By: Gen. Jim – 8/22/25
Matthew begins chapter 23 with Jesus speaking to His disciples & to the multitudes. He begins with a general criticism of the “scribes & Pharisees, vs.2, following up with 7 WOES, vss.13-33; “Woe unto you, scribes & Pharisees, hypocrites…” Jesus, the Lamb of God, criticized the nation’s religious leaders & AROUSED OPPOSITION so BITTER that it led to His death!
The truth is, Jesus did not always disagree with the Pharisees, i.e. certain individuals He was in agreement with. Note vs.3, “All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe & do…” According to Jesus the scribes & Pharisees were not teaching falsehoods but they did not practice what they preached. There were a fair share of HYPOCRITES within their circle. Was hypocrisy the primary characteristic of the scribes and Pharisees? “The scribes are actually in a position of authority, & in so far as they teach what God intends, they are to be obeyed. But their actual rulings on cases, & therefore their practices, are not always the true law.” (Israel Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism & the Gospels, 2nd ser., Cambridge: Univ. Press, 1924, pp.29-32).
Jesus’ condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees was not in an absolutely sweeping castigation: but He was not afraid to call out the sheer hypocrisy among them. Jesus’ anger was a righteous anger, a burning indignation that was always rooted in divine love. (example: “And when He (Jesus) had looked round about on them (men in the synagogue) with ANGER, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts…” – Mk. 3:5. This ANGER was justified: the “religious men” were watching Jesus to see if he would heal (on the sabbath) the man with a withered hand – no pity whatsoever! Note what follows after Jesus heals the cripple: “And the Pharisees went forth, & straightway took counsel with the Herodians against Him, how they might destroy Him,” vs.6).
Apropos
“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat & swallow a camel.” – Mt. 23:24
Just what did Jesus mean by this? One scholar observed: “Jesus’ point… it is in the grotesquely humorous style that He adopted.” According to Judaism, both gnat & camel were unclean!; in their eagerness to avoid a tiny defilement the Pharisees are polluted by a huge one. “Strain at” is a typographical error for “strain out”. The Eng. printers, not the King James translators, are to blame for it, many explain. (We wonder what the original said? But there are only originals off the originals.)
Was Jesus at fault in His “WOE” attack? Well, to those who honor the “niceties” of form & forget the necessities of the godly life, yes! To us today this seems a bit over the top. The punctilios of the Pharisees seem so remote that we may easily assure that the WOES has no meaning for us. It may have been ancient, but it is also modern – at least it would be right in God’s sight if there were men of God who would obey the Spirit’s dealings with today’s backslidden Church.
Religious men in those days turned religion into scrupulosity as they also do today.
Ye Strain, Ye Swallow
In the common translation this conveys no sense. To us today this seems strange. Some Bible scholars believe it was an error of the press, “at” for “out”, which, on examination they find it escaped in the 1611 edition (KJV). I’m looking at translations – Eng. & Latin – where the words read: “… which strain out a gnat…” not “at”. In Edmund Beckse’s Bible, printed in London 1549, & in several others, the word “out” is used.
There is an Arabic proverb that says, “He eats an elephant & is choked by a gnat.”
Mt. 23:24 involves an Aramaic play on words. “Gnat” is “qalmā” & “camel” is “gamlā”. The point is the same as in the previous vs.: they scrupulously obey legal minutiae but flagrantly disobey the law’s central tenents.
[note: there were Jewish sects in Jesus’ day such as Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, & Zealots].
The straining out of gnats refers to the practice of straining wine through a cloth or fine wicker basket (see Mishnah, Shabbath 20:2, Danby, p.117 [note: the Mishnah (Heb.) (oral) instruction, the first part of the Taemud, containing traditional oral interpretations of scriptural ordinances, compiled by the rabbis around A.D. 200]
It appears from the Talmud (Chullin 67a) that an insect called by the Jews Yabchush was thus removed from the wine, & there is evidence that it was believed that this small creature was generated in the dregs of wine & in the mass of pressed grapes in the winepress. The ground for filtering the wine so carefully is Lev. 11:41 = “abomination”.
The camel also is an unclean beast (Lev. 11:4). The saying then pillories the elaborate precautions taken in minor matters & the carelessness about BIG things.
Like other sayings in the Gospels, it is hyperbolical.
So, the condemnation was that the S/P picked at tiny things, yet let the big things go by.
When we spent 5 years in a Pentecostal Church, we saw this kind of “spirit”. The ladies could not wear pants. If their dress did not fall below the knee (the law!), a big deal was made. Yet these same ladies had tongues half-a-mile long when it came to gossip!
Gnat: Gk, kōnōps (κώνωψ) denotes the wine-gnat or midge, which breeds in fermenting or evaporating wine.
Camel: Gk., kemēlos (κάμηλος), from a Hebrew word signifying a bearer, carrier, is used in Proverbs to indicate 1) something almost or altogether impossible (Mt. 19:24 “… it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God.”); 2) the acts of a person who is careful not to sin in trivial details, but pays no heed to more important matters.
Fin
I think we get the word picture of Mt. 23. Jesus reproved the S/P for their foolish living. He shows us what is important; not what we think is important.
Do we actually believe what He says in Mt. 23:33? “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?”