Mt 26:30, Mk 14:26 – They sang the final hymn, the great Hallel, and then went back out to the Mount of Olives.
Thematic Relevance:
|
Jesus is the obedient One, the Man in whom there is no sin. |
Doctrinal Relevance:
|
There is value in observing the rituals set forth by Scripture for our observance. |
Moral Relevance: |
Obedience remains the key. Thinking upon that final prayer of Jesus, the seeking for unity amongst a people that would truly cherish and observe God’s words, putting them into practice; how fitting that He should take care to observe the order of this final Passover with so great a care. We, too, must have a heartfelt concern for observing, doing, all that God prescribes for our worship of Him, which pretty well covers the whole of life. |
Doxology:
|
On this occasion, I think I will hold my doxological thought until I have read those Psalms of Hallel. |
Questions Raised: |
Jesus is sinless, yet didn’t the return to Mount Olivet constitute a breach of order for Passover? What, if anything, should be understood from this? |
N/A
While we have what is effectively but one verse to consider, there are two activities noted. There is the singing of a hymn or psalm (some translations suggest more than one), and then there is the return trip across the valley to the Mount of Olives. I am going to consider these in reverse order for the simple reason that this trip across the valley gives me pause. There is seemingly a problem presented by this action.
Let me try and lay that out for us. It seems a reasonably safe statement that the verses before us describe the closing moments of the Last Supper. The Last Supper bears sufficient resemblance to a Paschal meal that we can reasonably suppose that this is precisely what it was. Now, there is admittedly a bit of debate as to whether this meal occurred on its proper day of observation, or whether it took place one day early due to a certain confluence of the Sabbath schedule and the Passover day. There is certainly sufficient confusion over the testimony of the four Gospels to allow for either interpretation. One point that is raised in favor of an early observance is that the Pharisees ought to have been loathe to deal with prosecution of Jesus on the day of preparation.
While I could hardly present myself as some sort of expert on the matter, I am inclined to take the meal at face value. It is sufficiently like the Paschal meal for me to accept that this is what it is. But, now I am faced with a problem. Mosaic law laid down the rule that those who partake of the Passover meal are to remain in their homes through the night. Jesus, for His atoning death to have value, had necessarily to obey every least aspect of that law which God handed down through Moses. Traditions were one thing, but the Law was non-negotiable. Yet, here we see Jesus taking His disciples out of the upper room wherein they have been to make the trek through the streets of Jerusalem, across the Kidron Valley, and back up the Mount of Olives. How can this not be a violation of that Law, and if it is, then how is Jesus sinless?
Now, let me set out a few inviolate ground rules for understanding, as I seek to wrestle with this point. First, Scripture being inerrant, it is certainly possible that I have misconstrued the timeline, but it is not possible that Matthew and Mark have misrepresented the event. So, we can be certain of this point: At the end of this meal together, they did indeed head back to the Mount of Olives, as they have done every evening during this sojourn in Jerusalem. Second, I must hold that Jesus is sinless. This is so necessary a component of doctrine, and indeed of life, as brooks no debate for me. These two points must hold with however I come to understand what has transpired in this verse. However it is to be explained, it cannot be done by doing violence to the record left by the Apostles, nor can it do violence to the righteousness of the Christ. If, indeed, understanding is to be arrived at, it will be within the bounding limits of these parameters.
So, certainly, one way out is to accept the argument that this meal happened a day early, and therefore the evening travel restrictions did not apply. However, the significance of this final meal as the fulfillment of the Passover, and a shifting of that memorial to a new and higher meaning lead me away from such a solution. It is part of that theory, of course, that Jesus intentionally observed the meal a day early as a clear indication that this was a changing of the order. But, even such an understanding requires the cooperation of Judean society, and in particular, its religious order. There had to be accommodation already in place for an early observance, so that the priests were available to deal with the sacrificial lamb a day early. There would have to have been an alternate set of rules on the books to cover this early observance. Did they bear the same weight as the real instructions? Did they include a similar ban on overnight travel for the early observer? What became of those early observers when the rest of the people opted to observe on the proper day?
