And as they went to bring his disciples word, behold also, Jesus met them, saying, Hail! And they coming up took him by the feet, and did him homage.
The women leave the empty tomb with a message to carry. On the road the risen Christ Himself meets them. His first word and their rush to His feet raise two questions: what does that word mean, and why may they hold Him?
The word behind "Greetings!" (the older translation reads "All hail") is the everyday Greek word for rejoice, and He had heard it before under very different circumstances.
But, wonder of wonders, we find the same word again in the very next chapter of Matthew: chapter 28, the Resurrection chapter. Perhaps the very first word our Saviour spoke after His resurrection was this very word, Chaire: "Rejoice!" Twice during that terrible time before His death He had listened to that word in mockery. Now it is the first, or almost the first, word He uses when He meets His own, alive from among the dead.
For women who had watched Him die, the sound of that voice carried more than politeness.
What is the meaning of "All hail"? I could not put it into words exactly; but for these lovers of Christ, whose hearts had been broken by the thought that they had lost their blessed Lord, suddenly to hear His gracious voice greeting them was joy indeed. To them it was surely "Welcome." That is the idea. It said to them in effect: every difficulty is over, the darkness has gone, all is bright and clear.
He met them while they were on their errand.
We cannot say that faith marked what they did, or an intelligent grasp of the Lord's often-repeated statement about His resurrection. But their loving care for the body of the Lord, held in check by respect for the Sabbath day, came from a love that would spend and be spent for Him. Nothing less than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself could satisfy their hearts. This was a true and intense desire, and the Lord met it while they were going to bring the disciples word, as the angel had ordered. There was not one of those beloved women to whom the Lord did not reveal Himself before doing so to anyone else. Let us take it to heart: our faithful Lord will meet everyone who is truly seeking Him. As it is written, "You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart."
A creature loyal to God refuses worship. He does not.
Again we find Him accepting worship, which no creature true to God could do (see Revelation 19:10) — much less Jesus if He were only Man. His very perfection as Man would refuse it. He was truly David's Son, the King of Israel, but He was also David's Lord. He was truly Man. He was also truly God, and so we see Him receiving worship without question.
The change in them was immediate, and it happened at the tomb where their hopes had died.
Their perplexity gave place to worship, and their desolate hearts were filled with gladness.
On the same morning, Mary Magdalene is told not to cling to Him. Here, no such word is spoken. The difference is explained by what each Gospel is showing.
In Matthew the risen Lord takes up again His relations with the Jewish remnant, and gives these women, as a sample of that remnant, the enjoyment of His presence on earth. For this reason Matthew has no ascension scene at the end, and no mention of the fact at all. It would spoil the perfection of the picture, which shows us the Lord present with His own until the close of the age. John, on the other hand, corrects Jewish feeling at once and announces new relations. Ascension to the Father takes the place of all expectations for the nations on the earth.
Commentators differ over whether Matthew and John describe two separate meetings or one. Kelly treats them as distinct incidents very close together; another writer harmonises them as a single scene reported from two sides:
She fell at His feet and touched them, and as she was holding them the Lord spoke the words found in John's Gospel. The taking hold of the feet is reported in Matthew, and the words He spoke in John. This is one of the beautiful evidences of the divine authorship of the Gospel records.
Since Matthew keeps Him on earth with His people, the scene at His feet points forward.
Why does He not tell them not to touch Him? Because here He is the risen King, alive from the dead, standing on earth among an earthly people who love Him and worship Him. It is a miniature picture of His coming earthly kingdom.
- Rejoice — His first resurrection word is the ordinary word for "rejoice." Days earlier mockers threw it at Him. Now He gives it back to His own as a welcome.
- Sought — He met them on the road while they obeyed; the Lord meets everyone who truly seeks Him with all their heart.
- Worshipped — He accepts worship that no creature loyal to God would accept. He is David's Son and also David's Lord.
- Touched — Matthew shows the King present with His people on earth, so they may hold Him. John turns instead to His ascension to the Father.
- Coming — that grip on His feet is a small picture of the day when He stands on earth among a people who love and worship Him.
Then Jesus says to them, Fear not; go, bring word to my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there they shall see me.
The women went to the tomb to mourn, and the risen Lord met them on the road with a message that changes what they are to Him. Two things stand out: the name He gives His scattered followers, and the place He names for the meeting.
