THE BOOK OF MATTHEW
Lesson 94, Chapter 27 Continued
Verses 11 through 26 in Matthew chapter 27 have been perhaps the chief source
for persistent anti-Semitism within our faith; and this has been so for as much as
1800 years. The question these verses have been alleged to deal with is: who is
responsible for Christ’s death? By a large margin institutional Christianity says
the answer is the Jews as a people, and thus God has transferred all the
blessings of the covenants He has made with them to the gentile Church, while
leaving the Jews with all the curses. Yet that by no means was a question that
Matthew intended to raise or to answer.
In this section we find 3 identifiable persons or groups of persons involved in the
decision to execute Jesus of Nazareth: the Jewish religious leadership of both
the Temple and the Synagogue authorities, the Roman Prefect over the Roman
province of Judea (Pontius Pilate), and the Jewish crowds that stood before him
on that fateful Passover day. All agreed to send Yeshua to the cross. The crowds
(as typical of mobs) were rather easy to manipulate because certain recognized
leaders knew how to prey on their already explosive emotions, which rose high
and spread like volcanic ash during all the pilgrimage feasts. So, what caused the
mob to turn against Jesus? Verse 20 says:
CJB
Matthew 27:20 But the head cohanim persuaded the crowd to ask for
Bar-Abba's release and to have Yeshua executed on the stake.
Once again we find that the leadership are the culprits. Even so, the crowds
cannot be absolved from their participation. They are given the choice of having
the notorious and known murderer Bar-Abba freed as a Passover gift from Pilate,
or they could choose to have the innocent Christ released. They chose Bar-Abba
1 / 13

(Barabbas in most Bibles), and even vowed before God to accept any penalty
that might come from their choice. But even more that this penalty from God,
should there be cause for it (a curse, in Jewish thought), it would extend to their
children. Clearly this was not a serious or well thought out expression of the
sureness of their choice or of a consequence they were actually willing to bear,
but rather one brought on by a reckless frenzy fomented by the Jewish religious
leadership.
Matthew’s point was to make a historic recollection of how Jesus’s formal
condemnation occurred and the execution proceeded, as opposed to trying to
point a finger of blame for it. In fact, so far it’s the Jewish religious leadership
that Yeshua has indicted for the spiritual state of the naïve and misinformed
common people, since it is the leadership that is tasked with properly instructing
them in God’s laws and commands. And yet the misinformed cannot claim
innocence when, finally, they are shown God’s truth but they prefer to stick what
the falsehoods they have previously known. Bottom line: a mob cannot be
representative of an entire population, race, or people group. Nor can the general
population be held responsible for the decisions of a corrupt and perverse
leadership that cause violence to happen. Especially in a 1
st
century political
environment when leaders were not chosen or elected by the people, but rather
leadership offices were handed down within families or bought and paid for or
acquired through subterfuge, can the common people be held accountable.
Therefore, placing blame for Christ’s death on the Jews or the Roman gentiles is
a red herring, and is certainly not the point Matthew was making. Therefore, it is
not something that we, today, ought to be distracted with as we study the
Passion Narrative.
Let’s read a little more of Matthew chapter 27.
RE-READ MATTHEW CHAPTER 27:26 – 44
I’ve mentioned in earlier lessons that all the Gospel accounts about Yeshua’s
death use only a couple of pages or so to speak of it. Matthew, especially, is
quite brief and concise in telling us what transpired. The trial and death of
Yeshua, even the aftermath, is almost anti-climactic for these Gospel writers and
it is something we need to ponder deeply. While it is a Church mantra that about
all that matters for a Christian is Christ’s death and resurrection, then why does
the New Testament spend so little time on it? I’d like to think that the 90+
lessons in Matthew that we’ve so far studied together answer that question: who
2 / 13

He was historically, what He represents, and what He taught us is equally
important as His death and resurrection. If we were to go by the volume of
inspired writings on the matter, the former is even more important than the latter.
