TEXT [Commentary]
4. Jesus predicts his death as a ransom for many (20:17-28; cf. Mark 10:32-45; Luke 18:31-33)
17 As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside privately and told them what was going to happen to him. 18 “Listen,” he said, “we’re going up to Jerusalem, where the Son of Man[*] will be betrayed to the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. They will sentence him to die. 19 Then they will hand him over to the Romans[*] to be mocked, flogged with a whip, and crucified. But on the third day he will be raised from the dead.”
20 Then the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Jesus with her sons. She knelt respectfully to ask a favor. 21 “What is your request?” he asked.
She replied, “In your Kingdom, please let my two sons sit in places of honor next to you, one on your right and the other on your left.”
22 But Jesus answered by saying to them, “You don’t know what you are asking! Are you able to drink from the bitter cup of suffering I am about to drink?”
“Oh yes,” they replied, “we are able!”
23 Jesus told them, “You will indeed drink from my bitter cup. But I have no right to say who will sit on my right or my left. My Father has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen.”
24 When the ten other disciples heard what James and John had asked, they were indignant. 25 But Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. 26 But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave. 28 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
NOTES
20:17-19 Jesus was going up to Jerusalem. The mention that Jesus had begun the ominous journey to Jerusalem lends drama and urgency to the third passion prediction (cf. Mark 10:32-34; Luke 18:31-34).
he took the twelve disciples aside privately. Matthew notes that this was a private announcement (cf. 17:1; 26:37), which probably was difficult since crowds constantly followed Jesus (19:2; 20:29).
hand him over to the Romans to be mocked, flogged with a whip, and crucified. This third passion prediction is more explicit than the first two in that it states that the Jewish authorities will condemn Jesus to death (26:66), but that the Gentile authorities will actually carry out the execution (27:2; cf. John 18:31). This is the first time crucifixion has been mentioned in the passion predictions (cf. 16:21; 17:22-23; ). Crucifixion was a Roman form of execution, not a Jewish one (m. Sanhedrin 7:1-4), but it could be viewed in terms of Deut 21:23 as an indication of being cursed by God (cf. Gal 3:13). The mention of the leading priests and teachers of religious law recalls 2:4. The predicted details of Jesus’ sufferings anticipate the occurrence of those sufferings: he was mocked (27:29-41; cf. Ps 22:7), flogged (27:26), and crucified (27:35), just as predicted here. The additional details of this third prediction serve to stress the exactness of Jesus’ knowledge of what would happen. The involvement of both Jews and Romans stresses the universality of Jesus’ rejection (Davies and Allison 1997:80-81). All three of the passion predictions conclude with the resurrection of Jesus, which becomes the central focus of the preaching of the early church (26:32; 27:63; 28:6; Acts 2:24; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40-41; 1 Cor 15:4-8).
20:20 the mother of James and John. In obvious contrast to Jesus’ projected sufferings, the mother of Zebedee’s sons ironically sought their future glory (cf. Mark 10:35-45; Luke 22:24-30). The two sons of Zebedee were indeed James and John, but their names do not occur in the Gr. text of this verse (cf. 4:21; 10:2; 17:1; 26:37; 27:56).
knelt respectfully. This translates the same Gr. word (proskuneō [TG4352, ZG4686]) that in other contexts is translated “worship” (2:2, 11).
20:21 in places of honor. This does not occur in the Gr. text but brings out the implication of sitting at Jesus’ right or left hand. These seats probably connote proximity to the king’s prestige and authority in ruling the future Kingdom (19:28), rather than simply sitting next to him at the eschatological banquet (8:11) or at the final judgment (25:31-33). The fact that the mother made the request for her sons probably reflects negatively on them, not her (see next note). James, John, and their mother had not even begun to understand the significance of Jesus’ repeated passion predictions or the meaning of such statements as found in 19:30, 20:16.
20:22 You don’t know what you are asking! Jesus had asked the mother what she wanted from him, but at this point he addressed the mother and her sons. This implies that the sons had instigated their mother’s original question. None of them understood the gravity of their request, or its monstrous inappropriateness at this point.
bitter cup of suffering. This translates one Gr. word (potērion [TG4221, ZG4539] “cup”). To be sure, drinking the cup is a metaphor for experiencing suffering (26:39; cf. Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Jer 25:17; Ezek 23:31; John 18:11).
we are able! Their answer to Jesus’ question was sincere, though brash, since they did not know what they were talking about. Similarly, they all promised Jesus at the Last Supper that they would not desert him in his sufferings (26:35).