One writer traces the moment from the empty tomb to the greeting on the road.
They must have trembled with great excitement, but their joy was greater still. The angel's message had at last brought back to them the Lord's words about His resurrection on the third day. So they ran to bring the news to the disciples. As they hurried on, eager to carry out the command, Jesus met them. He greeted them with the word Chairete — "Oh, the joy!" or "Rejoice!" He was full of joy, and in His grace He revealed Himself to these devoted women... Worshipping, they fall at His feet. He Himself assures them, "Do not be afraid," and repeats the angel's message.
He does not say "my disciples." One writer weighs the single word He changed.
The Lord confirms the angel's instructions. But by changing one word He adds a link of precious intimacy. No one could have known that link before the cross. It is no longer "my disciples" but "my brothers." They were still disciples, of course. But He was about to declare the Father's Name to them, as Psalm 22:22 had foretold, and from then on to become the Leader of their praises.
These were the same men who had run away days earlier.
His brothers! Who were they? Those who had abandoned Him in the garden, and Peter, who had denied Him in the high priest's house... What grace the words "My brothers" speak of! Nothing they had done had checked the outflow of His love to them. The eleven had deserted Him in the garden, yet He was not ashamed to own them as His brothers. Men are sometimes ashamed of their nationality or their relatives. If someone has disgraced his family, his very name may be banned from being mentioned in company. But the Lord was not ashamed to own the tie between Him and them.
The meeting point He names is not the religious capital.
The disciples were to leave Jerusalem, the place of organised religion. They were to go down to Galilee, a despised place outside Judea.
One writer ties this appointment to what Matthew's book is about — and to what is missing from it.
The Jews and Jerusalem have rejected the Messiah. He now shows that when He is raised from among the dead, He will still recognise the "poor of the flock" in Galilee... This is no doubt why we have no ascension in Matthew. It is also why the angel sent the disciples word to meet Jesus in Galilee. Our Lord later confirmed that word, and the disciples acted on it. Here Jesus as Messiah has died for that "nation." On the ground of His work He is now able to recognise relationship with the faithful few who remain. In keeping with this, He lets the women hold Him by the feet and worship Him.
The wording of the errand has been read as opening the appointment to more than the apostles.
The message was not to "the apostles" but to "my brothers." It occurs to me that this invitation gathered a good many together. It was not merely that the apostles were to go and see Him there, but the brothers. Affection for Christ will always carry the true heart to the spot where He is, and He cares for nothing else. We set great store by intelligence, because it makes something of us... but depend upon it, it is affection He values.
One writer draws the practical lesson from the promise that they will see Him there.
In principle, the "meeting-place" assumes that you fall in with the Lord's appointment. The place is not of your own choosing. You go there to be with Him, since He has said, "There they will see me." You go there in humble dependence on the Holy Spirit. He has come here below to take the things of Christ and reveal them to us.
Faith acted first, and the reward followed.
Though filled with the conflicting emotions of fear and joy, the women received the angel's word with faith, and so they set out in obedience. The obedience of faith was quickly rewarded by an appearance of the risen Lord Himself, and this brought them to His feet as worshippers and sent them on their way as messengers of the Lord, and not merely of the angel.
- Fear first. Before He gives an errand, He removes the terror. The risen Lord meets the women with a greeting of joy and tells them not to be afraid.
- Brothers, not disciples. One changed word lifts them from followers to family, tied by Psalm 22 to His declaring the Father's Name.
- Grace, not merit. The men called "my brothers" are the very men who deserted Him; He was not ashamed to own the tie.
- Galilee, not Jerusalem. He names a despised place outside the religious capital. There the Messiah still owns the faithful few.
- Affection finds Him. The invitation went to "brothers," not officials. Love, not cleverness, carries a heart to the place where He said He would be seen.
And as they went, behold, some of the watch went into the city, and brought word to the chief priests of all that had taken place.
The women were still on their way to tell the disciples the tomb was empty, but another group carried the same news into Jerusalem with a very different purpose. What happens when people get solid evidence they have already decided not to accept?
The verse sets two journeys side by side — the women going to the disciples, the soldiers going to the priests. One writer traces how the same event landed on three different sets of people.