Do not mistake what I’m suggesting. I’m in no way meaning that His death and
resurrection are not the defining moment in which Salvation from our sins
became a possibility for us. Rather it is that it is not an either/or situation. We
cannot on the one hand claim Salvation based on our faith in His death and
arising from the grave, if we (on the other hand) determine to largely ignore living
out that Salvation in the way He tells us we are obligated to do. Or as Yeshua’s
biological brother James put it:
CJB
James 2:19-26
19
You believe that "God is one"? Good for you! The
demons believe it too- the thought makes them shudder with fear!
20
But,
foolish fellow, do you want to be shown that such "faith" apart from actions
is barren?
21
Wasn't Avraham avinu declared righteous because of actions
when he offered up his son Yitz'chak on the altar?
22
You see that his faith
worked with his actions; by the actions the faith was made complete;
23
and
the passage of the Tanakh was fulfilled which says, "Avraham had faith in
God, and it was credited to his account as righteousness." He was even
called God's friend.
24
You see that a person is declared righteous because
of actions and not because of faith alone.
25
Likewise, wasn't Rachav the
prostitute also declared righteous because of actions when she welcomed
the messengers and sent them out by another route?
26
Indeed, just as the
body without a spirit is dead, so too faith without actions is dead.
James uses a wonderful metaphor to help us understand the importance of
following through with the actions that Christ told us to do; that of the relationship
between body and spirit. When he says “spirit” he is referring to the invisible life
force that makes us living beings. So, if faith in Christ’s death and resurrection
represents the body, then doing what He taught us to do represents the spirit. If
we don’t do what He taught us, then the body is dead because there is no spirit
(no life force) to make our faith alive. James does not put one above the other;
both are important and required in equal measure.
Verse 27 initiates the sequence of moving Christ to the cross. The governor’s
soldiers (meaning Roman soldiers) took over. Jews were no longer part of the
process. Although we can’t come up with a number, there were more than a few
soldiers surrounding Yeshua no doubt because His impending death was so
controversial and it was the Feast of Passover when messianic fervor was at a
3 / 13

fever pitch in Jerusalem. They began by removing His standard peasant-Jew
garb, and putting a scarlet robe on Him. Where was Jesus at this moment? It was
likely at one of two places: either the Antonia Fortress located on Temple
grounds, or it was the former Herod’s palace in the upper city where Pilate
stayed when he was in Jerusalem. Pilate’s actual home was located in Caesarea
Maritima located on the Mediterranean Sea, north of Jerusalem, and that’s
where he resided most of the time. He only came to Jerusalem at the times of the
feasts in order to make sure there weren’t riots, or when some kind of official
business was necessary there.
Matthew’s Gospel says a scarlet robe was put onto Jesus, but Mark says it was
purple; Mark was not correct. Purple was a color used mostly by royalty. Where
would the Romans have obtained a purple robe? Scarlet was the color of a
Centurion’s robe or cape. No doubt the Centurion in charge of the cohort lent his
scarlet cape to be put onto Jesus as a mock royal robe in order to make fun of
Him. To further humiliate Him they took some kind of a vine that had thorns on it
and wove it into a mock crown. When we see the sort of diadem worn by Roman
Emperors then we realize that this was what the soldiers were imitating since
Jewish kings wore crowns of gold. They also handed Him some type of reed to
imitate a king’s scepter. Whatever these items were, they were at immediate
hand; there is no feasible way that these rough soldiers planned this humiliation
in advance or took the time to seek out these various items to place on Yeshua.
To complete the comedy, they knelt down before Christ and said: “Hail to the
King of the Jews”.
When we back away from the scene, and when we see what happens once He’s
nailed to the cross, we understand that as far as the soldiers know, and as far as
Pilate was concerned, Yeshua’s crime was His claim as being a king. In the
Roman Empire this was the highest form of treason; only Caesar could be a king.
