BIBLICAL EXAMPLE OF CONFLICT

WHO DOES GOD CALL? THE RIGHTOUS OR THE SINNERS?

MATTHEW 9:9-13

John Marks Sanders

Crisis Intervention
January 22, 2010
 1

Historical Analysis (Old Testament Ties)

When one looks at the synoptic Gospel of Matthew, certain characteristics come to mind

that are specific to this gospel. One may think of certain parables or stories that are unique to

Matthew such as the Sermon on the Mount or the Genealogy of Christ. Maybe a reader of the

first book of the New Testament would be able to read its words and discover its Jewish nature

or see that the concept ekklesia (“church”) is important to Matthew “because it is unique to

Matthew and not found in the other Gospels.”1

The style and concepts found within Matthew show that the work was clearly written to

the Jews; this is a factor in its physical place in the cannon of Scripture. It is no accident that

Matthew appears as the first book of the New Testament. Matthew in a way “serves as a hinge

upon which the Testaments pivot acting as a gateway to the New Testament with the strongest of

closing connections to the Old Testament.”2 The Gospel of Matthew has over 90 allusions and

quotations of the Old Testament and serves the purpose of being a gospel that “was written by a

Jew in order to convince the Jews.”3

The author has a heart for the Jewish people which is demonstrated in the text where

Jesus sends out the twelve on the task of evangelization His instruction is “go no where among

the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of

Israel.”(Matt 10:5-8) Yet the Jewish nature and motivation for the gospel is by no means to deter

the Gentiles. While allusions to the Messiah, observance of Jewish law, and terms such as king

and kingdom are used strongly in sense of the Jews, the end of the Gospel of Matthew clearly

1
D.A. Carson, Matthew, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 31
2
Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2000), 2
3
William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, The Daily Study Bible Series Vol 1 (Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1975), 5
 2

gives focus to Christ and what He came to do and expect of His followers. Matthew teaches that

many are to come from the east and the west to sit down in the kingdom of God (Matt 8:11).

The gospel is to be preached to the whole world (Matt 24:14), and it is the Gospel of Matthew

“that gives the marching orders of the Church: ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all the

nations’”4 (Matt 28:19). It is clear that Matthew’s first interest is in the Jews, but that he foresees

the day when all the nations will be gathered.

One of the great objects of the Gospel of Matthew is to demonstrate that all the

prophecies of the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus Christ, and that, therefore, He must be the

Messiah. Matthew explains in “mini-Bible form God’s entire plan of the ages from Genesis to

Revelation so to misunderstand the Messiah as presented by Matthew is to misunderstand much

of the plan of God as it unfolds in the New Testament.”5

Lexical Analysis

Specific words found in the text of Matthew 9:9-13 speak of the condition of the heart of

those that considered themselves righteous and those that were lost in sin. This text affirms

Matthew’s heart as a Jew writing to fellow Jews so that they may be saved.

Matthew 9:9-10 has similar words that come from the same root. Both of the verses have

the words “tax office” and “tax collectors” which derive from the same Greek root work τέλος

which means an end, or a toll. A tax office was just a place of commerce where taxes were

collected “most likely fish”6 and was associated and defined by the person in the office who

served as the tax collector. Literally, the term tax collector means a farmer of taxes and is the
4
William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, The Daily Study Bible Series Vol 1 (Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1975), 6
5
Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2000), 2
6
Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew, Sacra Pagina Series Vol. 1 (Collegeville: The Liturgical
Press, 1991), 126
 3

profession of an individual (Jew in this context) who was thought to be “the most despised, vile,

and corrupt man that would accept bribes from the wealthy to reduce and falsify taxes and would

then exact proportionately more from the middle and lower classes, making themselves hated

still more.”7

The next term is common throughout Scripture but in Matthew 9 shines light onto a

different aspect of perceived sin by the Pharisees. The term “sinner” in Matthew 9:10 come

from the Greek word ἁμαρτωλοὶ which is an adjective for the ones gathering to recline and

eat with Jesus. It is possible that the sinners here are those who because of their lifestyle or

occupation or actions were looked upon as failing to meet proper religious standards.

