthew.

It may be well to remark in this place, that it is a complete delusion to suppose that the Scriptures can be interpreted according to the "?unanimous consent of the Fathers.?" There is no such unanimous consent! It is a mere high-sounding phrase, utterly destitute of any foundation in facts. The Fathers disagree as much in explaining Scripture as Whitby and Gill, or Matthew Henry and D'Oyly and Mant.]

But what are we to understand when we read the promise which our Lord makes to Peter: "?I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven?" Do these words mean that the right of admitting souls to heaven was to be placed in Peter's hands? The idea is preposterous. Such an office is the special prerogative of Christ himself (?). Do the words mean that Peter was to have any primacy or superiority over the rest of the apostles? There is not the slightest proof that such a meaning was attached to the words in New Testament times, or that Peter had any rank or dignity above the rest of the twelve.

The true meaning of the promise to Peter appears to be that he was to have the special privilege of first opening the door of salvation, both to the Jews and Gentiles. This was fulfilled to the letter when he preached on the day of Pentecost to the Jews, and visited the Gentile Cornelius at his own house. On each occasion he used "?the keys,?" and threw open the door of faith. Of this he seems to have been sensible himself. "?God,?" he says, "?madechoice among us that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe?" (? Acts 15:7).

Finally, what are we to understand when we read the words, "?whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven??" Does this mean that the apostle Peter was to have any power of forgiving sins, and absolving sinners? Such an idea is derogatory to Christ's special office, as our great High Priest. It is a power which we never find Peter, or any of the apostles, once exercising. They always refer men to Christ.

The true meaning of this promise appears to be that Peter and his brethren, the apostles, were to be specially commissioned to teach with authority the way of salvation. As the Old Testament priest declared authoritatively whose leprosy was cleansed, so the apostles were appointed to "?declare and pronounce?" authoritatively whose sins were forgiven. Beside this, they were to be specially inspired to lay down rules and regulations for the guidance of the church on disputed questions. Some things they were to "?bind?" or forbid; others they were to "?loose?" or allow. The decision of the Council at Jerusalem that the Gentiles need not be circumcised was one example of the exercise of this power (?); but it was a commission specially confined to the apostles. In discharging it they had no successors. With them it began, and with them it expired.

We will leave these controverted words here: enough perhaps has been said upon them for our personal edification. Let us only remember that, in whatsoever sense men take them, they have nothing to do with the Church of Rome. Let us now turn our attention to points which more immediately concern our own souls.

In the first place, let us admire the noble confession which the apostle Peter makes in this passage. He says, in reply to our Lord's question, "?Whom say ye that I am??" "?Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God?".

At first sight, a careless reader may see nothing very remarkable in these words of the apostle: he may be think it extraordinary that they should call forth such strong commendation from our Lord: but such thoughts arise from ignorance and inconsideration. Men forget that it is a widely different thing to believe in Christ's divine mission when we dwell in the midst of professing Christians, and to believe in it when we dwell in the midst of hardened and unbelieving Jews. The glory of Peter's confession lies in this, that he made it when few were with Christ and many against him. He made it when the rulers of his own nation, the scribes, priests and Pharisees, were all opposed to his Master; he made it when our Lord was in the "?form of a servant,?"without wealth, without royal dignity, without any visible mark of a King. To make such a confession at such a time, required great faith and great decision of character. The confession itself, as Brentius says, "?was an epitome of all Christianity, and a compendium of true doctrine about religion.?" Therefore it was that our Lord said, "?Blessed art thou, Simon bar Jonah.?" We shall do well to copy that hearty zeal and affection which Peter displayed. We are perhaps too much disposed to underrate this holy man, because of his occasional instability, and his thrice repeated denial of his Lord. This is a great mistake. With all his faults, Peter was a true hearted fervent, single-minded servant of Christ; with all his imperfections, he has given us a pattern that many Christians would do wisely to follow. Zeal like his may have its ebbs and flows, and sometimes lacks steadiness of purpose; zeal like his may be ill-directed, and sometimes make sad mistakes: but zeal like his is not to be despised. It awakens up the sleeping; it stirs the sluggish; it provokes others to exertion. Anything is better than sluggishness, luke-warmness and torpor in the church of Christ. Happy would it have been for Christendom had there been more Christians like Simon Peter and Martin Luther.

In the next place let us take care that we understand what our Lord means when he speaks of his church.

The church which Jesus promises to build upon a rock is the "?blessed company of all faithful people.?" It is not the visible church of any one nation, country or place: it is the whole body of believers of every age, and tongue and people. It is a church composed of all who are washed in Christ's blood, clothed in Christ's righteousness, renewed by Christ's Spirit, joined to Christ by faith, and epistles of Christ in life; it is a church of which every member is baptized with the HolyGhost, and is really and truly holy; it is a church which is one body. All who belong to it are of one heart and one mind, and hold the same truths, and believe the same doctrines as necessary to salvation. It is a church which has only one head: that head is Jesus Christ himself. "?He is the head of the body?." (? Colossians 1:18).

Let us beware of mistakes on this subject. Few words are so much misunderstood as the word "?church?"; few mistakes have so much injured the cause of pure religion. Ignorance on this point has been a fertile source of bigotry, sectarianism and persecution. Men have wrangled and contended about Episcopal, Presbyterian and Independent churches as if it were necessary to salvation to belong to some particular party, and as if, belonging to that party, we must of course belong to Christ. All this time they have lost sight of the one true church, outside of which there is no salvation at all. It will matter nothing at the last day where we have worshiped, if we are not found members of the true church of God's elect.

In the last place, let us mark the glorious promises which our Lord makes to his church. He says: "?The gates of Hell will not prevail against it?".

The meaning of this promise is that the power of Satan shall never destroy the people of Christ. He that brought sin and death into the first creation by tempting Eve shall never bring ruin on the new creation by overthrowing believers. The mystical body of Christ shall never perish or decay. Though often persecuted, afflicted, distressed and brought low, it shall never come to an end: it shall outlive the wrath of Pharaohs and Roman Emperors. Visible churches, like Ephesus, may come to nothing; but the true church never dies. Like the bush that Moses saw, it may burn, but shall not be consumed. Every member of it shall be brought safe to glory. In spite of falls, failures and shortcomings, in spite of the world, the flesh and the devil, no member of the true church shall ever be cast way (? John 10:28).