In a few words, this Gospel shows how Jesus' resurrection, and what followed it, touched three groups — the women, the soldiers, and the Jews. For the women, it is comfort and grace; they are the messengers of the good news to the disciples. The soldiers are alarmed and become like dead men. That is what happens when God shows His power and steps in... With the Jews it is deliberate hardness of heart. They try to destroy the testimony they could not deny — testimony made certain by the guard they had posted themselves.
These men skipped the Roman governor and went straight to the religious leaders. One writer finds that odd, and asks why.
The guards had recovered enough from their terrible fright, and some of them hurry back to the city. Something must have happened. Why else would they leave their important post and go back to the city to report? It is also strange that they went to the chief priests first and not to the Roman governor. That was not the normal thing to do. So these soldiers must have thought their report mattered more to the chief priests than to Pilate. Perhaps the priests had told the guard this: if anything happened at the tomb and He came out, come to us first.
The Lord's enemies had posted this guard themselves. That turns their report into evidence no one can call biased.
It is certain that the Jews, above all the religious leaders, led the way in evil and in opposition to God before Christ's death (Matt. 26-27), while He lay in the grave (Matt. 27:62-66), and after He rose again (Matt. 28:11-15). Yet unbelief is as weak against God as faith is strong with Him. Their own guard became the clearest witness of the resurrection — without meaning to, and without anyone suspecting it. The alarm of the soldiers, set beside the doubts of His own disciples, was a powerful testimony!
The leaders gathered, and the guards laid out the facts. What follows shows what the meeting was actually for.
The elders gather; the guards report the facts; and the elders decide what to do. Hostility to the Lord was the settled source of all. They did not debate whether to accept the clear testimony of the Lord's resurrection. These unhappy leaders of the people debated only how to get rid of it. The evidence was clear, and it came from their own witnesses. So they turn to bribery, paying the soldiers to tell a different story.
The leaders paid the soldiers for a different explanation. Its own details defeat it.
A true story holds together, and you can examine it in close detail. But this tale is far from convincing. If ALL the guard were asleep, how could they know that the disciples had stolen the body? If, further, the body was stolen, how could sleeping men know what had become of it? Was the WHOLE guard likely to be asleep on the morning of the third day, the very day our Lord had said He would rise from the dead? They knew that sleeping at their post could cost them their lives.
The men who invented the lie never disputed the empty tomb — only its cause. That leaves the historical record in a strong position.
They told the truth to the priests. Then the priests bribed them and coached them, and they lied to the people... No fact of history has better human evidence behind it than the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. So when anyone denies this fact — an open unbeliever, or someone who claims to be religious — he also throws away the value of the evidence for every other fact of the past.
- Report. Some of the guard left their post and carried news of the empty tomb into the city. They would not have moved unless something undeniable had happened.
- Witness. The very men hired to prevent the resurrection story became its clearest and least suspected witnesses.
- Refusal. The assembled leaders never debated whether the report was true; they only debated how to be rid of it.
- Bribe. The leaders paid the guards to tell a different story — money spent to bury a truth they could not deny.
- Result. Two errands left that tomb. One carried good news. The other carried a paid-for lie that collapses under the first question.
And having assembled with the elders, and having taken counsel, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers,
Soldiers sent to guard a sealed tomb came back with a report no one could deny. The men who heard it never asked whether it was true — they asked what it would cost to bury it.
This scene fits a pattern that runs from the first page of Matthew to the last:
This is the only Gospel that tells us of Jewish hostility pursuing the Lord beyond the cross. Matthew, and Matthew only, tells us of the sealing of the stone and the setting of the watch at the door of the tomb… No kindness, though heaped on their heads again and again, reduces it, and death does not quiet it. That hostility opens his Gospel, in Herod's attempt on the young Child's life. The same hostility now closes it, at the tomb of their martyred Messiah.
The leaders met and took counsel. The striking thing is what they discussed — and what they did not:
Hostility to the Lord was the settled source of it all. They never discussed whether to accept the clear testimony of the Lord's resurrection. The only thing these unhappy leaders of the people discussed was how to get rid of it. The evidence was clear — clear from their own witnesses. So they turn to bribery to get the soldiers to give a different account of the matter.
Set the week's two payments side by side.
The false religious leaders of their day — the priests — were utterly blinded by the devil. They assembled together with the elders and took counsel. Those who bribed a treacherous disciple with "thirty pieces of silver" to put Christ to death now gave "large money" to deny the truth of His resurrection. Such is man, such is the world; and, solemn to say, such is its highest and proudest form. Such it was then: is the moral character of it changed now?