20:23 You will indeed drink from my bitter cup. The disciples would share in drinking the cup—that is, in suffering with Jesus. James was later martyred by Herod Agrippa I, but John was evidently spared such a fate (John 21:20-23; Acts 12:1-2).
I have no right to say who will sit on my right or my left. My Father has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen. Jesus could not promise them the best seats in his future Kingdom. In accord with the mysterious reality of the incarnation, Jesus acknowledged his human limitations, much as he does in 24:36.
20:24 when the ten other disciples heard what James and John had asked, they were indignant. The NLT’s “James and John” is lit. “the two brothers.” The ambition of James and John angered the remaining disciples, probably because they were jealous.
20:25 This quest for status became an opportune time for teaching Kingdom values to all the disciples, similar to a previous occasion (18:1-4).
rulers in this world. Lit., “rulers of the Gentiles.” Jesus once again explained the norms of the Kingdom for spiritual greatness (18:1-14; cf. 10:39; 16:25; 19:30; 23:11-12). He did this first by contrasting the values of the world (20:25) with the values of the Kingdom (20:26-27). Then he pointed to his own life and death as the model for their aspirations.
20:28 the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many. While worldly rulers tend to flaunt their power and status with ostentatious displays of “pomp and circumstance,” Jesus is the epitome of greatness because he has served and ransomed his people (see commentary below). On the authenticity of 20:28 as a saying of the historical Jesus, see Blomberg (1987:243-244); Carson (1984:432-433); Hagner (1995:579-580).
COMMENTARY [Text]
Matthew 20:17-28 narrates the third and fullest prediction of Jesus’ passion, followed by an episode stressing the disciples’ ambition. In this passage, Matthew contrasts Jesus’ humility and suffering (20:17-19, 28) with the disciples’ pride and desire for glory. The verses 20:17-19 contain the main elements of the two previous passion predictions: betrayal, death, and resurrection, but they also contain unique elements (discussed below). The structure of the second part of the passage involves a dialogue (20:20-23), which turns into an occasion of teaching (20:24-28). First, Jesus responded to a request from the mother of Zebedee’s children (20:20-23). When the rest of the disciples learned of this, their anger became another opportunity for Jesus to teach his disciples about genuine greatness in his Kingdom (20:24-28). This teaching takes the form of two parallel statements about worldly greatness (20:25) in antithesis to two parallel statements about Kingdom greatness (20:26-27). True greatness involves following in Jesus’ steps along the path of sacrificial service (20:28; cf. 10:38-39; 16:24-26; 19:21). In this passage the reader is influenced to respond in sympathy to Jesus and antipathy to the disciples. Their ignorance, pride, and false confidence contrast with Jesus’ knowledge, humility, and acceptance of the Father’s will.
Jesus’ Passion Predictions. As noted previously, Matthew 20:17-19 is the third of three explicit predictions of Jesus’ sufferings, death, and resurrection in Jerusalem. There are, of course, several implicit references to the Passion that prepare the reader for these explicit predictions (10:21, 24-25, 28, 38; 12:14, 38-40; 16:4). It is helpful to lay the three out side-by-side to note similarities and differences. When this is done, it is clear that the third prediction is the most detailed of the three. It stresses the imminence of Jesus’ sufferings in Jerusalem, as well as the dual agency of his death by a Jewish sentence carried out by Roman authorities. There is also a detailed description of his horrible sufferings. Only the third prediction mentions that Jesus’ death will be by crucifixion. The second prediction is the briefest. It alone omits mention of Jerusalem, but it alone mentions the grieving response of the disciples. Only the first prediction is presented as a summary of what Jesus said rather than as a direct quotation.
Jesus’ Passion and the Disciples’ Ambition. Matthew 20:20-28 is a remarkable study in the definition of authentic greatness. Ever since the fall of humanity, greatness has been defined in terms of prestige, power, and glory. Jesus alluded to this state of affairs in 20:25 and immediately repudiated it in 20:26. His definition of greatness in terms of service turns the world’s model on its head. His disciples are to follow his example of sacrificial, suffering servanthood even to the point of death. Paul clearly grasped this radically altered definition of greatness (2 Cor 4:5; 10:1; 12:9-10; Phil 2:3-11), which McNeile (1949:290) defines as servire est regnare (to serve is to reign). One can do no better than to reflect on these words of Jesus from Luke’s account of the Last Supper: “Who is more important, the one who sits at the table or the one who serves? . . . I am among you as one who serves.” (Luke 22:27). John’s account of Jesus’ explanation of his washing the disciples’ feet is also highly relevant here (John 13:12-17).