In fairness, let me point out that there is a great deal of symbolism surrounding the last day of our Lord’s earthly life that are lessened if we take this meal as truly being the proper Passover observance. For instance, it is said that His sentencing fell on the very day on which the sacrifices were made, that His crucifixion was timed almost to the minute for that very thing. While that sounds wonderfully amazing, I have to say that it doesn’t make a great deal of sense to me. With all that would be required of the priesthood for this day of preparation, when the lambs of a nation were to be slaughtered, was it really likely that they would opt to hold their counsel session in judgment of Jesus, to march Him out through the courts of the temple in the midst of all that activity? Their whole purpose had been to maintain some secrecy over His arrest, lest there be rioting in response to their actions. Why, then, would they have been marching Him off to see Pilate right in the midst of this major sacrifice? It doesn’t add up.
Neither, unless I am missing something (always a possibility), is there anything in the Scriptural record that would require us to hold this view of the timing. Nothing in the doctrines of faith demands that His death occurred on the precise anniversary of the Passover for His death to truly signify the fulfillment of Passover’s promise. The things which dictate the timing of events for us are more likely to be the sensibilities of the people involved. We have, for instance, the concern shown for having His body down off the cross in time for the Sabbath. But, that is the Sabbath, not the Passover. We must be careful, for the Passover itself may have been referred to as a Sabbath. However, the overall description of events leads me to see that later reference as being to the normal Sabbath.
This returns me to the point at hand: If this was really the Passover meal, what are these men doing in going to the Mount? Are they not in violation of Law? It would be tempting to suppose that perhaps they had been so long in observing this meal that dawn had already broken across the land and their walk was actually a morning thing. But, the immediate transition to Jesus’ statement, “You will all fall away this night,” and, “Peter, this very night, you will deny me thrice,” leave us necessarily in the dark of this night, don’t they? It has to, for there remains that concern over the Passover schedule on the part of the officials. If this night was actually looking ahead to the night following (because they were currently in this day), all of that concern makes no sense.
It would appear to be required to conclude that the trip over to Mount Olivet was a night-time journey, and that it did indeed follow after the final cup of the Paschal meal. How, then, can we account sinless these men who made the trip? Indeed, how is it that there is no hint of hesitation on their part? Well, we could look at the earlier departure of Judas, which likewise failed to raise any eyebrows. I recall some comments to the effect that there were exceptions made to the curfew for certain necessities of life. These would be more relaxed yet given the double Sabbath that is sometimes supposed for this date. Would a return to camp have counted under those exceptions?
It doesn’t seem unreasonable to suppose it might. After all, with so many in Jerusalem, and so many effectively borrowing or renting these upper rooms for their observance of the feast, where were they to sleep? As I understand it, these rooms were not equipped for such purpose. They were effectively dining rooms, or halls not too unlike those we might rent for a party of some sort. They had no sleeping facilities to speak of. Would not those who were visiting Jerusalem depart these rooms to return to whatever accommodations they had made? If I remember correctly, this would mean going back out of Jerusalem into the surrounding tent city, wouldn’t it? If that’s the case, then it would seem reasonable that the disciples heading out to the Mount of Olives was neither sinful nor even particularly noteworthy.
I must admit that when I first began to perceive this issue, I was inclined to suppose that there was some deeper significance to the event. Surely, our sinless Savior having thus broken with the ritual observance, there must be a point there about how the symbolic was ended and the real begun! But, if that were the case, we would just as surely see the point made far more forcefully than to simply note in passing that they left town for camp. This is really little more than a travelogue, a transitional note indicating that the dinner scene is over, and we are moving to chat around the campfire. Everything about this speaks of the utter normality of the action. They sang a hymn. They went home. That’s the sum of it. And, even in that note about singing a hymn, there is a strong statement of normalcy. Everybody knew the hymn they were talking about. It was the same hymn they would have used to end their own observation of that meal not only in this final year of our Lord’s life, but every year.