Thus, while the Jewish Sanhedrin convicted Him of blasphemy, they knew better
than to take that charge to Pilate. Rather they told Pilate that Christ claimed to be
a king, knowing that this was the surest way to get Pilate to agree to condemn
Him because this made Jesus a threat to Roman sovereignty. As we’ve
discussed on numerous occasions: from an earthly standpoint, and from a purely
historical standpoint, Jesus died as a political prisoner for political reasons.
What is so interesting, and ironic is that in truth Jesus was the King of the Jews.
And He stated as much when He claimed the role of Messiah, which was
understood by the Jewish people since ages past to be a new Davidic king. The
4 / 13

Roman soldiers spat on Yeshua. Spitting upon Him was then, just as it remains
today, one of the worst acts of contempt. Culturally it was an infliction of great
shame to be spat upon. Thus, as He continues His journey to the cross, He is
now in a societal state of shame so far as Jewish society was concerned. The
soldiers took the reed or stick from His hand and lashed Him with it. When they
had finished their physical and psychological abuse, they removed the cloak from
Him and gave it back to the Roman Centurion that lent it.
Backing up a little bit, verse 26 had told us that He was whipped. What this
means is flogged. Flogging was a truly terrible experience, and something that
was regularly done to prisoners that were going to be crucified because it was
bound to hurry along the dying process. Flogging involved hitting a person, over
and over again, with a device called a flagellum that had multiple leather arms,
and at the end of these arms were bits of metal or sharpened bone that would
tear into the flesh and rip it. Profuse bleeding along with intense pain was the
result. It was not unusual for a man to die during flogging. Obviously Jesus
survived it, but what comes next tells us that He was greatly weakened by it.
Verse 32 tells the story of a Jewish man from Cyrene named Shim’on that was
forcibly enlisted to carry Christ’s cross. The picture of this event is one of the
most popular painted by Christian artists. However, the idea that Yeshua truly
carried his own cross is not tenable. The Roman execution stake was huge and
no single man could have carried it. Rather what was carried was the cross
beam. This beam, called a patibulum, was usually tied to the condemned
prisoner’s arms and he more or less carried it on his shoulders to the site of his
impending crucifixion. Part of the reason for this procedure was to further publicly
disgrace him, but also to be a very visible warning to any Jew that would think to
oppose Rome. Further it would exhaust the prisoner and as he hung on the cross
it would reduce his ability to push up with his legs to lessen the agony of not
being able to breathe well. Again, in a cruel way, it might hasten the death
process.
In any case some random Jewish person from among the onlookers was
grabbed by the Roman soldiers and made to carry the cross beam as Yeshua
was simply unable to after being flogged and beaten. Cyrene was a city that lay
on the coast of what today we call Libya. It already had as early as the 4
th
century
BC a substantial Jewish population, no doubt as a result of Israel’s exiles.
Shim’on was but one of many scores of thousands of Jewish pilgrims in town for
the Feasts of Passover, Unleavened Bread, and Firstfruits. Mark’s
5 / 13

Gospel further identifies this particular Shim’on (a very popular and widely used
Jewish name) as the father of Alexander and Rufus, and indeed Shim’on was
just arrived to Jerusalem when he saw this disturbance happening (talk about
bad timing!). Such a reference might indicate that while Shim’on lived in Cyrene,
Alexander and Rufus were locals.
