Matthew 23:23-24

TEXT: 23:23, 24

23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith: but these ye ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone. 24 Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

a.

If there are weightier matters of the law, does not this make other matters in the same law less weighty? Was Jesus indifferent about these lesser matters? Can anyone give too much attention to little things? Explain what you mean.

b.

What is the greatest commandment? What is the second greatest? What makes them greater and more important than others? Do you think Jesus meant to ignore love as one of the weightier matters of the law? (Cf. Luke 11:42.)

c.

Are there big and little sins? Does Jesus-' distinction between weightier and (by implication) less weighty matters of the law suggest that some sins could be less important than others?

d.

What is the criterion by which Jesus distinguishes the weightier matters from tithing mint, anise and cummin?

e.

People in Jesus-' day gave exaggerated attention to little things while ignoring the great principles of justice, mercy and faith. Do you think it is possible for people in our day to do just the opposite, i.e. give great attention to great principles while ignoring items they would refer to as nonessential details, even though God ordered them?

f.

While it is true that Christians are not under law but under grace (Romans 6:14), is there a sense in which we too operate under the principle of observing the weightier matters of justice, mercy and faith, without neglecting the other things required of us? If so, how would you illustrate this?

g.

What do you think is wrong with people who are very scrupulous about (relatively) less important rituals, and yet who readily justify greed, impurity, dishonesty, cruelty and other sins in which they are personally involved?

h.

Some brethren believe that this text is Jesus-' last word on church finance, i.e. that tithing is hereby reinstated in the Christian system. Do you think they have correctly interpreted Jesus? If so, explain. If not, why not?

PARAPHRASE

How terrible for you teachers of the Law and Pharisees, pretenders! You give God a tenth of your smallest garden spices like mint, aniseed and cummin, but you have neglected the most vital provisions of the Law, like justice, mercy and integrity! These are the things you ought to have practiced, without neglecting the others. You blind guides, you carefully strain everything for fear of drinking an unclean animal like a gnat, yet you do not notice that you are swallowing a camel whole!

SUMMARY

Hypocrites are people who, among other things, are scrupulous about trivialities, but grossly negligent about duties of highest and gravest importance.

NOTES
Majoring In Minors

Matthew 23:23 Ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith. (Cf. Luke 11:42.) Jesus-' first vivacious illustration of rabbinical wrong emphasis is the preposterous snapshot of a squinting Pharisee, patiently counting one out of every ten parts of mint, anise and cummin, while long, dusty cobwebs gather on his practice of justice, mercy and faith.

Too much could be made, however, of the fact that the Law named only grain, grapes and olives to be tithed (Leviticus 27:30 ff.; Numbers 18:24; Numbers 18:26; Deuteronomy 14:22 ff; Deuteronomy 26:12). Some affirm that the inclusion of mint, anise and cummin was an illegitimately over-extending. of the law (Hendriksen, Matthew, 831). While the Talmud, too, pictures tithing of herbs as a refinement of the rabbis (Bruce, Expositor's Greek Testament, 282), hence apparently not originally intended by the Law nor practiced by earlier Jews closer to Moses, several points are to be noticed in its favor:

1.

The Law did not list in detail ALL of its proper, potential applications, but necessarily limited itself to key illustrations, leaving all unresolved questions in the hands of the Judaic judiciary. (Cf. Deuteronomy 1:9-18; Deuteronomy 17:8-13; Deuteronomy 19:17; Deuteronomy 25:1; remember Paul's argument in 1 Corinthians 9:9 f.) On other occasions questions were resolved by prophets. (Cf. Zechariah 7:1 to Zechariah 8:23.) Even so, Deuteronomy 26:2 specifies: first-fruits of all that you produce from the soil of the land, while Deuteronomy 26:12 mentions: a tenth of all your produce, so to tithe garden spices would technically not over-extend the Law's actual precept. In fact, Jews closer to Moses than the Talmudists understood they must tithe not only grain, wine and oil, but also honey (2 Chronicles 31:5: all that the fields produced), fruit of all the trees (Nehemiah 10:35; Nehemiah 10:37, not merely olive oil).

2.

Although Rabbinism typically and wrongly over-stretched the Law in many cases, is this what has actually occurred here? In Jesus-' words there is no discernible criticism of the Pharisean choice to tithe garden herbs. He did not affirm, These, that is, God's revealed tithing precepts (not human exaggerations added to them), ye ought to have done, but simply, These ye ought to have done. , leaving mint, anise and cummin to be tithed along with grain, wine and oil.

3.

The extraordinary meticulousness of Pharisees regarding their tithing is, in itself, commendable, because they had covenanted before God not to appropriate for personal use anything that rightly belonged to Him, however great or small it might be. If only more Christians would share this same conscientiousness and faithfulness in small things (Luke 16:10 f; Luke 19:17).