You see, the inclusion of the comment about singing the closing hymn really puts the seal on what we have been observing. Yes, this was a Passover observation. There are those hints of the standard Passover routine that are scattered throughout the record, and this mention of the hymn is but the last in that series. It has been there before, in the mention of the wine. I believe I noted at the appropriate point that the cup by which Jesus instituted what we observe in Communion was one of the ritual observances of Passover.
The sum of this seems to be that we ought not to read either a breach of Law nor a modification of Law in the fact that Jesus and His disciples went across the valley that night. It was nothing more or less than typical behavior, and is relayed to us with no further significance than to say the meal was over. It is not a matter of note except as it provides the geographical shift required for the narrative. The action has relocated from downtown to countryside, after a perfectly mundane termination to a most extraordinary Passover observance. They sang a hymn and went home.
What does have some potentially powerful impact is to consider the hymn or hymns which were sung. While most of our translations are quite nonspecific about what was sung, it is a matter that the original readers of Matthew and Mark would have been so familiar with as to need no more detail. The CJB, which I don’t recall having quoted from before, makes the familiar explicit for us. “After singing the Hallel, they went out to the Mount of Olives.” The Hallel? What is that? Well, the NET provides useful information in that regard, as do a few others among the translations. We are being pointed to Psalms 115-118, as well as Psalm 136. I recall looking into these once already as regards their use in this Last Supper setting. However, there is definite value in considering them again.
I am uncertain as to whether the full set of these Psalms was sung at meal’s end, after the final cup, or whether we should be looking specifically at Psalm 136. I suspect the latter, particularly given that the singing mentioned here is typically applied to a song in the singular, rather than a suite of songs in the plural. But, if those others were not the immediate object of the singing before us, neither were they very far into the past as this meal concludes. Given what lies immediately ahead for Jesus, I have to think these Psalms took on a particular poignancy for Him.
Let me consider just a few brief declarations made by those who sang these Psalms. I consider, for example, the opening verse of Psalm 115: “Not to us, Lord, but to Your name be the glory!” We can hear the influence of that on that great High Priestly prayer of Jesus. “Glorify the Son that He may glorify You” (Jn 17:1). Then, from Psalm 116, we have this: “Return to your rest, O my soul, for the Lord is bountiful towards you” (Ps 116:7). Again, this is echoed after its fashion in that great prayer. “I am no more in the world” (Jn 17:11). His soul is already resting in God’s bounty, even as He considers what lies ahead. To be sure, there remains that agony of prayer in Gethsemene, yet this rest remains in Him.
And how these words must have buoyed Him going through those events that awaited! “God is for me! I will not fear, for what can man do to me” (Ps 118:6)? Well, there is that which they could and would certainly do to the flesh, but to the being, to the essence of our Lord? No. There is nothing that man nor devil could do! And thus, for the joy set before Him, He endured the cross (Heb 12:2). He knew the One Who was the sole proper object of fear, and that a reverent fear rather than servile. “Fear the One who after He has killed has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear Him” (Lk 12:5)! His own words, and how He must cling to that internal certitude that this was, indeed, the way of it as He faced what lay ahead. If ever there was a time when it was necessary to really and truly hold these truths self-evident, and not mere matters of philosophical knowledge, this was it!
Then there is this, from farther along in Psalm 118. “The Lord has disciplined me severely. But! He has not given me over to death” (Ps 118:18). How this was fulfilled in our Savior! How clearly He has proclaimed this throughout His ministry. “I have the authority to lay it down and the authority to take it back up again.” Death is not in control, nor that sin which is death’s cause, nor satan who fashions himself ruler of death’s domain. Death does not have authority or power. God does, and His power and authority are fully invested in His Son. How Jesus must have needed the power of this message on this night! How they must have strengthened Him as He faced Pilate. Indeed, there is the sound of that strengthening in His words to Pilate. “You would have no authority over Me, unless it were given you from above” (Jn 19:11). Pilate may have heard reference to Caesar in those words, but the true object from whence all authority is God, and it is to Him that Jesus assuredly referred.