The place where the crucifixion would take place is called Gulgolta; it’s an
Aramaic word that means “skull” or in our passage it would be fair to call it “the
place of the skull”. The Latin Vulgate Bible translated this to calvaria, from which
we get the English word calvary. So, does the term Gulgolta as indicating “skull”
mean that the place where it happened somehow looked like a skull? Or was it
kind of a macabre name for a non-descript place where hundreds, probably
thousands, of crucifixions happened? I really won’t venture a guess, since there
is no way to know for sure and one guess is as good as the other. Where,
exactly, this place was located in Jerusalem is another issue. To be clear,
however: there is a difference between where He was crucified and where He
was entombed. Gordon’s Calvary is currently the most popular guess as to
where He was crucified. There is a rock formation there that does have some
resemblance of a skull. Whether it looked like that 2,000 years ago is another
matter. A couple of hundred yards away is what today is known as the Garden
Tomb; this is the place some think Jesus was buried. Another candidate for His
burial place is where the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is built. I truly don’t have
any better opinion on the matter than do the many scholars who have chimed in
on it over the centuries. What I do know is that the Church of the Holy Sepulcher
as we see it today wasn’t built until the Crusader era. Prior to that there was a
building there that was an edifice dedicated to Emperor Constantine, which had
been built over an edifice bult to Emperor Hadrian. Such is the way religious sites
have worked over the centuries. In Christ’s era, this place lay outside the walls of
Jerusalem. Since neither a place of execution nor a place of burial would have
been allowed inside the city walls, then the place of the Holy Sepulcher can’t be
ruled out. On the other hand, it seems a most unlikely place for a tomb, but it’s
not out of the question.
Therefore, the place called the Garden Tomb (to which I’ve taken many tour
guests), is the more likely location of His burial. And it is adjacent to the place
that has a cliff that looks like a skull. The irony is that today both of these sites lay
outside the Damascus Gate, meaning they are in a Muslim area. In fact, a bus
station used mostly by Muslims was built many years ago immediately below the
cliff that looks a bit like a skull. Wherever the execution took place it must have
6 / 13

been very public. There had to have been roads and paths that went by it for
easy access and because the Romans wanted it to be highly visible to as many
people as possible. And finally, it had to be well outside the walls of Jerusalem
because as a place of death it was ritually unclean, and the Romans would have
honored that in order to keep the peace. Beyond that we’ll likely never know
exactly where Christ was crucified or buried.
Matthew’s Gospel says that BEFORE He was nailed to the stake, He was
offered a mixture of wine with something called gall. Gall is more a description of
something bitter or not very good tasting than it is the name of a particular
substance. Mark says the actual substance in the wine was Myrrh. Myrrh was a
narcotic when ingested. So, wine (probably with a high alcohol content) mixed
with Myrrh was intended as an act of mercy to dull the pain. This, too, was rather
standard Roman practice. Recall that crucifixion was reserved strictly for Jews. It
was not a form of execution used on gentiles (at least not in the Holy
Land). Yeshua refused to drink it. Why? Good question. Some of the evangelical
branches of the Church say it was because it was wine that contained alcohol;
these are the same branches that don’t believe the “wine” mentioned in the
New Testament or that Christ used at the Lord’s Supper was actual wine but
rather merely grape juice (which, if one knows much of anything about Jewish
1
st
century society and of Torah ritual practices, it is that low alcohol content wine
drinking was normal and customary). None of the Gospel writers explain
Yeshua’s refusal of the pain killer, and so we won’t attempt it either. But they do
agree that this is what happened.
After He refused the narcotic pain killer, Yeshua was nailed to the
Roman stauros… the Roman style execution stake that Christians call a cross. A
victim being nailed to the stake was actually the usual practice. There is a
mistaken belief among many Christians that Jesus’s crucifixion was unique
partially because they used nails through His wrists and feet (to make it extra
gruesome) instead of tying his hands and feet to the stake using ropes. A heel
bone with a spike through it and dated to that time period has actually been found
to prove the point. The Gospel writers all speak of Christ being nailed to the cross
matter of fact-ly and simply move on; in other words, nothing unusual to see
here. As the nailing was going on, some of the soldiers took Yeshua’s garments
and played a dice game for them. None of them could have seriously wanted this
peasant Jew’s garments; they had no value. But, it was apparently a kind of
Roman custom among soldiers. The mention of it is likely to highlight the
fulfillment of yet another messianic prophecy.