No, Jesus-' emphasis lies in another direction: You are hypocrites, for ye tithe. and have left undone the weightier matters of the law. That the Mosaic system had at its base great, overriding principles is well-documented both in the Law and by the Prophets (Deuteronomy 10:12-22; Proverbs 21:3; Isaiah 1:16 f.; Jeremiah 22:3; Zechariah 7:9 f.; Micah 6:8 and the list of other text at Matthew 22:36 notes.) The weightier matters of the law are these grand principles that give purpose to its every part. Justice to the oppressed, mercy where strict justice cannot solve the problem humanely, and faith in God as well as faithfulness to God in seeking conscientiously to apply His Word, are just some of the broad, foundational ethical rules upon which genuine holiness and true righteousness are grounded and on which every other item of specific legislation is based. Jesus had already mentioned love for God and man (Luke 11:42; Matthew 22:34-40). Here, too, He expects every disciple to judge every minor detail of everyday life according to this criterion: Does what I am doing express the weightier matters of the law, justice, mercy and faith and the love of God? Man's choice, then, is not these weightier matters OR tithing and other minutiae, but the one AND the other, the one THROUGH the other.

In fact, to tithe one's goods under the Jewish system meant to act justly by giving back to God what is justly His (Leviticus 27:30), to be used for the support of the Levitical priesthood (Numbers 18:21) and for mercy to the poor (Deuteronomy 14:28 f.), in faith trusting God's system to be right. Or, to put it another way, Jewish tithing expressed one phase, even if minor, of justice (because done precisely like God required and because, regardless of one's income, tithing was uniformly just), of mercy (because it furnished the means to care for the needy), of faith (because God promised to make it possible to live on the remainder and prosper, so I will do it because I trust Him) and of the love of God (because He can be completely trusted to know what is best for me, whether I can perfectly understand and justify it or not). Jesus-' complaint, then, is that, in their tithing, the Pharisees were merely going through the motions, for they left the other undone, that is, they were not tithing as an expression of the great principles of true religion, but quite irrespective of them.

It is simply not true, therefore, that a proper sense of proportion, so fundamental to an even-balanced Christian expression, requires us to believe that not all duties are equally important, or that to fail to discern which is important and which less so is to lack spiritual equilibrium. The Jews were right to think: Be careful over a light precept as over a weighty but they mistook the reason: for thou knowest not the giving of the rewards of the precepts (i.e. how divine approval will be expressed concerning each one) (Aboth Matthew 2:1). This equality of duties is a valid understanding, because the supposedly light precepts, that appear less important, are actually the examples, the illustrations, the cases in point which express the so-called heavy precepts.

The rabbinical error signalled here by Jesus was their gross partiality in matters of the Law. (Cf. Malachi 2:9.) They believed themselves free to select which duty they would obey, despite God's expectation (Numbers 15:39 f.; Deuteronomy 5:1; Deuteronomy 5:32 f.; Deuteronomy 6:24 f.; Deuteronomy 8:1; Deuteronomy 11:22; chap. 30) and Israel's own explicit promise to be obedient in all things. (Cf. Exodus 19:8; Exodus 24:3; Exodus 24:7; Joshua 24:24.) Anyone whose righteousness is expected to come from the Law (Deuteronomy 6:25) must do everything it requires (Deuteronomy 27:26 = Galatians 3:10; James 2:10).

Why do hypocrites of every age take hyper-zealousness for microscopic regulations as the route to righteousness? The rationale is not hard to discover:

1.

If it is a good name and fame for godliness he seeks, the hypocrite will even show burning zeal for easy-to-do, relatively insignificant rules to purchase the prestige of being religiously conscientious. In the same motion he can conveniently pay passing respect to God too. This is bargain-basement religion: two for the price of one!

2.

It is easier to tithe (or pray in public or go to church or whatever) than it is to do those essential things that really matter to God, like having a deep passion for justice, kindness and true-heartedness. Consistent justice, patient mercy and unfailing integrity are expensive in terms of self-denial, energy and time, too expensive for the self-seeking person.

3.

The bigot is hypocritical because he considers important only that which he personally can understand or what expresses the distinctives of this sect. Broad, fundamental principles like justice, mercy, faith and the love of God, are too nebulous for him, because they admit too many requirements than his limited understanding or sectarian tradition permits him to conceive.

4.

The man of narrow interests, sympathies or outlook sees just a few inconsiderable articles of religion as big. Anything mind-stretching that would require him to think or reconsider the limitedness of his own worldview or concerns is positively painful to contemplate.

