Matthew 7.13-23: A Historical Reading

Just as the Torah given through Moses bore with it blessings and curses (Deuteronomy 28), so too the Torah that comes from the mouth of Jesus.  Having begun the Sermon with blessings, Jesus concludes it by preaching on the consequences of disobedience.

Like Moses of old, Jesus has set before his hearers “life and death” (Deuteronomy 30.19). He now gives them three strong warnings about disobeying his interpretation of the Torah.  Each of these draws a stark dichotomy between those who live by the Sermon and those who reject it. They can be structured as follows:

Warning 1: There are two ways (7.13-14)

The wide gate and the easy road vs. The narrow gate and the hard road

Warning 2: Beware of false prophets (7.15-23)

False prophets who bear bad fruit vs. True prophets who bear good fruit

Warning 3: There are two kinds of hearers (7.24-27)

The foolish who hear but do not obey vs. The wise who hear and obey

Let’s look at these in turn.

Warning 1: There are two ways (7.13-14)

The motif of entering in the first warning resumes Matthew 5.20, where the object of one’s entering in (eiserchomai) is the kingdom of heaven, as is the case in Matthew 7.21. Elsewhere in Matthew’s Gospel, eiserchomai is used repeatedly to mean entry into the life of the kingdom (see Matthew 18.3; 18.8-9; 19.17; 19.23-24; 22.12; 23.13; 25.10; 25.21, 23). Since Matthew portrays Jesus as the New Moses, it is probable that this motif is rooted in ancient Israel’s entrance into the promised land of Canaan—an entrance which was refused to those who refused to place their trust in the God of Israel.

What is most interesting here is that the two ways and the two gates appear to be two attempts to arrive at a common destination. The easy road leads its traveler to the wide gate; an attempt to enter in this way leads to destruction. The hard road, on the other hand, leads one to the narrow gate by which one enters into life.

Without “spiritualizing” terms like “gate” and “road” too quickly, there is the possibility that Jesus has in mind the circumstances of a traveler who, in approaching a city, must choose one of its two gates. I propose also that the city implied here is Jerusalem. If Jerusalem is “the city of the great King”, as Jesus referred to it earlier (Matthew 5.35), why should he not have it in mind when he speaks of “entering” the kingdom? Furthermore, in the oracles of restoration given by the prophets of Israel, Zion (the restored Jerusalem) lies at the center of God’s redemptive work and becomes the headquarters, as it were, of his kingdom.  This can be seen, for example, in passages like Isaiah 2, 60-61; Zephaniah 3.14-20; and Zechariah 12-14.

If the two gates of which Jesus speaks is taken with reference to Jerusalem, the eschatological connotations of eiserchomai are heightened by a particular first-century Jewish expectation among som, based on Scriptures such as Ezekiel 46.1-2, 12, Zechariah 14.4-5 and Joel 3.2, that the Messiah and his hosts (disciples?) would  enter Jerusalem from the east and bring about the awaited deliverance of Israel.  By this same token, it is not surprising that, when Jesus approached Jerusalem from the east after crossing the Kidron Valley on Palm Sunday, the crowds immediately hailed him as the Davidic heir—that is, the Messiah and King (Matthew 21.9; Mark 11.10; Luke 19.38; John 12.13).

I speculate that Jesus was in fact alluding to two specific entrances into Jerusalem: the (”wide”) Eastern Gate and the (”narrow”) Sheep Gate, both of which led to the Temple Mount. These gates can be taken to symbolize the two contrasting ways of bringing about the kingdom: (1) the “wide” gate representing the popular expectation of the Messiah’s glorious return and the military defeat of Israel’s enemies—that is, the way of resistance movements followed so many of Jesus’ contemporaries; and (2) the “narrow” gate, near which animals were prepared for Temple sacrifices, representing the way of non-violence and submission to persecution advocated by Jesus (”Do not resist…”).*

Could Jesus have possibly been calling his followers to become like sheep for sacrifice, after which the Sheep Gate received its name? Immediately after this saying the Teacher likens his disciples to “sheep” who must be on guard against “ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7.15). Although the allusion is cannot be verified with certainty, its immediate context seems to support the interpretation of the “narrow gate” I suggest here.

Warning 2: Beware of false prophets (7.15-23)

Jesus’ warning about false prophets is centered on their bearing “evil fruit” (Matthew 7.17-18). It is notable that these prophets are first likened to thorns and thistles, from which one cannot expect to harvest grapes or figs (Matthew 7.16). In the scriptures of Israel, thorns and thistles are common metaphors for the enemies of Israel who obstruct her flourishing and fruitfulness in the land—for instance, the Canaanite peoples who were in the land during the conquest (Numbers 33.55; Joshua 23.13; Judges 2.3). Similarly, in the prophetic tradition, these “weeds” represent Israel’s Gentile oppressors (Isaiah 5.6; 7.23-25; 10.17; 27.4; 33.12; 34.13; Ezekekiel 2.6; Nahum 1.10).

Yet the false prophets of whom Jesus speaks here cannot simply refer to all Gentiles, for the Teacher has already said that they are “outsiders” of the community actually masquerading as “insiders”—ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are quite capable of professing Jesus as “Lord” and performing mighty works (Matt 7.21-22). Who, then, are these false prophets who are likened to Gentiles?

Again, the scriptures of Israel afford light on the matter. False prophets in the history of Israel were not so much teachers of heretical doctrine as they were counterfeit political strategists. Especially in the time of they last days of the Davidic kingdom, they assured the people of peace and tranquility when in fact the true prophets announced God’s judgment on Judah in the form of pagan invasion.  An iconic instance of confrontation between a true prophet and a false prophet on this subject is that between Jeremiah and Hananiah (see Jeremiah 28.1-17).

Like the prophets of old, Jesus, had already warned of impending judgment for those who reject his manifesto for the kingdom (Matthew 5.13, 25, 29-30). Later, in his discourse on the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus would warn against these false prophets who would arise in a time of political turmoil and mislead many into lawlessness (Matthew 24.11-12). Their way “leads to destruction” (Matthew 7.13). His hearers must be on guard, since false prophets will come who will dissolve the starkness of Jesus’ proclamation with a counterfeit announcement of peace for all. They are the promoters of “alternative” kingdom agendas and propagators of deluded hopes. Yet even these disguised wolves could be identified by their fruit, which Jesus calls “evil” (ponēros, Matthew 7.17)—that is, no different than that of the “evil” pagan aggressor (Matthew 5.39).  From these false prophets, too, his disciples must learn to pray to their heavenly Father, “Deliver us…”.

[The third warning will be covered in tomorrow's post.]

———

* According to Eusebius, the fourth-century bishop of Caesarea, animals were washed in the large pools by the Sheep Gate in preparation for sacrifice in the Temple: “There are now pointed out twin pools, of which one is filled by the rain water (winter rains) and the other it appears that the water becomes miraculously red, as they say, bearing the traces of the sacrificial victims formerly washed in it. So it is called the sheep after the sacrifice…. The sacrificial victims were brought unbound by the priests into the bath, whence it received its name” (Onomasticon 58.21-26). Moreover, it is likely that these animals might have been sold to pilgrims there as well (Urban C. von Wahlde, “Archaeology and John’s Gospel”, in Jesus and Archeology, ed. James H. Charlesworth [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006], p. 553).