John Calvin Commentary Matthew 16
John Calvin Commentary
Matthew 16
John Calvin Commentary
Matthew 16
"And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and trying him asked him to show them a sign from heaven." — Matthew 16:1 (ASV)
And the Pharisees came. Mark says that they began to dispute, from which we may infer that, when they had been defeated in argument, this was their last resort; for obstinate men, whenever they are driven to extremes, are accustomed to introduce something irrelevant to the subject to avoid being compelled to yield to the truth.
Although the nature of the dispute is not stated, I think it probable that they debated about the calling of Christ: why he dared to make any innovation, and why he made such lofty claims, as if by his coming he had fully restored the kingdom of God.
Having nothing further to object against his doctrine, they demand that he shall give them a sign from heaven.
But it is certain that a hundred signs would have no greater effect than the testimonies of Scripture. Besides, many miracles already performed had placed before their eyes the power of Christ, and had almost enabled them to touch it with their hands. Signs, by which Christ made himself familiarly known, are despised by them; and how much less will they derive advantage from a distant and obscure sign? Thus the Papists of our own day, as if the doctrine of the Gospel had not yet been proved, demand that it be confirmed by means of new miracles.
The Pharisees, together with the Sadducees. It is noteworthy that, although the Sadducees and the Pharisees regarded each other as enemies, and not only harbored bitter hatred but were continually hostile to one another, yet they formed a mutual alliance against Christ. In the same way, though ungodly men quarrel among themselves, their internal conflicts never prevent them from conspiring against God and making a pact to join forces in persecuting the truth.
Tempting. By this word, the Evangelists mean that it was not with honest intentions, nor from a desire for instruction, but with cunning and deceit, that they demanded what they thought Christ would refuse, or at least what they imagined was not in his power. Regarding him as utterly lowly and despicable, they had no other design than to expose his weakness and to destroy all the acclaim he had until then obtained among the people. In this manner, unbelievers are said to tempt God when they complain about being denied what their whim prompted them to ask, and charge God with a lack of power.
"But he answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, [It will be] fair weather: for the heaven is red." — Matthew 16:2 (ASV)
About the beginning of the evening. By these words, Christ reminds them that his power had been sufficiently shown, so that they must have recognized the time of their visitation (Luke 19:44), if they had not willingly shut their eyes and refused to admit the clearest light.
The comparison he uses is beautiful and highly appropriate. For, though the appearance of the sky changes, so that sometimes a storm unexpectedly arises, and sometimes good weather appears when it was not expected, yet the lessons from nature are sufficient to enable people to predict from signs whether the day will be fair or cloudy.
Christ therefore asks why they do not recognize the kingdom of God when it is made known by signs just as clear. For this proved clearly that they were excessively preoccupied with earthly and temporary advantages, cared little about anything related to the heavenly and spiritual life, and were blinded not so much by mistake as by willful malice.
"And in the morning, [It will be] foul weather to-day: for the heaven is red and lowering. Ye know how to discern the face of the heaven; but ye cannot [discern] the signs of the times." — Matthew 16:3 (ASV)
Hypocrites, you can judge. He calls them hypocrites because they pretend to ask for what, if it were shown to them, they are resolved not to observe. The same reproof applies to nearly the whole world, for people direct their ingenuity and apply their senses to immediate advantage. Therefore, there is scarcely anyone who is not sufficiently well qualified in this respect, or at least who is not tolerably acquainted with the means of achieving their goal.
How is it then that we feel no concern about the signs by which God invites us to Himself? Is it not because everyone gives themselves up to willful indifference and extinguishes the light that is offered to them? The calling of Christ, and the immediate presentation of eternal salvation, were shown to the scribes both by the Law and the Prophets, and by His own doctrine, to which miracles were added.
There are many people of the same description today who plead that on intricate subjects they have a good right to suspend their judgment because they must wait until the matter is fully ascertained. They go further, and believe that it is a mark of prudence purposely to avoid all inquiry into the truth; as if it were not an instance of shameful sloth that, while they are so eagerly concerned about the things of the flesh and of the earth, they neglect the eternal salvation of their souls, and at the same time devise vain excuses for gross and stupid ignorance.
