Hypocrites 2 - Matt 23:23-36

Going back just a little bit, the IM gives a very good chart on what it describes as “a series of eight ‘woes’ that would befall the scribes and Pharisees because of their hypocritical actions.” The concept of “woe” is an interesting one, I knew that it discussed harsh conditions but hadn’t really understood the definition, which the IM gives as “the word woe means a condition of misery, distress, and sorrow resulting from great affliction or misfortune.” The IM then gives a chart of “actions of the scribes and Pharisees identified as Hypocrisy:

Verse 13 – They not only rejected Christ, His Church, and His offer of salvation, but they also sought to prevent others from accepting Christ and salvation.” They tried to prevent Christ’s popularity and acceptance by the people by killing him, thus taking away his chance to teach. They tried to trap him in his words, to discredit him in front of the people, they shunned people from their community who accepted Him, and then they persecuted and killed those who accepted Him after his death.
Verse 14 – “They were greedy and materialistic, and they preyed upon the misfortunes of others.” As heads of the religion of the true and living God, the scribes and Pharisees should have lived as the Savior, or King Benjamin, or other righteous people. They should have supported themselves with their own hands, they should have served others, they should have cared for the poor, and strengthened the testimony of others. But instead they did the opposite, they took advantage where they could, and they used religion as a cover for thievery.
Verse 15 – “They were recruiting souls to false beliefs.” This is something that we didn’t discuss yesterday but it was from verse 15 which reads, “woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” One place I read said that this proselyte isn’t converting gentiles into Jews, but in converting Jews into Pharisees. It takes a certain type of person to be a Pharisees. I feel it takes a very specific type of person to live a life style in which you pretend to be religious but in actuality starve old people, humiliate those who aren’t compliant, and figuratively rub salt into the open wounds of the sick. I don’t know if I’d necessarily call them psychopaths because that implies that they were born that way and can’t do anything about it. I definitely think that this type of lifestyle appeals to someone who’s psychopathically inclined, but I think that most of the people weren’t born with an inability to be sympathetic to others, but develop that character trait throughout a lifetime of alienating themselves from the Spirit and making poor choices.
I wonder if it’s like the ultimate MLM, if you recruit someone who trains to become a Pharisee, then they have to share the wealth they procure with you for a certain period of time or something like that. They probably scoured the countryside looking for those individuals who would take to their training and then maximize their profits. Actually I guess if you think about it, all the money that the Pharisees can get goes to the temple treasury, which is where they draw their own pay from. So if you want more money, then you would have to find other people to be in your club that could also pull in big revenue. You wouldn’t want to have someone making you money that wanted to give that money to the poor or wouldn’t really put the screws to some old widow in order to take her house. That wouldn’t be profitable, you’d be looking for someone just like you. Interesting. Then once this “special” type of person was found and trained by the Pharisees, the new recruit becomes twice as evil as the original trainer. I wonder if this implies a judgment against the mentor when evil is passed on between teacher and student.
Verse 16-22 – “Through their oaths, they gave more reverence to the gold and furnishings of the temple than to the Lord, whom the temple honors.” It would make sense that a materialistic person would be more fixated on the gold finishes of the building that they work in than the actual work that goes on. Working in the temple probably wouldn’t have been as prestigious if it had been a tented tabernacle like Moses used.
Verse 23 – “They obeyed rules but ignored the more important doctrines and principles the rules were based on.” Verse 23 cites that the Pharisees paid their tithing in “mint and anise and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these out ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.” Interestingly, I bet the Pharisees had cash to pay their tithing with, but to pay with spices, I wonder at the significance of that, if they were just being stingy. Following the rules without consideration for the purpose of the rules is the exact reason that people will not drink and drive but will do drugs and then drive, “hey I wasn’t drinking, you can’t get me for a DUI” after they’ve just killed four people.
Verse 24 continues, “Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” The IM gives background saying, “This was a reference to the practice of some Jewish leaders who carefully strained their drinking water to avoid mistakenly swallowing the smallest of unclean animals. Yet they would symbolically swallow a camel- the largest of unclean animals.” It seems to be that the Pharisees were more interested in keeping the external commandments and ignoring the “inside” commandments. They wouldn’t outright lie, but would make up reasons why it would be acceptable to break their word. The IM quotes President James E. Faust as teaching, “Jesus introduced a higher and more difficult standard of human conduct. It is simpler as well as more difficult because it focuses on internal rather than external requirements: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Love your neighbor as yourself. When smitten, turn the other cheek. When asked for a coat, give your cloak also. Forgive, not just once but seventy times seven. This was the essence of the new gospel. There was more emphasis on do than do not. More moral agency was given to each of us.”
