What does Matthew 23:20 mean?

Explanation

Matthew 23:20 is a verse in the Christian Bible where Jesus is addressing the religious leaders of the Jewish people, the Pharisees and scribes, condemning their hypocritical practices.

He criticizes their legalistic approach to oaths, highlighting the inconsistency in their teachings about what constitutes a binding oath.

When they swear by the altar, Jesus points out that they are not just swearing by the structure itself but also by the sacred offerings that are placed upon it.

The deeper meaning here suggests that oaths and promises should not be manipulated through technicalities and that all oaths inherently involve God and his sanctity, as represented by the altar and its sacrifices.

Historical Context

This verse is part of a larger section known as the "Seven Woes" in the Gospel of Matthew, chapters 23:13-36, where Jesus rebukes the Pharisees and teachers of the law.

The religious leaders at that time had developed a complex system of laws and traditions, some of which allowed them to appear pious while evading moral responsibilities.

Swearing by the altar and other objects was one practice they used to create loopholes in oath-taking.

This practice was common in the Second Temple period of Judaism when Jesus lived and taught.

Theological Insights

From a Christian theological perspective, this verse emphasizes the holiness of oaths and the importance of honesty and integrity in all statements, especially those made before God.

It points to the idea that oaths should not be taken lightly and that attempting to circumvent their seriousness by swearing on religious objects, rather than simply by God, is missing the spirit of the law.

This reinforces the notion that God is the ultimate authority and that all promises eventually relate back to Him.

Practical Applications

In practical terms, Matthew 23:20 can be understood as a call for honesty and transparency in one's dealings with others.

It suggests that individuals should avoid making frivolous oaths and sly promises with hidden escape clauses.

In daily life, this teaching can be applied by ensuring that one’s words are truthful and commitments are made in good faith, with the intention of fully honoring them, recognizing that God is witness to all agreements.

Cross-References

• Matthew 5:33-37: "Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:"
• Matthew 23:18: "And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty."

Language Study

In the original Greek text, the word for "altar" is "θυσιαστήριον" (thysiastērion), which refers to the place where sacrifices are offered to God.

The phrase "swear by" translates from "ὀμόσῃ ἐν" (omosē en), implying making an oath or a solemn vow. The stress on "by all things thereon" highlights the inclusion of everything related to the altar, not just its physical structure.

Cultural and Religious Comparisons

Cultural and religious comparisons of the practice of swearing by objects can be seen in various ancient cultures, where oaths by deities, temples, and sacred objects were commonplace.

In Roman society, for instance, oaths were often made by the gods or by the emperor's genius.

Meanwhile, in ancient Hebrew culture, taking an oath by God's name was considered very serious and binding, reflecting the importance placed on truthfulness and the consequences of breaking promises.

Scientific Perspectives

While there are no direct scientific perspectives related to the act of swearing by the altar mentioned in Matthew 23:20, the study of psychology can offer some insight into the nature of oath-taking and promise-keeping.

Psychological research suggests that making commitments in a public and formal manner can increase the likelihood of adherence to those promises due to social pressure and the human desire for consistency.

commentaries

Commentators throughout history have interpreted Matthew 23:20 in various ways in relation to the larger context of Jesus's criticisms of the Pharisees. For instance:

• John Calvin, a prominent Reformation theologian, saw this passage as condemning the Pharisees for their false interpretation of the law and for misleading the people into thinking that an oath by the altar was not binding.
• William Barclay, a 20th-century theologian, suggested that the Pharisees were splitting hairs to such an extent that they destroyed the real meaning of religion, which, according to him, lies in sincerity and commitment.
• Contemporary biblical scholars often view this verse as part of Matthew's broader portrayal of Jesus as a teacher of the law who calls for a deeper understanding of the law’s intentions, beyond the surface level of legal compliance.