(Where older translations read "large money," the ESV has "a sufficient sum of money.")
Notice who the soldiers went to first with their news.
Then it is strange that they went to the chief priests first and not to the Roman governor. This was indeed very irregular. From this we must conclude that these soldiers thought their report mattered more for the chief priests to know than for Pilate… They bring their report, and this was nothing less than a witness to the resurrection and to the empty tomb. The enemies were the first witnesses of His triumph.
The tale bought that morning cannot survive plain questions.
A true story will hang together, and can stand close examination. But this tale is far from convincing. If ALL the guard were asleep, how could they know that the disciples had stolen the body? If the body was stolen, how could sleeping men know what had become of it? Was ALL the guard likely to be asleep on the morning of the third day, the day our Lord had said He would rise from the dead? They knew that sleeping at their posts risked the death penalty.
There is also what the leaders never even tried:
If the disciples had removed the body, why did the chief priests settle for bribing the soldiers to tell a lie that put them at great risk? Why not search by every possible means for the body? Suppose they could have got hold of the body and shown it in public. What convincing proof that would have been that there was no resurrection! Where was the body? The body was never produced. Why? Because there was no dead body, but a living risen Christ.
Money alone was not enough. The story the priests bought made the soldiers confess to a crime that carried death.
It was a death offence for a soldier to sleep on guard duty. But the governor had unjustly handed Jesus over to their will. He would not hesitate at a small thing like sparing the guilty soldiers, having already put himself under the power of the chief priests by that unrighteous act.
Yet the payment failed. Within a few months the lie could no longer bear any weight:
These same priests had stooped to a large act of bribery with the soldiers assigned to watch the grave. They had also committed themselves to an even more expensive act of bribery with the Governor, if necessary, to twist their witness to His resurrection. Yet when only a few months had passed, the lie they had sent on its way had clearly proved too fragile to rely on. They dared not take their stand on it.
- Evidence — Hostile witnesses brought the first report of the empty tomb. The enemies of Christ carried the news of His triumph.
- Counsel — The leaders never debated whether the report was true. Their entire discussion was how to dispose of it.
- Price — Thirty pieces of silver bought His death. They paid a far larger sum to deny His rising. The size of the bribe measures the strength of the fact.
- Cover — Sleeping on guard carried the death penalty. So the money came with a promise to handle Pilate, a governor already in the priests' power through his own unjust act.
- Collapse — The story could not answer simple questions. No body was ever produced. Within months even its authors would not stand behind it.
saying, Say that his disciples coming by night stole him [while] we [were] sleeping.
The soldiers who guarded the tomb have just reported to the chief priests. Instead of facing what happened, the priests pay the men to repeat a story of the priests' own making.
The priests do not draft a careful cover story. They hand the guards a sentence that collapses under its own weight. Ask the plain questions and it falls apart.
A true story will hang together, and can be closely examined. But this tale is far from convincing. If ALL the guard were asleep, how could they know that the disciples had stolen the body? If the body really was stolen, how could sleeping men know what had become of it? Was ALL the guard likely to be asleep on the morning of the third day? Our Lord had said He would rise from the dead. Above all, they knew that sleeping at their posts risked the death penalty. Of course they could not deny that the stone was rolled away and the tomb was empty. So some story had to be told, to escape admitting that our Lord had risen from the dead.
Where they told the lie makes it worse. The temple curtain had just torn in two, and the tomb stood open.
The high priest invented a lie, in the face of a torn veil; the Roman soldiers agreed to that lie, in the face of an opened tomb.
Money moves the whole scene. The priests paid far more to bury the resurrection than they had paid to secure the crucifixion.
Money, and the love of it, lay at the root of this particular evil. They bribed the soldiers, and we may suppose they won over the governor the same way. Anything to stop the truth about the resurrection coming out! They realised how it would wreck their cause and establish His. They gave only thirty silver coins to Judas to bring about His death. But they gave a large sum to the soldiers, trying to suppress the fact of His resurrection.
The lie was dangerous for the men told to repeat it. Sleeping on duty could cost a soldier his life. But the governor was in no position to refuse the priests.
It was a capital offence for a soldier to sleep on guard. But the governor had unjustly handed Jesus over to their will. He would not hesitate at such a small thing as sparing the guilty soldiers. By that unrighteous act he had already put himself under the power of the chief priests. So this falsehood is reported among the Jews, even to our own times.