The IM also quoted Elder Lynn G. Robbins as teaching, “While He recognized the importance of do, the Savior identified be as a ‘weightier matter.’ The greater importance of being is illustrated in the following examples: (1) Entering the waters of baptism is something we do. The be that must preced it is faith in Jesus Christ and a mighty change of heart. (2) Partaking of the sacrament is something we do. Being worthy to partake of the sacrament is a weightier and must more important matter. (3) Ordination to the priesthood is an act, or do. The weightier matter, however, is power in the priesthood, which is based ‘upon the principles of righteousness.’” It’s easy to see how just doing these things, being baptized, taking the sacrament, and performing priesthood ordinances could make someone think that they are doing the right things, when in actuality, they are not only doing wickedly, but condemning themselves even further because they are mocking God. It’s like the 16 year old boy who drinks and has random sex on Saturday night and then blesses the sacrament the next morning. Or the Relief Society president who hits her kids and takes pills. No one is perfect but if we are judged simply on what we do, then it would be easy to believe that we are perfect because it is possible to “do” all the “do” things. Just because I don’t lie or commit adultery or steal or murder doesn’t mean I’m perfect, and honestly, it probably just means that that I’m barely a good person. The “do not” rules are pretty straightforward and reflect an external level of commitment, but the “do” rules require more deep digging, more reflection, and more becoming.
Verse 25-28 – “They hid internal greed and self-indulgence beneath an exterior show of righteousness. They looked clean and good on the outside, but on the inside they were full of corruption and spiritual decay.” This is a problem for a couple of different reasons. First is the example that it sets. If someone is supposed to be our leader, we will find it easier to do what they do, that’s one of the reasons that the Book of Mormon prophets lamented the people having a king, because a righteous king will do well for the people, but an iniquitous king will encourage the people to sin and can only be overthrown through much bloodshed. Leaders make a difference, look at our society today. We are divided over things that have been smoothed over for years, and just because the leader says it’s ok to hate and blame and adulterate. Suddenly everyone who feels so inclined is protected in doing whatever the leader is doing. No one forces anyone else to do anything, contrary to what Satan tells us, so as much as I’d like to lay all the blame for our problems at the feet of our leader, I can’t, it’s contrary to the law of agency. We all have to make our own choices, but poor leadership contributes to poor morality among the people.
The analogy that the Savior used to demonstrate this point is that of “whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” This is quite a bold comparison because of the Pharisees’ detain for dead bodies, it would have been most offensive. The IM comments, “It was common during New Testament times to apply a white finish to the exterior of tombs, thus making the exterior look clean, while the dead body decayed within. No amount of exterior polish could abate what was happening on the inside.” The outward observances are important, really, they can just be a manifestation of what’s going on inside, but not always. That’s one of the problems that we have with comparing ourselves to others, we compare what we know is going on inside with what we see going on outside of other people. This is also an especially poignant analogy because the Pharisees were spiritually dead inside, murders, thieves, and adulterers.  
Verse 29-30 – “They rejected living prophets while claiming allegiance to dead prophets.” There are a couple of reasons that this statement is important. The first point comes to us from the IM which says, “His words clearly implied that He was Jehovah of the old Testament, and that He is the one who directs the inspired priesthood leaders of all ages. He was referring to those prophets who were sent to save the Jews and who would be persecuted and killed as a result of their efforts, including Himself and His Apostles.” It’s much easier to fulfill your own purposes when all you have is writing and tradition, because you can just change the “interpretation” of the writings and change the tradition to fit whatever ends you are working towards. The second point is that the message of the ancient prophets and those prophets at the time of Christ were the same, but by aligning themselves with the dead prophets, they could hold them up as martyrs to the people and exclude themselves from the condemnation of the alive ones by just citing the ancient texts. As the religious leadership, the Pharisees should have known the law and its purpose better than anyone else, and lived in a way that would inspire others to believe in Christ, but they did just the opposite. They used their positions to commit grievous sin and to take advantage of those who are less fortunate.