JESUS’ THREE PASSION PREDICTIONS |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Matthew 16:21 |
Matthew 17:22-23 |
Matthew 20:18-19 |
|
From then on Jesus began to tell his disciples plainly that it was necessary for him to go to Jerusalem, and that he would suffer many terrible things at the hands of the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law. He would be killed, but ON THE THIRD DAY HE WOULD BE RAISED FROM THE DEAD. |
After they had gathered together again in Galilee, Jesus told them, “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed. He will be killed, but ON THE THIRD DAY HE WILL BE RAISED FROM THE DEAD.” And the disciples’ hearts were filled with grief. |
As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside privately and told them what was going to happen to him. “Listen,” he said, “we’re going up to Jerusalem, where the Son of Man will be betrayed to the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. They will sentence him to die. Then they will hand him over to the Romans to be mocked, flogged with a whip, and crucified. But ON THE THIRD DAY HE WILL BE RAISED FROM THE DEAD.” |
|
Words similar in the first and second predictions |
||
|
Words similar in the first and third predictions |
||
|
Words similar in the second and third predictions |
||
|
WORDS SIMILAR IN ALL THREE PREDICTIONS |
||
In this passage, the reader’s emotions are torn between positive feelings for Jesus and negative feelings toward Jesus’ disciples. Jesus has now spoken of his coming sufferings in Jerusalem three times, but, inexplicably, his disciples have forgotten their previous grief over this prospect. It is instructive to compare the selfish request of the mother of Zebedee’s sons with the selfless request of the Canaanite woman for her daughter (15:21-28). One would have thought that the mother of two of Jesus’ disciples would have had more spiritual insight than the Canaanite woman, but such was not the case. The disciples were preoccupied with thoughts of their own glory instead of concern for their Lord’s sufferings. Davies and Allison (1997:82) put it well: “The loneliness of the Passion narrative begins here.” Later, Peter and the very disciples who wanted to sit at Jesus’ right and left in the Kingdom would sleep as Jesus agonized in the garden of Gethsemane (26:36-46). As Jesus predicted, he did not sit on a throne in Jerusalem but was crucified, with thieves on his right and left hand (27:38). How shocking it is to contemplate the disciples’ insensitivity to Jesus’ priorities! But it is all the more shocking to realize that many professed followers of Jesus still do not seem to grasp the nature of greatness in his Kingdom.
Jesus, a Ransom for Many. In giving himself as a “ransom” (lutron [TG3083, ZG3389]) for many, Jesus paid a price that frees them from slavery to sin (cf. Mark 10:45; Luke 1:68; 1 Tim 2:6; Titus 2:14; Heb 9:12; 1 Pet 1:18). The concept of ransom probably draws on such OT texts as Exodus 30:12, Psalm 49:7-9, and especially Isaiah 53:10-12, since Matthew had previously viewed Jesus as the suffering servant in 8:17 (citing Isa 53:4) and 12:18-21 (citing Isa 42:1-4).
Matthew 20:28 recalls 1:21 and anticipates 26:28. In 1:21 it is stated that Jesus will save his people from their sins. This affirmation, a play on the meaning of the name “Jesus,” indicates that the problem of Israel is not its occupation by Rome but its sin against God. But how would Jesus deliver his people from their sins? By paying a ransom that would free them from the bondage of alienation from God, according to 20:28. In view of the background in Isaiah 53:10-12, the haunting question of 16:26 (lit., “What can a man give in exchange for his soul?”), and the use of the preposition “for” (anti [TG473, ZG505], “instead of,” “in behalf of”) in 20:28, we should understand Matthew as teaching that redemption is vicarious; it comes when Jesus substitutes his own life for the lives of his people. But when will Jesus pay this ransom? According to 26:28, the wine of the Last Supper was intended as a sacred sign of Jesus’ blood, shed for the remission of his people’s sins. His blood was shed at his crucifixion, and clearly this was when the ransom was paid (cf. 1 Pet 1:18-19). The tearing of the Temple veil when Jesus died probably symbolizes the completion of this redemption (27:51). In summary, Jesus saved his people by shedding his blood as a ransom that frees them from the bondage of their sins. While this falls short of a comprehensive “doctrine” of the atonement, Davies and Allison (1997:100) are overly pessimistic when they say that “it is impossible to construct a Matthean theory of the atonement.” While there are some unanswered questions, the general thrust is clear.