The priests had posted the guard to stop the very theft they now paid the men to report. The soldiers' fear and their report had already given the case away.
Unbelief is, after all, as weak against God as faith is mighty with Him and by Him. Their own guard became the clearest witness of the resurrection, and the least suspected. They never meant to be. What a testimony was the alarm of the soldiers, added to the doubts of His own disciples! It was more than unbelief now; it was a deliberate, wilful lie.
Suppose the disciples had taken the body. There was then a far simpler way to end the matter than paying soldiers to risk execution.
And if the disciples had removed the body, why did the chief priests settle for bribing the soldiers to tell a lie that put them at great risk? Why did they not search by every possible means to find the body? Suppose they could have laid hold of the body and shown it to everyone. What convincing proof that would have been that there was no resurrection. That would have settled the matter once and for all. Where was the body? The body was never produced. Why? Because there was no dead body, but a living, risen Christ.
The story kept spreading. Yet the men who paid for it soon stopped using it themselves.
These same priests had stooped to a large act of bribery with the soldiers set to watch the grave. They had also committed themselves to an even more expensive bribe with the governor, if needed. All this was to twist their witness to His resurrection. Yet it is clear that, after only a few months, the lie they had launched proved too fragile to rely on. They dared not take their stand on it.
- Bribe. The priests paid a small sum to have Christ killed and a large sum to have His rising denied. The cover-up cost more than the crucifixion.
- Blunder. Sleeping men cannot report what happened while they slept. One plain question, and the story falls apart.
- Backfire. The priests posted the guard to stop a theft. That guard became the least suspected witness to the resurrection.
- Body. One body on display would have settled the matter for good. They never produced it, because there was none to produce.
- Bankruptcy. Within months the men who paid for the lie would not stand on it publicly — evidence outlasts money.
And if this should come to the hearing of the governor, *we* will persuade him, and save *you* from all anxiety.
The chief priests have just paid the guard to say the body was stolen while they slept. Now they add a promise: if word reaches Pilate, they will handle him. This one sentence shows how much the nation's leaders would spend, and risk, to bury the news of the resurrection.
The priests promise to "satisfy" the governor. They do not say how. But they had just shown their method with the guard.
Money and the love of it lay at the root of this particular evil. They bribed the soldiers, and we should suppose that they would win over the governor the same way. Anything to stop the truth as to the resurrection coming out! They realised how it would wreck their cause while establishing His. The devil, who moved them, realised it far more clearly than they did. They gave only thirty silver coins to Judas to bring about His death. But they gave large money to the soldiers, trying to suppress the fact of His resurrection.
Why would soldiers need to be kept "out of trouble"? Roman military law is one reason. Pilate's own position is another.
The council had condemned the Lord to death. Now it does not hesitate to bribe the Roman guard to say His disciples came and stole Him away. It was a death offence for a soldier to sleep on guard. But the governor had unjustly handed Jesus over to their will. He would not hesitate at a small thing like sparing the guilty soldiers. By that unrighteous act he had already put himself under the power of the chief priests.
The nation's religious leaders backed this lie. They sold it to men who had just seen an angel.
The chief priests knew the law. If a guard slept at his post, the punishment was death. For this reason they promised that they would speak to the governor if he heard that they were sleeping. Such was the sense of honour among these highly religious men! The guards forgot their earlier fear of the angel. Greed for money moved them to tell a shameless lie. So the people still accepted this falsehood at the time Matthew wrote. Yet any honest person could have seen through the whole web of lies. Still, if a man likes a lie he will gladly accept it without question.
The plan backfired. The only people the priests could pay were the people who had been there.
They had bribed a treacherous disciple with "thirty pieces of silver" to put Christ to death. Now they gave "large money" to deny the truth of His resurrection. Such is man, such is the world; and, solemn to say, such is the world at its highest and proudest... But unbelief is as weak against God as faith is mighty with Him and by Him. Their own guard became the clearest witness of the resurrection — the witness no one suspected, and one that never meant to testify. The alarm of the soldiers, added to the doubts of His own disciples — what a testimony that was!
The priests were ready to spend more on Pilate than they had spent on the guard. Yet within months the same men would not repeat their own account in public.