7 / 13

CJB
Psalms 22:17-19
17
Dogs are all around me, a pack of villains closes in
on me like a lion [at] my hands and feet.*
18
I can count every one of my
bones, while they gaze at me and gloat.
19
They divide my garments among
themselves; for my clothing they throw dice.
Next, the Roman soldiers handling the executions that day sat down to wait as
the ones hanging on the execution stakes slowly expired.
Verse 37 makes plain what we talked about a little earlier. A sign was placed
above Yeshua’s head telling what the charge against Him was. It said “This is
Yeshua, King of the Jews”. It was usual that a sign would be created and hung
around the neck of the condemned stating what offense had been committed.
Yet, assuming all our Gospel writers got it correct, the sign was placed above the
head of Christ and it was less a list of charges and more a continued ridicule and
mocking. In other words, it was meant for the Jews who passed by to see and
take heed to forget this Messiah figure some hoped would lead a rebellion
against Rome and then become the first Jewish king in many centuries. The
message: this is what will happen to any Messiah that happens to show up.
Submit to Rome; you have no hope.
Since a sign was placed above Jesus’s head, then there had to be at least a bit
of the vertical post that rose up higher than the horizontal cross beam. So even
though most historical illustrations of a Roman death stake have it in the shape of
a capital “T”, apparently there was a few inches of the post above it. Either way,
the shape of the cross as we know it today was in no way like it was in that era.
In fact, the earliest use of a cross as a Christian symbol was in the 300’s
A.D., based on the Greek letter Tau. Later Constantine promoted this kind of
cross as the official Christian symbol. Obviously the cross is nothing that early
Jewish Believers could ever possibly have accepted because it was symbolic of
the most barbaric form of execution used on them. And while accepted by most
branches of Christianity, the exact shape of the cross varies significantly across
these branches. The Bible never pushes forward the idea of a wooden cross as a
God-given symbol of Christianity, or even as something to remember Christ by.
The cross is a Christian tradition and ancient custom; it is not a biblical command
or even a recommended biblical icon. The cross is, and has been, far too much
used as a symbol of gentile Church superiority, or in some cases as downright
bigotry against Jews. It is far past time to rethink some of the symbols that while
having become entrenched as holy in Christian institutions, are in the end only
tradition-based icons. When the use of the cross causes great hurt to our Jewish
8 / 13

brothers and sisters in the faith (and for good reason), and thus creates a strong
wall of separation, we have to carefully think through the value of using it. Let me
be clear: I am not anti-cross. I understand that most well-meaning Christians
aren’t intending it as an insult to Jews. But, when we know that it is offensive for
what it means for them, and when our most basic biblical command is to love our
fellow man as we love ourselves, then we have to ask if the insistence upon
using certain symbols doesn’t do more harm than good in promoting faith in
Yeshua. After all, Yeshua was the Jewish Messiah. Enough said.
Verse 38 says that 2 robbers or thieves were placed upon their own crosses next
to Yeshua; one on either side of Him. The Greek word for the two criminals
is lestes. It carries the general meaning of a thief, but somehow that really
doesn’t fit with the scenario. Rome did not execute common thieves. So,
whatever these men did extended well beyond mere thievery. Some language
scholars think the term is broad enough to include the kind of robbers that attack
and even kill people to steal from them (what we’d call armed robbery
today). So, we must not think of a couple of poverty-stricken Jews who stole
bread or a fish to feed themselves or their families. These were men who had
committed serious offenses that very likely involved harming people. Perhaps
they were thought to be Jewish rebels.
