CRITICAL NOTES
Matthew 21:12. Cast out.—Apparently a second cleansing of the temple. See John 2:15-17. Them that sold and bought in the temple.—The first person to introduce this sacrilegious custom was, according to the Talmud, one Babha Ben Buta, who brought three thousand sheep of the flocks of Kedar into the Mountain of the House, i.e. into the court of the Gentiles, and so within the consecrated precincts. The practice grew out of the desire to meet the convenience of the foreign Jews, who visited the Holy City at the feasts, and were glad to purchase, close at hand, the beasts they desired to offer in sacrifice, and to exchange their foreign money for the orthodox Jewish shekel (Tuck).
Matthew 21:17. Bethany.—A village “standing in a shallow ravine on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, to the south-east of the central summit” (Thrupp’s Ancient Jerusalem). It is now called El-’Azirêyeh, from El-’Azir, the Arabic form of the name Lazarus.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— Matthew 21:12-17
Visitatorial action.—As the Saviour did on His entering into Jerusalem, so He began to do when inside it. The same remarkable combination of authority and meekness—the same clear vindication of His rights and position, and the same manifest forbearance in making use of them—are still to be seen in His conduct. In two ways, especially, may this combination be seen at this time, viz., in noticing first, what he beheld; and secondly, what He heard, when coming now to the temple of God.
I. What the Saviour beheld.—Its nature, on the one hand. A great scandal! A crying offence! Apparently, the court of the Gentiles was the scene of this evil. Originally meant for their accommodation when admitted to worship, it had been encroached on for the transaction of business connected with the worship of God. Animals for sacrifice were brought there for sale. Changers of money had established themselves in it. And all this, it is thought with great reason, with the interested connivance of the temple authorities themselves. The scandal was one, therefore, which affected all classes alike, and that in away which was peculiarly offensive because of its connection with the worship of God (1 Samuel 2:17). Its results, on the other hand. Very deliberate, very thorough, and very faithful was the Saviour’s consequent action. Very deliberate (see Mark 11:11). Very thorough—all who had trespassed there being made to go out (Matthew 21:12); others who wished to do so being debarred from entering (Mark 11:16). Very faithful—the action being accompanied by language which expressed its meaning in full (Matthew 21:13). And yet, at the same time, being unaccompanied by much that might have been justly done in such case. The dealers, for example, are “cast out,” but their goods are not otherwise touched. The offence is stopped and the offenders rebuked, but they are not punished because of it. Not the sword of the judge, indeed, but the touch of the healer (Matthew 21:14), is what we read of instead. That polluted “court,” by such works of mercy, is as it were, re-consecrated to God. In every way, therefore, the previously existing offence is witnessed against and rebuked. But nothing more than this, by this kingly “Visitor” is done at this time. As before and as we shall see afterwards, there was the “hiding of His power” (Habakkuk 3:4).
II. What the Saviour heard.—Its nature and purport, on the one hand. A cry of worship! A shout of praise! All that the multitude had previously acknowledged (Matthew 21:9), of His royal lineage and more than royal mission is here repeated again (Matthew 21:15). Repeated (apparently) with greater fervour than ever after seeing His works (ibid.). Repeated by those who are, perhaps, the last of all to be reached by such things. Fame is fame indeed, when it has penetrated to the cradles of the land. Its reception on the other. Its reception first, in the way of silence. Exactly contrary to what was expected by some—by some who doubted in consequence, whether the Saviour could have truly noted the language He heard—all this worship was listened to by Him without a word of rebuke—as though not only in His judgment a matter of right, but a matter of course, as it were (cf. Luke 19:40). Its reception, next, in the way of defence. To His tacit acquiescence in, He adds express approval of, the homage now paid. Far from being a blameworthy thing, only those are so who would condemn it as such. Had they known more, as they ought to have known—had they remembered what they had “read” in the writings they professed to teach and revere—they would have called to mind what justified fully all that was now being done. God is never more praised than when He is praised by the lips of sucklings and babes (Matthew 21:16). Even such praise, therefore, is the full right of Him who has come to that house as its King. Its reception, finally, in the way of forbearance. Forbearance in drawing the line at this necessary word of rebuke. The Saviour defends His friends. He confutes His adversaries. He does both effectually. But, having so done, He stops short. He does not now “visit” for sin. What an unexpected sequel, from this point of view, is the close of this passage! See all He does, now, with that “den of thieves”—that nest of conspirators—which He has just exposed and denounced (Matthew 21:17). Where, in all this, was “the rod of His power?”
It is to be noticed, in conclusion, that even this “combination” did not tell on these men.
1. This display of authority did not tell on their wills.—They “heard” and “feared” Him, but went on as before (Mark 11:18; see Ecclesiastes 8:11).
2. This display of mercy did not tell on their hearts.—All they did in return was to seek to “destroy” Him (Mark 11:18, again; see also Isaiah 26:10).
3. This double failure abundantly explained and so justified the subsequent punishment of that people (Jeremiah 9:9).
4. And is, therefore, to be looked upon as a double warning to all.—How are we dealing with the mingled “mercy and judgment” (Psalms 101:1) of God?