It is no accident, therefore, that, in order to lead us back to an equilibrated moral sanity, Jesus ordered: These (weightier matters of the law, justice, mercy and faith), ye ought to have done, and not to have left the other (tithing of mint, anise and cummin) undone. He expects both: herein is His true sense of balance. Unlike some modern religionists impatient with ceremonies and details, Jesus approves of conscientiousness toward principles and particulars. On the other hand, excessive attention to small details cannot atone for neglect of large ones. Some disciples today are very strict about church attendance, but unconcerned about their life the rest of the time. Others are strict about identifying themselves by the terms set forth in the Bible, even about restoring the New Testament Church and calling things by Bible names (good ideals in themselves), but are strangely unconcerned about being what the terms signify. We must mistrust the misplaced seriousness of that religious zeal that burns itself out on trivial matters but has neither time nor energy remaining for the truly important things God prefers.

One sad irony is the use of this text (Matthew 23:23) today by preachers seeking some divine fiscal bludgeon to nudge their members into giving God money. Ignoring the obvious address to Jews for whom tithing was obligatory by law under the Mosaic economy, these text doctors grasp at Jesus-' words: these ye ought to have done and NOT LEFT THE OTHER UNDONE, and miss two whole Chapter S of truly Christian motivations in 2 Corinthians 8:9. Like the Pharisees of old, these modern legalists fail to see there really are some higher Christian principles that are more truly motivating encouragements to give God money than the external compulsion of a tithing law. Perhaps a sadder irony is the Christian who neither tithes nor responds to God's grace, and just leaves everything undone.

The Proverbial Clincher

Matthew 23:24 Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel! To clinch the point of His previous assertion Jesus moves His audience with another of His humorous sketches. In this one a Pharisee painstakingly strains a drowned gnat out of his drink lest he contaminate himself ceremonially by swallowing that almost visible, but unclean, insect (Leviticus 11:20 ff.), without even noticing an equally unclean camel (Leviticus 11:4) in the same glass, and so he guzzles it right down! (Another facet of this exquisite portrayal is that there may have been a Jewish pun back of His choice of animals: a gnat is kamla-' but a camel is gamla-'; Marshall, Challenge of NT Ethics, 61). But the Lord is not merely poking fun at Pharisees. His point is serious: these sectarians laid great stress on inflexibly precise observance of minor regulations (straining out the gnat), but consistently ignored gross violations of justice, mercy and faith (swallowing the camel). Several illustrations of this twisted sense of duty occur:

1.

They would pray long prayers pretending to be pious, but were especially clever at reducing unwary widows to poverty (Mark 12:40 = Luke 20:47).

2.

They criticized Jesus-' disciples for their unwashed hands (violation of tradition), but instructed people to ignore honor to aged parents (violation of God's Law) (Matthew 15:1-20).

3.

Rather than be defiled, hence disqualified from participation in religious ceremonies, they refused to enter a Gentile's house, but hovered around outside, screaming for the judicial murder of an innocent Man (John 18:28 to John 19:16).

4.

Sadducean priests were not better to pay out blood money for the betrayal of an innocent Man, but then to quibble over a scruple against putting the same tainted money into the holy coffers (Matthew 26:14 ff; Matthew 27:4-10).

Their sin lay, not in straining out the gnat, but in swallowing down the camel. We too must give attention to important details. Faithfulness in small matters is a character index of trustworthiness for greater things (Luke 16:10 ff; Luke 10:17; Matthew 25:21). If God did not order Christians to strain out gnats nor tithe garden herbs, but He did specify some other apparently minor detail, then He wants it done. We must scrupulously endeavor to do everything He asks.

Criterion of False Religion

Any faith that permits its adherents to lose their sense of proportion and become carefully meticulous about religious trivia and trifles, while remaining indifferent to the things that really matter with God, is a false religion, regardless of its official name, origins or past history.

FACT QUESTIONS

1.

What is involved in tithing? Where did people learn to do this? Why was tithing necessary?

2.

What were the Pharisees doing when they tithed mint, anise and cummin?

3.

What are mint, anise and cummin used for?

4.

What, according to Jesus, are the weightier matters of the law? Define each one, showing how each deserves this high title.

5.

What principle is involved in Jesus-' maxim: these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others?

6.

What did the gnat and the camel have in common in Jewish thinking?

7.

Explain the comment about straining out gnats and swallowing camels. What does the gnat refer to? What is the camel? What is meant by straining out the one and swallowing the other?

8.

What attitude is shown by Jesus toward the less significant features of the Mosaic Law? How does this attitude harmonize with His other teachings about the Law?

9.

To whom was Jesus speaking when He said, This you ought to have done and not left the other undone?