The charge of some of the Jewish onlookers of saying that Jesus was going to
destroy the Temple and build it back in 3 days mostly results from a
misunderstanding of what He had earlier said and meant. He meant it
prophetically and in a couple of different senses. He knew that a few years later
the Temple would be destroyed. The building itself had become so sacred to the
Jewish people, and the historical memory of it having been destroyed by the
Babylonians so hateful for them, that the thought of Jesus implying that He was
going to destroy the Temple (something He did NOT say) brought on instant
anger. We’ve already heard about people swearing (making vows) using the
Temple itself as the guaranteeing 3
rd
party, almost as if it was alive. The only real
value to the Temple had always been as the place of God’s presence on earth,
at the moments He chose to be there. Otherwise, it stood empty except of
furniture. Since the Babylonian exile, and the rebuilding of the Temple, not even
the Ark of the Covenant was present any longer. The building itself was viewed
as a holy place, even as today the foundation walls for a Temple in Jerusalem
that hasn’t existed for nearly 20 centuries (the Western Wall, the Kotel) is
considered holy by the religious Jews.
9 / 13

Of the many passers’ by of this highly visible place of crucifixions, some hurled
insults at Yeshua, and some shook their heads at Him and mocked Him as did
the Roman soldiers. This, too, is prophetic fulfillment.
CJB
Psalm 22:7-8
7
But I am a worm, not a man, scorned by everyone,
despised by the people.
8
All who see me jeer at me; they sneer and shake
their heads:
It is interesting that in Mark’s Gospel the insults hurled at Yeshua are called
blaspheming (which clearly is not meant by Mark in its most technical function).
And yet, while in the P’shat sense (the literal and simplest sense) these are but
offensive slurs aimed at Christ, in the Remez sense (the deeper hint
sense) these passer’s by actually are committing blasphemy in its fullest biblical
function because they are saying these foul and slanderous things to the divine!
In truth this understanding of blaspheming Jesus can only be discovered with the
benefit of hindsight, and yet He regularly showed His fellow Jews His divine side
through the incomparable miracles He facilitated and because He outright said
He was divine by identifying Himself (countless times) as the Son of Man. The
people were just blinded to it by their centuries of manmade Tradition that had
obscured the truth.
Among the many scorning words thrown at Yeshua included “If you are the Son
of God then come down from the cross”. Such wicked words can’t help us from
remembering something similar said to Him much earlier in Matthew.
CJB
Matthew 4:3-6
3
The Tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son
of God, order these stones to become bread."
4
But he answered, "The
Tanakh says, 'Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that
comes from the mouth of ADONAI'"
5
Then the Adversary took him to the
holy city and set him on the highest point of the Temple.
6
"If you are the
Son of God," he said, "jump! For the Tanakh says, 'He will order his angels
to be responsible for you.... They will support you with their hands, so that
you will not hurt your feet on the stones.'"
The connection is unmistakable. These jeerers are acting as Satan’s agents
towards Jesus, even using the same word formula! Earlier Satan tempted
Yeshua when He was hungry, then tempted Him to prove Himself by jumping off
a high place. Now these people are telling Jesus to climb down off the cross, if
He really is who He says He is. All these temptations have to do with Christ
10 / 13

gaining something for Himself; whether it is bread to satisfy His hunger, or
performing a high dive to obtain a kingdom Satan says he’ll give to Him. Now it
is to come down from the cross to ease His personal suffering and to avert death.
When these same jeerers tell Christ to save Himself they don’t mean it in the
sense of salvation as we think of it. Rather it is in the sense of saving Himself
from agony and death; they know nothing about any claim of spiritual deliverance
through Him.
Next we’re told that Jewish religious figures mocked Him. I suspect at least
some of these were members of the Sanhedrin that had pronounced the death
sentence on Him and they wanted to come and view this dark spectacle to satisfy
themselves that their will was being carried out by Rome. Like the other jeerers
they say something like “He can save others but not Himself”. And say if He is
who He claims to be then come down from the cross. I wonder, might any of us in
that era based on what seemed to be the available information at the time have
understood the idea of “saving” in the sense of personal salvation from our sins?
Even Christ’s 12 disciples didn’t seem to get it. So, while we can study our New
Testaments, and benefit from the many fine teachings given to us by excellent
teachers and Pastors, and understand from a distance of time what these words
and events meant in the larger spiritual if not cosmic realm, it simply was not so
obvious to the Jews of that day.