HOMILIES ON THE VERSES
Matthew 21:12-15. The righteousness, peace, and joy of the kingdom.—The casting out of the traders illustrated the righteousness of the kingdom, the healing of the blind and lame its peace, and the shouts of the children which followed, its joy.—J. M. Gibson, D.D.
Matthew 21:12-14. The ancient prophecy fulfilled.—What the King did on entering the temple admirably illustrates the prophecy. For what saith the prophet? “Behold thy King cometh unto thee; He is just and having salvation.” “He is just”—therefore He will not tolerate the unholy traffic in the temple, but “cast out all them that sold and bought” etc.; “and having salvation”—accordingly, when He sees the blind and the lame in the temple He does not turn them out, He does not turn away from them, “He healed them.”—Ibid.
Matthew 21:12-13. Cleansing the temple.—This cleansing reminds us:—
I. Of the holiness which the temple had in Christ’s eyes.
II. Of the guilt of all who desecrate God’s house and day.
III. Of our duly to do all we can to maintain their sanctity.—Heubner.
Matthew 21:12. The King purifying the temple.—
1. It is the work of King Jesus to take notice of religion, and to purge it where He mindeth to reign; therefore He went into the temple of God, to purge it.
2. Horrible abuses may creep into the place of God’s service, while men, under pretence of furthering religion, do follow courses for their own gain; as here, merchandise and money-getting are set up in the place where religion only was to be exercised.
3. In this extraordinary way of reformation of His temple, He showeth Himself to be God, able to compass the most difficult works, by what means He pleaseth, and to terrify His adversaries.
4. Outward abuses, albeit not so great as inward, yet may they be begun at in reformation, as here Christ doth.—David Dickson.
The majesty and authority of Jesus.—The silent submission of these buyers and vendors, who by their physical force might easily have overpowered Jesus, conclusively proves the sublime moral majesty and power with which our Saviour performed this act, and silences the objection of some modern sceptics, who see in it an outbreak of violent passion, which is always a sign of weakness. It was a judicial act of a religious reformer, vindicating in just and holy zeal the honour of the Lord of the temple, and revealed the presence of a superhuman authority and dignity, which filled even these profane traffickers with awe, and made them yield without a murmur. Jerome regards this expulsion of a multitude by one individual as the most wonderful of the miracles, and supposes that a flame and starry ray darted from the eyes of the Saviour, and that the majesty of the Godhead was radiant in His countenance.—P. Schaff, D.D.
The desecration of God’s house.—The history of Christian churches has not been altogether without parallels that may help us to understand how such a desecration came to be permitted. Those who remember the state of the great cathedral of London, as painted in the literature of Elizabeth and James, when mules and horses laden with market produce were led through St. Paul’s as a matter of every-day occurrence, and bargains were struck there, and burglaries planned, and servants hired, and profligate assignations made and kept, will feel that even Christian and Protestant England has hardly the right to cast a stone at the priests and people of Jerusalem.—E. H. Plumptre, D.D.
Matthew 21:13. The house of prayer.—
1. Reformation of religion is to be done according to Scripture, by reducing abused ordinances unto their first institution.
2. All the ceremonial service appointed at the temple was subservient to the moral and spiritual duties; for it is said, “My house shall be called a house of prayer.”
3. All the worship of God may be comprised in prayer, as it comprehendeth praises and thanksgiving, because the end of the ordinances is to make men know how to carry themselves towards God in praises and prayer.
4. Vilest sins seek shelter under the pretext of religion, and there think to work; therefore this is the challenge, “Ye have made My house a den of thieves.”—David Dickson.
Matthew 21:14-16. A picture of the temple as it should be.—
I. Christ the centre of attraction in the temple.
II. The spiritually infirm seeking Him in the temple, and not the preacher, or the mere form of worship.
III. The spiritually infirm healed by Christ in the temple.—J. C. Gray.
Matthew 21:15-16. The children in the temple (Palm Sunday).—Let us consider this remarkable incident with respect to the three principal classes of persons concerned in it:—
I. The conduct of the children.—When all others were silent, why did children alone sing their “Hosannas” to Jesus as the Son of David?
1. They were unprejudiced.
2. They were especially attracted to Christ.
3. They were inspired by the enthusiasm of youth.
II. The complaint of the scribes and priests.—
1. As offenders themselves they wore enraged at the rebuke they had just received from Christ.
2. As officials they were horrified at the indecorum of the children.
3. As men of rank and dignity they were disgusted at the freedom of the children’s utterances.
4. As unbelievers they were indignant at the public recognition of the Messianic claims of Jesus.
III. The reply of our Lord.—
1. He approved of children’s worship.
2. He admitted the truth of the children’s testimony.
3. He accepted personal adoration offered to Himself.—W. F. Adeney, M.A.
Matthew 21:17. Jesus withdrawing.—
1. He had His own intended work in Bethany, yet by His leaving His adversaries, He teacheth us to cease from contention before it grow hot, and to cut short with our enemies, using as few speeches as may be; therefore it is said, “He left them.”
2. In that by His going off the town, occasion of tumults and uproars was eschewed, we learn to eschew needless dangers, and to reserve ourselves unto the time wherein God calleth us to glorify Him by suffering. David Dickson.