These same Sadducean priests had stooped to a big act of bribery with the soldiers appointed to watch the grave. They had also committed themselves to an even more expensive bribe, if necessary, with the Governor. Their aim was to twist the soldiers' witness to His resurrection. Yet only a few months later, the lie they had launched proved too fragile to rely on. They dared not take their stand on it.
Priests and soldiers had both seen God act. Neither group changed.
The tearing of the veil leaves the scribes and priests as hardened and as wicked as ever. The opening of the tomb leaves the soldiers who guarded it in the same state it found them in. The one group gives money, and the other takes it, to spread a lie in the face of these awful and astounding facts. These are solemn doings of the hand of God. Some hearts refuse to fear, to repent, to soften at such a call. Surely we may say that such a heart stands convicted before us as ruined beyond recovery.
- Bought. Thirty pieces of silver bought His death. "Large money" tried to bury His resurrection. The governor would have cost more still.
- Shielded. Sleeping on guard could cost a soldier his life. So the priests offered cover from a governor already in their power.
- Backfired. The men the priests paid had seen it all. Their own guard became the last witness anyone would suspect.
- Collapsed. Within months the priests would not stand publicly on the story they had paid for.
- Exposed. A torn veil and an open tomb left priests and soldiers unchanged. Evidence alone cannot soften a heart that will not repent.
And they took the money and did as they had been taught. And this report is current among the Jews until this day.
One writer asks who stood behind the governor, and follows their money.
The governor held the power of the Roman kingdom. But who secretly pushed him to act? The false religionists of their day — the priests, utterly blinded by the devil. They were never straightforward in heart. They met with the elders and made their plan. The men who bribed a treacherous disciple with "thirty pieces of silver" to put Christ to death now gave "large money" to deny the truth of His resurrection.
Nobody pays that much for the truth.
And further, would anyone give the guard "large money" to speak the truth? Did not the size of the bribe show how afraid the chief priests were? They feared that the truth would come out at last, and that the lies they told would put them in real danger.
They bring their report, and this was nothing less than a witness to the resurrection and to the empty tomb. The enemies were the first witnesses of His triumph. They quickly called the whole ruling council together to hear the report officially. The soldiers spoke plainly, as trained military men do, and no one could doubt they told the truth.
The invented story does not survive a few simple questions.
A true story will hang together and can be examined closely. But this tale is far from convincing. If ALL the guard were asleep, how could they know that the disciples had stolen the body? If the body was stolen, how could sleeping men know what had become of it? Was ALL the guard likely to be asleep on the morning of the third day? Our Lord had prophesied that He would rise from the dead. And they knew that sleeping at their posts risked the death penalty.
There was also a far simpler way to end the matter, and the priests never took it.
And if the disciples had taken the body away, why did the chief priests settle for bribing the soldiers to tell a lie that put them at great risk? Why did they not search for the body by every possible means? Suppose they had found it and shown it to the public. What proof that would have been that our Lord had not risen! That would have settled the matter once and for all. Where was the body? The body was never produced. Why? Because there was no dead body, but a living risen Christ.
If the story was so weak, its spread says more about the hearers than about the evidence.
The guards forget their earlier fear of the angel. Greed for money moves them to tell a bold lie. So up to the day Matthew wrote, people commonly accepted this falsehood. Yet any honest person could certainly have seen through this whole fabrication of lies. Still, if a man likes a lie he will gladly accept it without question.
Behind the choice to lie stands a refusal that costs more than money. One writer sums up the council's whole reaction in a sentence.
The unhappy Jews seek to hide their confusion, without humbling themselves, without repenting. By bribes they persuade the soldiers to spread the report — even at the risk of falling under the severity of Roman discipline — that the disciples had taken away His body while they slept.
Matthew's closing phrase marks a hostility that ran on through the generations.
There is more to say about this hostility of Israel. Here in the twenty-eighth chapter we read that the priests and the soldiers agreed on one lie: that the disciples came and stole away the body of Jesus while the guard were asleep. It is commonly reported to this day. That is a fair sign of the old hostility, carried on through all the generations of the nation, to this day.
These same priests had stooped to a large bribe for the soldiers set to watch the grave. They had also promised an even more expensive bribe for the Governor, if it were needed, to twist their witness to His resurrection. Yet it is clear that when only a few months had passed, the lie they had launched had proved too fragile to rely on. They dared not take their stand upon it.
