This week I went to mass with my Girlfriend, who is a catholic, and the account of the crucifixion found in Matthew was read. One verse in particular stuck out to both of us. It’s found in chapter twenty-seven. I’m sure many of you are familiar with it. It’s known as “the bood curse:”
In the greek it reads:
Ιδων δε ο Πιλατος οτι ουδεν ωφελει αλλα μαλλον θορυβος γινεται, λαβων υδωρ απενιψατο τας χειρας απεναντι του οχλου, λεγων αθωος ειμι απο του αιματος του δικαιου τουτου; υμεις οψεσθε. Και αποκριθεις πας ο λαος ειπεν, το αιμα αυτου εφ ημας και επι τα τεκνα ημων.
Or in English:
When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. "I am innocent of this man's blood," he said. "It is your responsibility!" All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" (NIV)
Note the bold text.
The words stood out to me because this week I had been having a conversation about the gospel of Matthew with a Jewish friend of mine who insists that the New Testament is inherently Anti-Semitic, and that I simply use my finely tuned exegetical prowess to reinterpret clear passages to mean other things.
I tend to believe that the New Testament is clearly not Anti-Semitic, but has become so saturated by diabolical hermeneutics over the centuries that his perspective as a Jew necessarily sees the text with instinctual apprehension.
The blood curse is one passage in which these two views are thrown into sharp relief.
This passage has had some very dark uses throughout Christian history. However it has not used to condemn Jews in the Christian church until hundreds of years after it was written.
Is this passage meant to be Anti-Semitic?
To my girlfriend the passage stuck out for a completely different reason. For her is seemed almost a prophesy unbeknownst to the speakers. It seemed a subtle reference to Exodus 24:8, in which Moses sprinkles blood on the people ratifying the old covenant.
She saw the verse as a foreshadowing to the sacrifice of blood that Jesus was about to make to bring all people in the new covenant which is in Christ.
This view can also make sense.
In Revelation 7 there is reference to being made white by the blood of the lamb (meaning Jesus).
Look also to Hebrews chapter nine starting at verse thirteen.
The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
There seems to be a consistent theme throughout the New Testament in which having Jesus blood on you is pretty much the best thing ever.
I asked my friend Scot who teaches over at North Park University what he thought about it and he said.
"The text is not anti-Semitic; it is written by a Jew (Matthew) who wanted Jews to believe in Jesus as Messiah. So, it is "intra-Jewish" debate. That text, though, has been used to justify monstrosities so it needs to be treated with utter sensitivity today. The text, rather innocently and typical Middle Eastern hyperbole, says "Jesus is wrong; we'll take responsibility for him." It's got that sense about it. But not now."
How about what you guys think...
Why did Matthew include this little narrative? What was he trying to get at?
I’m opening the floor to you guys!! Let me know what you think in the comments section!