Finally, as concerns these earlier songs, consider this message, which would make such solid impression upon the Apostles, and upon us. “The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief corner stone” (Ps 118:22). This is just what was happening now. This is what was being fulfilled on the ultimate Passover. The Apostles would witness just how firmly He was rejected, and they would also witness His installation as that corner stone. Never has He been shifted from that position since! No, nor ever shall be. Upon this Rock, He has built His church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Mt 16:18). Indeed, to Your name the glory, Lord! And, oh! How I love those words that follow the setting of the cornerstone by our God and Father: “This is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes” (Ps 118:23)!
Indeed, it is marvelous! Oh, my God: That You had spoken these things to generations on end, and yet they remained hidden until the fullness of time had come. And then, there in Jerusalem, amongst a people so determinedly unfit for such blessings, You set Your cornerstone. You made a way where there was and is no way. You saw our incapacity for righteousness and rather than give up on us, You instead turned around and blessed us, atoned for us, gave up Your very Son, causing Him to know the agony that was rightly ours to bear – an infinity of sorrow though it spanned but a moment. Truly, as these Psalms shout out of You, Your lovingkindness is everlasting! This is all that keeps us. This is our strength and our song, for You are our strength and our song. What shall we sing, but that Your lovingkindness is everlasting.
You have shown me compassion, and I cannot find cause for that except that You decided to do so. You have been merciful where I deserved only wrath. Thank You, Lord! You saw my sins and rather than washing me away by flood that Your creation might be purified of my stain, You instead washed me from my sins. And Lord, how it pains me, that I seem so determined to muddy myself again and again in spite of this washing. Oh, I know! I am clean, for You have made me so. Yet, I hate this agony of soul, this constant failing to remain upright when once You have set me on my feet. I hate the very thought that my actions might still be adding to the weight of sorrow my Savior has borne for me. And yet, these very things I do. Father, forgive me. It amazes me that You can. It amazes me further that You assure me that You will, and that You will not only forgive me, but will even make me whole, though on Your timetable and not my own. Thank You, yet again, for Your lovingkindness is indeed everlasting, and how I need that!
So, we arrive at that final song, the Hallel, which points us to Psalm 136. What power this ought to have upon those who give it voice! Twenty six times comes the refrain: “For his lovingkindness is everlasting.” Don’t yield to any temptation to find hidden meaning in the count. It is not the number of repetitions that should strike us, but the degree of repetition by which God drives this point home for us. If the threefold repetition of, “Holy, holy, holy,” is intended to proclaim the superlative holiness of our God, how ought we to take this drumbeat of remembrance? How seriously ought we to take note of His eternal lovingkindness towards us?
And, we are not just given the repetitive statement to speak as some sort of mantra. No! We are given reason after reason for recognizing that eternal lovingkindness. We are pointed to heaven and to earth to see His chesed on display. We are directed to consider our past and to consider our future to observe all those occasions in which He has made His chesed evident to us. God of gods, Lord of lords, worker of wonders and maker of heaven and earth and all which populates them: This is the One whose lovingkindness, Whose chesed, never ceases towards us! Yes, He spread the heavens, fashioned the earth, determined the structure and nature of every creature that would roam the earth, numbering their days. And, He has not been some absent clockmaker god, setting things in motion and then stepping back to watch the fun. No! He has taken a personal interest in His own! His chesed is everlasting! He destroyed the power of Egypt on your behalf. He moved oceans aside on your behalf. He leads you. Though your path be through the wilderness, though it seem that your meanderings have covered a lifetime, yet He has been leading you every step of the way. Kings have been dispossessed to make a place for you to dwell and to prosper. They held the land for at time, but only in trust. It has been taken back from them for your heritage, your future. He has remembered us! (He has never forgotten us.) He has seen us when we were brought low, and He has rescued us. Yes, He rescued us from our adversaries, and from our Adversary. He even rescues us from ourselves, perhaps primarily from ourselves.