Additionally, “almost certainly [sinners] here groups together those who broke Pharisaic

Halakoth (rules of conduct)—harlots, tax collectors, and other disreputable people.”8

The next term refers to a Jewish party that operates under the law. In the gospels, this

party is an opposition to work of Christ. The term “Pharisee” comes from the Greek word

Φαρισαῖοι referring to a Jewish religious sect, but the word literally means “the separated

ones.”9 This definition could mean that the group “separated themselves from the masses of the

people or that they separated themselves to the study and interpretation of the law.”10 This group

was very hostile to the work of Christ and “even at this relatively early stage (Matthew 9) in

Jesus’ ministry, the Pharisees were becoming resentful and vindictive. Jesus had already said

and done more than enough to establish Himself as an iconoclast who was at complete odds with

7
John MacArthur Jr., Matthew 8-15, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press,
1987), 60
8
D.A. Carson, Matthew, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 224
9
Clayton Harrop, “Jewish Parties,” in Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 2003
10
Clayton Harrop, “Jewish Parties,” in Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 2003
 4

almost everything they stood for and held sacred.”11 The Pharisees could see no defects in

themselves and no good in those who were not like them.

The next two terms will be defined together, not because they are similar, but because

they are opposites. In Matthew 9:12 the author speaks of those that are “sick” from the Greek

κακῶς and those who are “healthy” from the Greek ἰσχύοντες. This word for sick literally

means badly which could mean both physically and morally. It carries connotations of someone

who is amiss, diseased, evil, grievous, miserable, sick, or sore. The word for healthy that is used

counter to those who are sick literally means to have force and carries thoughts of one who is

able and can do good. These are opposites and speak of to whom Christ came. In this case,

Christ did not come for the ones who are healthy and able spiritually but rather came to serve

those that are sick and diseased.

The last term “righteous” in the text is referring to the Pharisees but comes from the

Greek word δικαίους which literally means innocent or holy. Usually this term refers to

those who are righteous and living according to Scripture and teachings of Christ, but here the

term is used sarcastically. Christ is using sarcasm when speaking to and referring to those like

the Pharisees. Ironically, “the Pharisees were not truly righteous, but they saw themselves as

such for they were not willing to accept [Christ’s] forgiveness and respond to His call.”12

Contextual Analysis

To believe that the Word of God is inspired and inerrant is to belief that everything written

in Scripture was written and placed where it was suppose to be according to God’s plan. When

reading the Scriptures, it is an injustice to the text to dissect a portion without reading and
11
John MacArthur Jr., Matthew 8-15, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody
Press, 1987), 63
12
Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2000),
126
 5

understanding it within its own context. The Word of God is the ultimate truth for all to live by

so the only source to compare and challenge the Word of God is with itself. This shows that

what comes before and after a particular text is not only important but is necessary and critical to

understand what a particular passage means.

The text for this paper is Matthew 9:9-13 and speaks of Christ coming to meet with

Matthew and call on him to be His disciple. Matthew was a tax collector and considered to be

chief of sinners, yet Christ came to him and ate with him. The Pharisees questioned Christ’s

actions of eating and calling Matthew, but it is in the context both before and after Matt 9:9-13

where one finds Christ’s motives for doing such a thing and how He challenges the thoughts and

actions of the proud Pharisees.

Prior to Jesus’ coming to Matthew and call for him to be a disciple, the Gospel of Matthew

records an incident where Jesus is performing a miracle, but the proud spectators declare that

Christ is blaspheming because Christ tells the paralytic “have courage, son, you sins are

forgiven” (Matt 9:2b). The spectators to this are thinking these thoughts against, Christ but He

addresses their disbelief. Jesus asks if it is easier to tell a man to get up and walk or forgive him

of his sins. Jesus proves his authority to the scribes by healing the paralytic and tells him to get

up and walk. Having encountered the scribe (Pharisaical) disbelief, “Jesus prepared them for

proof that he had authority to forgive sins and to heal paralysis. Neither is easier than the other,

but physical healing is easier to authenticate”13 because physical healing happens in the visible

realm whereas spiritual healing does not. Jesus looked at the intentions and thoughts of these

scribes in 9:3 just as He looked at Matthew to see his need of a Savior. The context before 9:9-

13
Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2000),
124
 6

13 has revealed and authenticated what happened to Matthew, but further understanding can also

be found in the context after 9:9-13.

In Matthew chapter 10, the Gospel of Matthew shows that Jesus has assembled His

disciples from all walks of life and sends them out so to evangelize the nations. While the

context of Matthew 9:9-13 has demonstrated the arrogance and heart issues with the Pharisees,

the Israelites are still the focus of this gospel and burden of the heart of Christ. After Christ calls

Matthew and challenges the Pharisees, Matthew 10 records the disciples putting action to the

good news of a coming Jewish Messiah. Christ tells the 12 disciples to “not take the road

leading to other nations, and don’t [go to] any Samaritan town. Instead, go to the lost sheep of

the house of Israel” (Matt 10:5-6). This context shows Jesus’ care for the Jews. Jesus did

respond to the Gentiles who showed faith, but the preaching of the gospel to Gentiles awaited

His ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit. The Pharisees countered the work of the gospel

as show in Matthew 9, but Matthew 10 shows God’s deep care and longing for them to know

what a relationship with Christ is all about. Christ had come to fulfill the law and to save the

Pharisees, but many were too proud and too self-righteous to see God’s plan.