These Jewish leaders (no doubt playing to others around them) say that the proof
they demand of Yeshua being the Son of God is for Him to come down from the
death stake. In other words, they are asking for another sign. His response to the
demand of a sign the first time it was thrust upon Him was never more
appropriate than at this moment.
CJB
Matthew 12:38-40
38
At this some of the Torah-teachers said, "Rabbi, we
want to see a miraculous sign from you."
39
He replied, "A wicked and
adulterous generation asks for a sign? No! None will be given to it but the
sign of the prophet Yonah.
40
For just as Yonah was three days and three
nights in the belly of the sea-monster, so will the Son of Man be three days
and three nights in the depths of the earth.
The sign of Jonah, being entombed for 3 days and 3 nights, was the only sign
necessary.
Even more prophetic words from Psalm 22 are fulfilled at the vile utterances of
11 / 13

the Jewish religious leaders when they say that since Jesus claims to trust God
so much, then let God rescue Him from this crucifixion.
CJB
Psalm 22:9 "He committed himself to ADONAI, so let him rescue him!
Let him set him free if he takes such delight in him!"
Even the criminals who are dying on their crosses on either side of Yeshua join in
the insults. It makes me think of people who have resisted Christ all their lives,
are moments from death, and when offered the opportunity to know Him and be
forgiven and saved still refuse it almost as a stubborn badge of honor. Whatever
saving is to be done, they’ll do themselves or not at all.
Let’s read a few more verses.
RE-READ MATTHEW CHAPTER 27:45 – 50
Matthew records that from about noon to 3 in the afternoon that day as Messiah
hung on the death stake, all the Land was covered in darkness. This must be
referring to the famous prophecy of Amos.
CJB
Amos 8:8-10
8
Won't the land tremble for this, and everyone mourn, who
lives in the land? It will all rise, just like the Nile, be in turmoil and subside,
like the Nile in Egypt.
9
"When that time comes," says Adonai ELOHIM, "I
will make the sun go down at noon and darken the earth in broad
daylight.
10
I will turn your festivals into mourning and all your songs into
wailing; I will make you all put sackcloth around your waists and shave
your heads bald in grief. I will make it like mourning for an only son and its
end like a bitter day.
What is so dazzling about this prophecy is not only the mention of the sun going
down at noon and darkening the whole Land, but that God will turn the festivals
into a time of mourning. What is Israel joyously celebrating at the moment of
Christ’s execution? The 3 Springtime festivals. The reality of recognizing
prophetic fulfillment is that it is often missed because it is not taken literally
enough. Some of the prophetic predictions are so difficult to fathom, or seem so
impossible in and of themselves to happen, that we look for another meaning.
Then they happen just as it was stated and God’s people miss it. That’s what
was happening with the Jewish people of the 1
st
century. Let’s not let that
happen among ourselves as the End Times approaches along with the many
12 / 13

prophetic fulfillments that accompany it.
Was this 3-hour darkness actual tangible darkness? Did the sun become
obscured? Or is this meant symbolically? What “Land” is this speaking about?
Jerusalem? Judea? All of the Holy Land? The entire Earth? Darkness is a biblical
term for evil or for God’s impending wrath. Could the sky have also darkened
with some unusual weather event? A sky so dark that it unnerved people? The
evil that was occurring, which borders on an evil that might be the worst in human
history to that point (crucifying Jesus, the Son of God), could be what the Gospel
writers intended. Or perhaps it was the portent of the wrath of God that was going
to (in a matter of minutes) be poured out in a most unsuspected and devastating
way. The term “the Land” is just as problematic because biblically it ranges in
scope from the city of Jerusalem at its narrowest to the Holy Land in general at
its widest.
It was at the final moments of this darkness when Yeshua released His spirit and
died. But not before His Father poured out His wrath upon His Son. And that will
be the opening topic of our discussion, next week.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
13 / 13