- Paid. The council paid thirty pieces of silver for His death. It paid "large money" to deny His rising. Same hands, same currency, a bigger price.
- Proved. The guards had already reported the truth, so a bribe was needed. His enemies were the first witnesses of His triumph.
- Punctured. Sleeping men cannot report what happened while they slept. And the priests never produced the body, the one thing that would have ended it.
- Preferred. The story spread because people wanted it, not because it was believable. If a man likes a lie he will accept it without question.
- Perishable. The lie travelled "to this day" as a mark of settled hostility. Yet within months it was too fragile to stand on, and its own authors fell silent.
But the eleven disciples went into Galilee to the mountain which Jesus had appointed them.
Matthew's last scene is far from Jerusalem, on a hillside in the north, where eleven men keep an appointment their Lord had made. Why does this Gospel send them away from the holy city, and who else may have stood on that mountain?
The number itself tells a story. One place among the twelve now stands empty:
This band of apostles is often referred to in Scripture as "the twelve," and Mark uses this way of speaking most of all... After Judas deserted, Scripture calls them "the eleven" (Matt. 28:16; Mark 16:14; Luke 24:9, 33; Acts 1:26); Matthias was later chosen by lot after prayer to fill the vacancy (Acts 1:26; 2:14).
Galilee lay far from Jerusalem and its pride, and that is the point. Matthew keeps the risen Lord among the despised:
Matthew tells of the Lord's resurrection in few words. Here too, after the resurrection, the aim is to connect the ministry and service of Jesus with the poor of the flock, the remnant of Israel. He has now handed that ministry to His disciples. He gathered them again in Galilee, where He had constantly taught them, and where the despised among the people lived far from the pride of the Jews.
Rising from the dead did not move Jesus out of the place of rejection. That points forward:
A rejected Messiah, fittingly and according to prophecy, finds Himself in Galilee, the despised place... He takes the same place now, after His death and resurrection, and there He starts His dealings with His disciples again. The godly remnant of the Jews must know the rejected Messiah there. His resurrection did not end their path of rejection... In Matthew, Galilee is the sign for a converted Jewish remnant until He comes to reign in power and glory.
Every earlier meeting after the resurrection had come without warning. This one was different:
This happened when the eleven disciples went to a mountain in Galilee to meet the Lord. He had arranged it on the first day He rose from the dead. The Apostle Paul tells us of five hundred brothers seeing the Lord at one time (1 Corinthians 15:6). This was probably the occasion Paul meant. Our Lord made an appointment to meet His disciples. This gave plenty of time to pass word to the many disciples who loved Him, and a chance to gather at the meeting place. Up to now the Lord's appearances were sudden and unexpected.
The message that sent them north went wider than the apostles. One writer notices the wording:
The Lord had said to the women, "Go and tell My brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see Me" (Matthew 28:10). The message was not to "the apostles" but to "My brothers." It strikes me that this invitation gathered a good many together... Affection for Christ will always carry the true heart to the spot where He is, and He cares for nothing else.
The Lord chose the meeting place, not the men who travelled there. One writer links it to a promise made earlier in this same Gospel:
He appointed a place where He could meet with them, and — wonderful fact — He has appointed a place for us, where He can meet with us. This same Gospel records His precious words for us: "For where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I among them" (Matthew 18:20). We do not choose the place. We may not please ourselves in this matter. The place is His appointment. Obeying His word and keeping this appointment with Him is our responsibility and our joy.
Matthew never records the ascension. One writer traces this back to a promise Jesus made before His death:
When our Lord spoke of His death and resurrection, He added, "But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee" (Matt. 26:32). The Jews and Jerusalem had rejected the Messiah. He now hints that, once raised from among the dead, He will still recognise the "poor of the flock" in Galilee... This is doubtless why we have no ascension in Matthew. This is also why the angel told the disciples to meet Jesus in Galilee. Our Lord later confirmed it, and the disciples acted on it (Matthew 28:5, 10, 16). Here Jesus as Messiah, having died for that nation, can now recognise a relationship with the faithful remnant, on the ground of His work.
- Eleven, not twelve — Judas deserted, and the gap stands in the record. Matthias filled it later, chosen by lot after prayer.
- Appointed, not accidental — earlier appearances came without warning. This one He fixed in advance, so word could spread.
- His place, not theirs — He chose the mountain, and they obeyed and came. The same holds wherever two or three gather in His name.