A very absurd inference is drawn by some ignorant people from this passage: that we are not at liberty to predict from the appearance of the sky whether we will have fair or stormy weather. It is, rather, an argument Christ bases on the regular course of nature: that those people deserve to perish for their ingratitude who, while they are sufficiently acute in matters of the present life, yet knowingly and willfully quench the heavenly light by their stupidity.
"An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of Jonah. And he left them, and departed." — Matthew 16:4 (ASV)
A wicked and adulterous nation. This passage was explained426 under Matthew 12:38. The general meaning is, that the Jews are never satisfied with any signs, but are continually incited by a wicked desire to tempt God.
He does not call them an adulterous nation merely because they demand some kind of sign (for the Lord sometimes permitted his people to do this), but because they deliberately provoke God; and therefore he threatens that, after he has risen from the dead, he will be a prophet like Jonah.
So Matthew at least says—for Mark does not mention Jonah—but the meaning is the same. For, strictly speaking, this was intended to serve as a sign to them, that Christ, after he had risen from the dead, would in every place cause the voice of his Gospel to be distinctly heard.
426 See page 93 of this volume. of this volume.
"And the disciples came to the other side and forgot to take bread." — Matthew 16:5 (ASV)
And when his disciples came. Here Christ takes occasion from the circumstance that had just occurred432 to exhort his disciples to beware of every abuse that encroaches upon sincere piety. The Pharisees had come a little before; the Sadducees joined them; and apart from them stood Herod, a very wicked man, and an opponent and corrupter of sound doctrine. In the midst of these dangers, it was very necessary to warn his disciples to be on their guard. For, since the human mind has a natural inclination toward vanity and errors, when we are surrounded by wicked inventions, spurious doctrines, and other plagues of the same sort, nothing is easier than to depart from the true and simple purity of the word of God. And if we once become entangled in these things, it will never be possible for the true religion to hold entire sway over us. But to make the matter clearer, let us examine closely the words of Christ.
Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. Along with the Pharisees, Matthew mentions the Sadducees. Instead of the latter, Mark speaks of Herod. Luke takes no notice of any but the Pharisees (though it is not absolutely certain that it is the same discourse of Christ which Luke relates), and explains the leaven to be hypocrisy. In short, he glances briefly at this sentence, as if there were no ambiguity in the words. Now the metaphor of leaven, which is here applied to false doctrine, might have been employed at another time to denote the hypocrisy of life and conduct, or the same words might even have been repeated a second time. But there is no absurdity in saying that those circumstances which are more copiously detailed by the other two Evangelists, in the order in which they took place, are slightly noticed by Luke in a manner somewhat different, and out of their proper place or order, but without any real contradiction. If we choose to adopt this conjecture, hypocrisy will denote here something different from a pretended and false appearance of wisdom. It will denote the very source and occasion of empty display, which, though it holds out an imposing aspect to the eyes of men, is of no value in the sight of God. For, as Jeremiah 5:3 tells us that the eyes of the Lord behold the truth, so those who believe in his word are instructed to maintain true godliness in such a manner as to cleave to righteousness with an honest and perfect heart, as in these words:
And now, O Israel, what doth the Lord require from thee, but that thou shouldst cleave to him with all thy heart, and with all thy soul? (Deuteronomy 10:12)
On the other hand, the traditions of men, while they set aside spiritual worship, wear a temporary disguise, as if God could be imposed upon by such deceptions. For to whatever extent outward ceremonies may be carried, they are, in the sight of God, nothing more than childish trifles, unless to the extent that they assist us in the exercise of true piety.
We now perceive the reason why hypocrisy was viewed by Luke as equivalent to doctrines invented by men, and why he included under this name the leavens of men, which only puff up, and in the sight of God contain nothing solid, and which even divert the minds of men from the right study of piety to empty and insignificant ceremonies. But it will be better to abide by the narrative of Matthew, which is more copious. The disciples, after having been reproved by our Lord, eventually came to understand that he had charged them to be on their guard against certain doctrine. It was plainly, therefore, the intention of Christ to fortify them against prevailing abuses, by which they were attacked on all sides. The Pharisees and Sadducees were expressly named, because those two sects maintained at that time a tyrannical sway in the Church, and held opinions so utterly subversive of the doctrine of the Law and the Prophets, that almost nothing remained pure and entire.