Meaning Analysis (Conflict Summary)

In Matthew 9:9-13, the author of the Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus violating a cultural

taboo by associating with a tax collector. This association and the response of the Pharisees is

the center of the scene and the presence of crisis. In the flow of the Gospel of Matthew, this

encounter with Matthew the tax collector is right before Jesus calls together His disciples and

sends them out to spread the news of the gospel. Jesus comes to call Matthew to be His disciple

but this contradicts Pharisaical law and common practice.

 7

As said previously in this paper, tax collectors were not individuals that received praise or

were even liked. In this context, the Romans needed the cheapest and most efficient way to

collect money from the residents. This resulted in Jews offering to be a tax collector (against

their own people) and scamming them so to make money themselves. The Jews thought it was

wrong to pay taxes because they were loyal to God and to pay taxes was to be loyal to man. This

made the Jewish tax collectors hated all the more. It was this tension between Pharisees and tax

collectors that caused the crisis between the Pharisees and Jesus. The Pharisees saw the situation

as Jesus enrolling in unaccepted behavior. It was “Jesus that proceeded to violate cultural

standards of acceptable behavior even further by visiting Matthew’s home and be eating with

him and many of his tax collector friends as well as many other sinners.”14 Eating together was

the deepest form of social intimacy and interaction. According to Pharisees, no sinner was

welcome at a righteous man’s table and no righteous man would consider eating at a sinner’s

table. Prior to this passage, Jesus read the thoughts of those thinking wrong about Him. Now,

Jesus was challenging the Pharisees and what they called righteous. These Pharisees had an

expectation that the Messiah would come and snuff out the sinners of this world and redeem the

“righteous” Pharisees, but Jesus’ plan was different from what the Pharisees expected. Jesus has

come to aid the sick (spiritually) and provide a way for the sinners.

When the Pharisees saw Jesus sitting and eating with sinners and tax collectors they ask a

question. They ask “why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners” (Matt 9:11).

This question was not directed to Jesus directly but “was mentioned to the disciples, maybe to

drive a wedge between them and Jesus.”15 This question was more of a “rebuke rather than a

14
Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2000),
125
15
Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2000),
125
 8

query, for the Pharisees thought a satisfactory answer could not be given so instead of asking a

sincere question, the Pharisees were just venting their hostility.”16 The expectations of the

Pharisees were not based on the life and purpose of Christ therefore, they caused stress and

tension and hostility. Jesus eating with sinners and tax collectors reveals His purpose, who He is

and that works do not earn His grace. Jesus is the one that seeks out the sinners of this world

while the Pharisees or the separate ones strive to be above those who are lost. Worldviews such

as these will constantly confront the other and will always result in conflict and crisis.

At first, the questioning was meant for the disciples, but when Jesus became aware of the

question, Jesus rose to confront the Pharisees and their self-righteousness with religious

indignation. Jesus declared that He had come for a reason that is to seek and to save that which

is lost. The Pharisees saw no need for spiritual healing, thinking they were above that, and

looked down on all who did.

The Pharisees thought they were safe in the physical laws that they kept, but in forgetting

the reason for the laws, they replaced Jesus and the gospel with man-made rules. Matthew 9:9-

13 offers an excellent illustration of how a tax collector and sinner can become a disciple of

Christ at no work of his own but only by grace of God. In terms of conflict, the Pharisees were

at odds with Christ during His earthly ministry and the last conflict would send Christ to the

cross. This passage shows a great sacrifice which was given on behalf of all man, grace shown

throughout Scripture, and one example of Christ coming to Matthew and telling him to “follow

me!” (Matt 9:9).

16
Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew, Sacra Pagina Series Vol. 1 (Collegeville: The Liturgical
Press, 1991), 63
 9

.
 10

Works Cited

Barclay, William. The Gosepl of Matthew. The Daily Study Bible Series. Vol. 1 Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1975

Carson, D.A. Matthew. Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Vol. 8 Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981

Harrington, Daniel J. Sacra Pagina Series. Vol. 1, Matthew. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1991

MacArthur, John Jr. Matthew 8-15 The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago:
Moody Press, 1987

Weber, Stuart K. Matthew. Holman New Testament Commentary. Nashville: Holman Reference,
2000

———. Note that an author’s subsequent works are listed with three em-dashes at the beginning,
which is a change from Turabian 6 which utilized eight underline marks.