- Despised ground — Galilee lay far from the pride of the Jews. There He taught the "poor of the flock", and there He meets them again, risen.
- No ascension here — Matthew ends with the Messiah still tied to the faithful remnant on earth. That tie is the thread this Gospel follows.
And when they saw him, they did homage to him but some doubted.
Matthew's account of the resurrection ends not in Jerusalem but on a mountain in Galilee, at a spot the Lord Himself had fixed. What happens there is startling: one sentence records both worship and hesitation.
Galilee was not a neutral choice. The religious leaders looked down on the region, and the risen Lord returns there to meet His own.
Galilee was the place of His rejection. This is evident throughout the Gospel of Matthew, which gives us only His ministry in Galilee. Jerusalem would not have Him. It rejected Him and sought to kill Him through Herod when He was a baby. So when the King began His ministry He began it in "Galilee of the nations." The most ignorant Jews lived in Galilee, and they had become mixed with Gentiles. The scribes despised Galilee, and, as we know, said, "Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee." … Jerusalem did reject Him. So in this Gospel we see the risen One passing Jerusalem by. He returns to the place of His rejection, and His disciples have to go there and meet Him in Galilee. On this significant ground He gives them the great commission.
Their first act on seeing Him is to worship; an older translation says they "did homage." That carries weight, because worship belongs to God alone, and Jesus never turned it away.
The Jews were taught that there is only one God, and that worship belongs to God alone, that is, to Jehovah. The Lord Jesus claimed to be God (John 5; John 8:53-58; John 10:36), and as such He never refused worship when people offered it to Him in the days of His humiliation (Matt. 8:2; Matt. 9:18; Matt. 18:26; Matt. 28:17; John 9:38, and other places). See this in contrast with Peter, in Acts 10:26, and the angel, in Revelation 22:9.
Nothing prompted the worship except the sight of Him.
Could they do anything else, when He stood before them who had died for them, bearing in His risen body the marks of His suffering and death? One sight of Him was enough to lay them flat in holy adoration at His feet. And so it will be with us if, free from distraction, we seek His presence in the place He has appointed for us.
Matthew could have left those three words out. That he did not tells us something about how God handles the failures of His own people.
"Some doubted" — and these were disciples. How good God is! How far above the thoughts of man! Man would have kept the fact back. Why say that some of His disciples doubted? Would it not trip others up? But it is useful to know how deep the unbelief in our hearts goes. Even in the presence of a risen Jesus, "some doubted." Whatever His love to His children, God never hides their sins, nor treats them lightly.
Commentators differ over who exactly hesitated. One writer suggests the eleven had already met Him in Jerusalem, and that a larger crowd stood on the mountain with them.
They worship Him, but some still seem to doubt. This may not apply to the eleven disciples, whom our Lord had met before, as Luke tells us; and in John we learn that even Thomas' doubts were settled. In the letter to the Corinthians the apostle says that five hundred brothers saw the Lord at once. Matthew mentions only the eleven going to the mountain the Lord appointed. But these five hundred very likely came together at the same time, and some of them may have been the doubters. (See 1 Cor. 15:6.)
An invented story would have been tidier. Nobody making one up would admit that some hesitated.
When they see Him they do homage, but some doubt. The truth here is told in the plainest way. The Jews plotted to protect their unbelief. But there was no plot among the disciples: some doubted it was He. No one composing an account would have said this; the evidence would have made it glaringly true, beyond argument. The doubt makes it even harder to argue against — but that is not man's way of doing it. He comes on them by surprise and some are not sure. An arranged plot would have secured His acceptance; a testimony with no facts behind it would never have invented a doubt.
The hesitation did not last. It did not shut anyone out of the work that followed.
There they bowed in worship before Him, though some doubted. But worshippers and doubters alike had become witnesses. Most of them were still witnesses on the day Paul wrote about them, at least twenty-five years later.
- Place — He met them in Galilee, the despised region of His rejection, and from that ground gave the worldwide commission.
- Sight — Seeing Him was the whole cause of the worship; His presence was enough.
- Homage — He accepted worship without a word of protest; Peter and the angel stand in contrast.
- Honesty — God records the doubt of His own disciples instead of hiding it. A made-up story would never invent one.
- Outcome — Worshippers and doubters alike walked away as witnesses, and stayed witnesses for decades.