All of these reinforce the reality of our God towards us. His lovingkindness is everlasting. We cannot think our way back to a time before He held us as objects of His lovingkindness, nor shall we find a time in future where His lovingkindness towards us has ceased. In no moment of life has this ever changed. Oh, we have known the hand of discipline. What, after all, were those forty years in the wilderness about? For what cause exile? Yet, the Truth stands: His lovingkindness is eternal.
I am struck all the more by the closing verses of this great Hallel. “He gives food to all flesh, for His lovingkindness is everlasting.” This is, of course, true in the simply realities of physical life. Tuesday evening, some few of us sat on the curb of our church, praying there by the side of the meadow alongside as the birds flitted about from shrub to tree to roof, and sang their songs. It was a rather wonderful moment, and a sweet place to be communing with our Lord and King. And, it was a powerful reminder of this very point, that He provides. Do birds know concern for their next meal? Are their brains capable of such thought or emotion? I don’t know, but I don’t believe so. They are in this degree blessed to comprehend God more fully than we tend to do. He gives food to all flesh. How merciful is that? Even those who would be shouting their condemnation of the One sent to save them, even those who would drive the nails through His hands, who would be gambling over His garments, who would shower Him in derision as He hung in final agony; even these, our God gives food. Truly, His lovingkindness is not only everlasting, but magnificent beyond our capacity to truly comprehend.
And then, this final note: Give thanks to the God of heaven, for His lovingkindness is everlasting! How those words must have rung in their ears as they departed this upper room to return to their camp on the hill beyond Jerusalem’s walls. They had a reasonable walk ahead of them to get there, and they had little enough by which to mark out what they would consider their camp, not even a bedroll to soften the ground upon which they would soon be sleeping, if only briefly. Yet, had not these last three years proven the truth of this Psalm? He had seen them fed, had seen them provisioned. Every need had been met and then some! Did they think back upon those occasions where the masses had been provisioned when no provision was in sight? Did they reflect upon that first miracle that had come about in Cana? Did they find themselves engulfed in thoughts of those heavens beneath which they walked their way back to Gethsemene?
I can think of but one occasion when I began to glimpse the full magnificence of the Milky Way overhead, and it is a truly awesome spectacle. Perhaps they had seen this so often that it failed to impress in its familiarity, but I find that hard to imagine. That sky is so fantastic, so filled with details to keep the eye’s interest. With the words of this Psalm ringing in their ears, knowing as they did that they walked this road beside the very One Who had set all that splendor in place, and by Whose power they maintained their place, is it really possible that they were not enveloped in reverential awe, wrapped within the echoing phrases of this final song? How I would that I could feel the full majesty of that which is said within the verses of that great Hallel. How I need to establish that same sort of record for myself, that long list of all that God has done on my behalf from His endless wealth of lovingkindness towards me. How would I be strengthened to know from that record the certitude that His eternal lovingkindness continues to uphold me, and will do so to the end? The Lord is with me. Whom shall I fear? For His lovingkindness is everlasting!
God! Embed this reality within my thought, within my essence! Is this not of a piece with that determination You have that I shall be one with You? Is this not my very heritage in You, that I shall not only know Your chesed never ceases towards me, but that I believe it, I live it, I have it as so ingrained a piece of my own character that I would necessarily have to cease existing were I to even think it otherwise. May any thought of abandonment be unthinkable in me, and may (oh, how I would that this were present reality!) any thought of offending Your majesty, Your holiness, be equally unthinkable in me. Holy God of heaven, You have washed me, and I know that by Your washing I am clean. Yet, these feet of mine seem incapable of remaining so for more than the briefest of moments. But, this I know: Your lovingkindness is everlasting. Cleanse me with hyssop and I shall be clean. Yet, You have proclaimed me clean in Your sight, and this is enough for me. For, You would not lie. No. If You have said it, it is. Though I may not see it in my present, yet in Your presence, I stand complete. In You. In Your eternal chesed I am held. What else is there to say to all this other than, Thank You. May Your praises ring out in all creation, and may Your name be glorified forever and ever. Amen!