But Herod did not in any way profess to teach. And a question arises: why does Mark class him with false teachers? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and Of The Leaven Of Herod. I reply: he was half a Jew, was mean and treacherous, and availed himself of every contrivance that was within his reach to draw the people to his side. For it is customary with all apostates to contrive some mixture, for the purpose of establishing a new religion by which the former may be abolished. It was because he was laboring craftily to subvert the principles of true and ancient piety, and thus to give currency to a religion that would be exceedingly adapted to his tyranny, or rather because he was endeavoring to introduce some new form of Judaism, that our Lord most properly charged them to beware of his leaven. From the temple of God the scribes disseminated their errors, and the court of Herod was another workshop of Satan, in which errors of a different kind were manufactured.
Thus in our own day we find that not only from Popish temples, and from the dens of sophists and monks, does Antichrist vomit out her impostures, but that there is a Theology of the Court, which lends its aid to prop up the throne of Antichrist, so that no stratagem is left untried. But as Christ opposed the evils which then prevailed, and as he aroused the minds of his followers to guard against those which were the most dangerous, let us learn from his example to make a prudent inquiry into what abuses may now do us injury. Sooner will water mix with fire than any man will succeed in reconciling the inventions of the Pope with the Gospel. Whoever desires to become honestly a disciple of Christ must be careful to keep his mind pure from those leavens; and if he has already imbibed them, he must labor to purify himself until none of their polluting effects remain. There are restless men, on the other hand, who have endeavored in various ways to corrupt sound doctrine, and, in guarding also against such impostures, believers must maintain a strict watch, that they may keep a perpetual Passover
with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth,
(1 Corinthians 5:8)
And as everywhere there now rages an impiety like that of Lucian,433 a most pernicious leaven, or rather a worse than deadly poison, let them exercise this very necessary caution, and apply to it all their senses.
432 “Ici Christ prenant occasion des propos precedens;” — “here Christ taking occasion from the former discourse.”;” — “here Christ taking occasion from the former discourse.”
433 “L’mpiete des Lucianistes et des Atheistes;” — “the impiety of the Lucianists and Atheists.” ;” — “the impiety of the Lucianists and Atheists.” Lucian, a celebrated Greek writer, of the second century of the Christian era, author of , a celebrated Greek writer, of the second century of the Christian era, author of Dialogues of the Dead, is here alluded to as the type of scoffers and , is here alluded to as the type of scoffers and Atheists. His subject naturally led him to treat with sportive humor the solenmities of death and the future judgment; and the wit and elegance of his pen, had it been guided by ordinary caution, would have been readily — far too readily — sustained as an apology for the tone of his work. But in defiance of the ordinary feelings of mankind, he attacked so fearlessly the most sacred truths, and offended the ear of modesty by such indecent allusions, that his character as a man has been stamped with infamy. Modern times have scarcely produced so daring an infidel, with the exception perhaps of . His subject naturally led him to treat with sportive humor the solenmities of death and the future judgment; and the wit and elegance of his pen, had it been guided by ordinary caution, would have been readily — far too readily — sustained as an apology for the tone of his work. But in defiance of the ordinary feelings of mankind, he attacked so fearlessly the most sacred truths, and offended the ear of modesty by such indecent allusions, that his character as a man has been stamped with infamy. Modern times have scarcely produced so daring an infidel, with the exception perhaps of Voltaire, who took no pains to conceal his intense hatred of Christianity and of good men. Had he appeared earlier, his name might perhaps have been substituted for that of , who took no pains to conceal his intense hatred of Christianity and of good men. Had he appeared earlier, his name might perhaps have been substituted for that of Lucian, as the representative of his class. — , as the representative of his class. — Ed.
Jump to: