Tag Archive for: Featured

Author: Mr. Kenneth Frank | Faculty in Theology, Living Education

Estimated Reading time: 7 min.

Did you know that Moses was honored with a seat in New Testament Jewish synagogues?

Centuries after Moses died, the seat of Moses was an honored chair in these meeting houses. In the first century, there is evidence from some synagogues of a special decorative seat called the “Seat of Moses” on a raised platform. His seat was filled by men who claimed the exalted position of teaching by Moses’ authority. Jesus referred to this religious office with some sharp statements about the religious leaders who occupied it. Today’s Digging Deeper explores the history behind this exalted position with Jesus’ important caveat.

Our central passage for this study is: “Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not” (Matthew 23:1-3 KJV). In this same chapter, Jesus pronounced seven woes upon these men for their abuse of power (Matthew 23:13-36).

The authority of Moses

Moses was the great legislator of the Israelite nation. God inspired him to preach and to inscribe five books (the Torah or Pentateuch) in God’s name. His influence transcended the centuries, for he is named 80 times in our New Testament, having a massive presence among the devout of the land. Moses occupied the office of expounder and chief justice for the application of the law to specific cases of conduct. Exodus 18 describes how his father-in-law convinced him to delegate authority to other judges under his command, thereby sharing his authority but leaving him as the chief justice with God’s final authority. Upon his death, Moses’ authority passed on to his successors who sat in his seat.

The Expository Notes of Dr. Constable explains what sitting in Moses’ seat represented: “According to Old Testament figurative usage a person who sat on a predecessor’s seat was that person’s successor (Exodus 11:5; 12:29; 1 Kings 1:35; 1:46; 2:12; 16:11; 2 Kings 15:12; Psalm 132:12)” (e-Sword 12.2). Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible explains why God permitted them to do so: “They sat there formerly by Divine appointment: they sit there now by Divine permission” (Ibid.). They were not authorized to mandate new law but rather to interpret already provided law for their followers.

The College Press Bible Study Textbook Series describes how his position was transferred upon his death: “Moses’ seat is his cathedra, his ‘Bible Chair’ from which his doctrine is read and expounded. In Malachi’s day it was the priests who had the magisterial responsibility (Malachi 2:7 ff.), a duty as old as the priesthood itself (Leviticus 10:17; Deuteronomy 17:9-13). But with ‘Ezra the priest and scribe’ (Nehemiah 12:26) the function began shifting onto professional scribes (Nehemiah 8:4, 7-9; 8:13, 18; cf. Ezra 7:1-6; 10)” (e-Sword 12.2).

The Transfer of Influence

In the first century, the Levites were to have been Israel’s teachers, but most of them were Sadducees and no longer carried the same authority. Moses’ authority had devolved to the scribes and Pharisees. Study of the Scriptures was of little interest to the indifferent Sadducees. The Pulpit Commentary, edited by H.D.M. Spence and Joseph S. Exell, explains: “The Sadducees seem to have had no popular influence, and were never recognized as leaders. The Levitical priests never appear in the Gospels as teachers or expositors of the Mosaic system; this function of theirs had devolved upon scribes and lawyers” (e-Sword 12.2).

By Jesus’ day, scribes (doctors of the law or legal experts) were mostly from the Pharisaic party instead of the Sadducean, but not all Pharisees were scribes. Dr. Bob Utley’s You Can Understand the Bible describes the scribes as “…experts in the Written Law (OT) and the Oral Law (Talmud) of Israel and were available to make local practical applications. In effect they replaced the traditional OT functions of the local Levites” (e-Sword 12.2). A Commentary on the Holy Bible, edited by J.R. Dummelow explains their claim to authority: “The scribes (who were ordained with the laying-on of hands) claimed to have received their authority through an unbroken succession from Moses. The ‘sitting’ refers to the judicial power, and the authority to teach, which all scribes or rabbis possessed, and which was centred in the Great Sanhedrin [Jewish supreme court]” (Ibid.).

Sitting to Teach

Moses’ writings were read incrementally in the synagogues every Sabbath day (Acts 15:21). When the Law of Moses (Genesis-Deuteronomy) and the Prophets were read from the scrolls stored in “the Ark” (cabinet) in synagogues, the reader stood; however, when he expounded the reading afterward he sat. Sitting was the posture of a teacher. Jesus employed this position to teach as well: “And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him” (Matthew 5:1 KJV). The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges notes that “In the Talmud ‘to sit’ is nearly synonymous with ‘to teach'” (e-Sword 12.2).

When Jesus said the scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, He merely acknowledged the fact. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges explains His remark about these leaders: “Where they went wrong Jesus will point out. But here He must mention them, because, despite their faults, they uphold Moses, as opposed to the paganizing leadership of the Sadducean priesthood” (e-Sword 12.2).

However, Jesus did criticize their hypocrisy (Matthew 23:3-7). The College Press Bible Study Textbook Series clarifies that Jesus’ criticism of these religious leaders was not for their holding such an authoritative position but “…because their party zeal strenuously applied the theologians’ legalistic conclusions to everyday life with a rigor that required everyone to fall in lock-step behind them. In this sense, the Pharisees, too, were Israel’s teachers, even if unofficially” (e-Sword 12.2).

To do what they say

In Matthew 23:3 Jesus does not dispute the importance of Moses’ law, but His implication is clear. He goes on to explain that these teachers did not obey their teachings (Matthew 23:4). As The College Press Bible Study Textbook Series continues ” … whatever comes from Moses is from God and is to be received with full confidence and submission. Merely because Jesus must undercut the unjustified pretensions of the Jewish magisterium does not mean that Moses must go too. So, before beginning His condemnation of the unfaithfulness and sinful conduct of the religious leaders, He calls for sincere reverence for God’s Law” (e-Sword 12.2).

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible provides us two important lessons from this passage:

“1. Many a good place is filled with bad men; it is no new thing for the vilest men to be exalted even to Moses’s seat (Psalm 12:8); and, when it is so, the men are not so much honoured by the seat as the seat is dishonoured by the men. Now they that sat in Moses’s seat were so wretchedly degenerated, that it was time for the great Prophet to arise, like unto Moses, to erect another seat.

2. Good and useful offices and powers are not therefore to be condemned and abolished, because they fall sometimes into the hands of bad men, who abuse them. We must not therefore pull down Moses’s seat, because scribes and Pharisees have got possession of it; rather than so, let both grow together until the harvest, Matthew 13:30″ (e-Sword 12.2).

Respect for high office, especially religious office, is a fundamental teaching of church government. Jesus set the record straight at a time when there was much abuse of this position by the religious teachers. This was not meant to condone their unbiblical behavior but rather to instruct their followers to abide by their correct teachings of God’s word, despite their hypocrisy. God’s mighty word will still change lives, even if delivered by defective servants.

Kenneth Frank was born and raised in New Jersey, USA, and attended Ambassador College, graduating in 1973. He served in the Canadian ministry from 1973-1999, after which he returned to the USA to pastor churches in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina for 15 years. Having earned a BA degree from Ambassador College he later earned a MA degree from Grand Canyon University before being assigned to the Charlotte office to teach at Living University, now Living Education. Currently, he teaches the Survey of the Bible course to the on-campus students and writes the Digging Deeper column for our online Bible study program. He is married, has four children, and seven grandchildren.

Author: Mr. Kenneth Frank | Faculty in Theology, Living Education

Estimated Reading time: 6 min., 46 sec.

Did you know that John the Baptist did not invent total immersion water baptism?

Early in our four Gospels, we read about a man named John, later called John the Baptist or John the Baptizer. Some may conclude from this title that John first used or even invented the practice. The Gospels name a few of the locations near the Jordan River where he baptized those who came to him for spiritual cleansing. Readers of the New Testament may conclude that water baptism was a new ceremony begun by John. However, as this Digging Deeper will disclose, total immersion water baptism long predates the ministry of John.

Within a couple of months, the Church of God will again observe the annual Passover, so now is the time to concentrate on its deep spiritual meaning.  As an annual recommitment to our baptismal covenant with Christ, we reflect on our momentous, life-transforming decision to accept His sacrifice for our sins and serve Him as loyal disciples. Tracing the history of water baptism will deepen our appreciation for its spiritual significance.

Baptism in the Ancient World

Ablutions and bathing were practiced by many ancient peoples. The NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible notes that “From the OT to Greek, Hittite and Egyptian temples, ritual purity and purification were important in the ancient world. Jewish people observed various ceremonial washings, and some groups, such as the Essenes, took these practices to an extreme” (Tecarta Bible App). The Essenes were an ascetic group living near the Dead Sea during the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.

This source continues: “Many ancient cults practiced ceremonial washings, which are also common in the OT and Judaism; some Jewish sects (such as the people who produced the Dead Sea Scrolls) were particularly scrupulous about these washings, but others (such as Sadducees and Pharisees) also shared this emphasis. Whereas most of these washings were often repeated, one kind of immersion (apparently attested even by some first- and second-century Gentile writers) was employed for conversion, namely of Gentiles converting to Judaism (alongside male circumcision)” (Ibid.).

Further describing this practice, the Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, edited by James Hastings, in its article by A.J. Maclean on “Baptism of proselytes” states that “The Jews admitted ‘proselytes of righteousness,’ i.e. full proselytes, with baptism, circumcision, and sacrifice. This custom was very common in Rabbinical times, though Josephus and Philo do not mention it, and some have therefore concluded that it did not exist in the 1st cent.; but Edersheim has clearly proved from ancient evidence that it was then in use (LT [Note: T Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (Edersheim).] ii. 746, Appendix xii.)” (e-Sword 12.2).

The NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible describes later Jewish baptisms: “Jewish initiatory baptisms involved immersion; later rabbis in fact required full-body immersions to be performed naked, to guarantee that the entire body was covered. Nevertheless, at an early stage Christians began making other arrangements where conditions were less than ideal (Didache 7.1–3)” (Tecarta Bible App).

Describing the seriousness of Jewish baptism of Gentile converts, Paul H. Wright in the Rose Then and Now Bible Map Atlas states: “A second type of immersion was required of Gentile proselytes converting to Judaism. These underwent a single initiatory rite of baptism to remove the defilement which had adhered to them, as non-Jews, from birth” (Rose Publishing, 2012, p. 164).

Various Baptisms in Biblical History

The following summarizes an article in the Archaeological Study Bible (Zondervan, 2010, p. 1328):

Ritual immersion in water was a frequently used religious symbol in ancient Judaism.  It symbolized purification and the removal of sin or was sometimes employed as an initiation rite to represent a change of status or a conversion.

1. In the OT, priests practiced rites of immersion for maintaining ritual purity – Leviticus 15; Leviticus 16:3-4, Leviticus 16:23-24.
2. Within Pharisaic Judaism during the NT period, water immersion served as the primary means by which ritual impurity was eliminated – Matthew 15:1-3; John 2:6-7.
3. In the community at Qumran, baptism became a symbolic act with which one was “made holy by the waters of repentance.”
4. Certain Jewish groups during the 1st century AD, practiced proselyte baptism, requiring converts, along with circumcision, to receive immersion in a ritualistic bath before full acceptance into the Jewish community.
5. Before entering the Temple and participating in Holy Day services, purification through ritualistic immersion baths was expected of all Jews – Numbers 9:10-11; John 11:55; Acts 21:20-27.
6. Several Jewish ritual baths, or miqvaot (singular mikveh), in cities like Jerusalem, Jericho, and other cities have been excavated.  Rabbinical law required them to hold at least 60 gallons of water, deep enough to completely immerse the body.

John’s Baptism

The Rose Then and Now Bible Map Atlas describes how John adapted this custom: “But unlike the Temple Jews, the Essenes–and John–reserved immersion for people who first repented of their sins” (Ibid., p. 163). This is why John’s baptism was described as a “baptism of repentance” by the Gospels of Mark and Luke and the Book of Acts. Unlike some Jewish ritual baptisms, John’s baptism was once for all: “John’s one-time ‘baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins’ was an initiatory rite aimed at emphasizing the need for living righteously (defined in terms of social, liturgical, acts) in a Kingdom of Heaven [Matthew’s term for the Kingdom of God] that was inclusive of anyone who submitted to its waters, regardless of gender, ethnicity, status or former life” (Ibid., p. 164). It was this particular form of baptism that gave John the distinctive nickname of “the Baptist” or “the Baptizer.”

Today, Christians also request baptism, after they have repented of their sins, to receive forgiveness. Jesus came to John for baptism, not for spiritual cleansing of sin, but to fulfill all righteousness (Matthew 3:15). John knew his baptism was limited when he told his followers, when Jesus came for baptism, that Jesus’ followers would receive the “baptism of the Spirit” from Jesus as well (Mark 1:8). In the Old Testament, water is often associated with the Spirit (Isaiah 44:3; Ezekiel 36:25-27; Joel 2:28-29). Today, Christians receive this baptism of the Spirit with the laying on of hands by the ministry following water baptism. This distinguishes Christian baptism from John’s baptism. Baptism is indeed a symbolic act – there is no magic worked by getting wet. Yet that does not mean it is unimportant. It is a commanded observance that represents being crucified with Christ, buried with Him in baptism, and rising to walk in newness of life (Romans 6:3-6).

John’s baptism was preparatory to Christian baptism – a stepping stone that focused more attention on Jesus’ Spirit baptism than his own. John knew he prepared the way for the coming of the Lord and that his ministry would diminish as Jesus’ ministry ascended (John 1:15, 26-30; Acts 19:4). Additionally, he recognized his place in God’s preparation for the coming of the Messiah (John 1:23). His baptism of repentance prepared many people for Jesus’ baptism of the Spirit, including some of John’s disciples who left him to follow Jesus instead. It was a vital link in the chain of God’s plan. As we prepare for this year’s Passover service, let us reflect on this baptism history to better appreciate our place in that chain.

Kenneth Frank was born and raised in New Jersey, USA, and attended Ambassador College, graduating in 1973. He served in the Canadian ministry from 1973-1999, after which he returned to the USA to pastor churches in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina for 15 years. Having earned a BA degree from Ambassador College he later earned a MA degree from Grand Canyon University before being assigned to the Charlotte office to teach at Living University, now Living Education. Currently, he teaches the Survey of the Bible course to the on-campus students and writes the Digging Deeper column for our online Bible study program. He is married, has four children, and seven grandchildren.