text:
Matthew 21:23-27
The Authority of Jesus Questioned
When He had come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to Him as He was teaching, and said, "By what authority do you do these things? Who gave You this authority?"
Jesus answered them, "I also will ask you one question, which if you tell me, I likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, where was it from? From heaven or from men?"
They reasoned with themselves, saying, "If we say, 'From heaven,' He will ask us, 'Why then did you not believe Him?' But if we say, 'From men,' we fear the multitude, for all hold John
as a prophet." They answered Jesus, and said, "We don't know."
He also said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.
Why did Jesus answer a question with a question, rather than just telling the Pharisees by what authority He acted?
Matthew 21:23-27; Mark 11:27-33; Luke 20:1-8
23. And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and elders of the people came to him, saying By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee that authority? 2323 "Et qui est celuy qui t'a donné ceste authorité?" — "And who is he that gave thee that authority?"24. And Jesus answering said to them, I also will ask you something, which if you shall tell me, I also will tell you by what authority I do these things. 25. Whence was the baptism of John? From heaven, or from men? But they thought within themselves saying, If we shall say, From heaven, he will say to us, Why then did you not believe him? 26. But if we shall say, From men, we dread the multitude, for they all hold John for a prophet. 27. And answering Jesus, they said, We do not know. And he saith to them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.
27. And they come again to Jerusalem; and while he was walking in the temple, the chief priests, and scribes, and elders, come to him. 28. And they say to him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee that authority 2424 "Et qui est celuy qui t'a donné ceste authorité?" — "And who is he that gave thee that authority?" to do these things? 29. And Jesus answering said to them, I will also ask you something, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. 30. Whether was the baptism of John from heaven or from men? Answer me. 31. And they thought within themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven, he will say, Why then did you not believe him?32. But if we say, From men, they dreaded the people; 2525 "Nous craignous le peuple;" — "we dread the people." for all reckoned John that he was truly a prophet. 33. And they answering say to Jesus, We do not know. And Jesus answering saith to them, Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.
1. And it happened on one of those days, while he was teaching the people in the temple, and preaching the gospel, the chief priests, and scribes, with the elders, came upon him, 2. And spoke to him saying, Tell us, by what authority doest thou these things? or who is he that gave thee that authority? 3. And Jesus answering said to them, I will also ask you something, and answer me. 4. Was the baptism of John from heaven, or from men? 5. But they reasoned within themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven, he will say, Why then did you not believe him?6. But if we shall say, From men, all the people will stone us; for they are convinced that John is a prophet. 7. And they answered, That they did not know whence it was.8. And Jesus said to them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.
Matthew 21:23. By what authority doest thou these things. As the other schemes and open attempts to attack Christ had not succeeded, the priests and scribes now attempt, by indirect methods, if they may possibly cause Him to desist from the practice of teaching. They do not debate with Him as to the doctrine itself, whether it was true or not—for already had they often enough attacked Him in vain on that question—but they raise a dispute as to His calling and commission. And, indeed, there were plausible grounds; for since a man ought not, of His own accord, to intermeddle either with the honor of priesthood, or with the prophetical office, but ought to wait for the calling of God, much less would any man be at liberty to claim for himself the title of Messiah, unless it were evident that He had been chosen by God; for He must have been appointed, not only by the voice of God, but likewise by an oath, as it is written, (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 7:21.)
But when the divine majesty of Christ had been attested by so many miracles, they act maliciously and wickedly in inquiring whence He came, as if they had been ignorant of all that He had done. For what could be more unreasonable than that., after seeing the hand of God openly displayed in curing the lame and blind, they should doubt if He were a private individual who had rashly assumed this authority? Besides, more than enough of evidence had been already laid before them, that Christ was sent from heaven, so that nothing was farther from their wish than to approve of the performances of Christ, after having learned that God was the Author of them. They therefore insist on this., that he is not a lawful minister of God, because He had not been chosen by their votes, as if the power had dwelt solely with them. But though they had been the lawful guardians of the Church, still it was monstrous to rise up against God. We now understand why Christ did not make a direct reply to them. It was because they wickedly and shamelessly interrogated Him about a matter which was well known.
25 Whence was the baptism of John? Christ interrogates them about the baptism of John, not only to show that they were unworthy of any authority, because they had despised a holy prophet of God, but also to convict them, by their own reply, of having impudently pretended ignorance of a matter with which they were well acquainted. For we must bear in mind why John was sent, what was his commission, and on what subject he most of all insisted. He had been sent as Christ's herald. He was not deficient in his duty, and claims nothing more for Himself than toprepare the way of the Lord.
(Malachi 3:1; Luke 7:27.)
In short, he had pointed out Christ with the finger, and had declared Him to be the only Son of God. From what source then do the scribes mean that the new authority of Christ should be proved, since it had been fully attested by the preaching of John?
We now see that Christ employed no cunning stratagem in order to escape, but fully and perfectly answered the question which had been proposed; for it was impossible to acknowledge that John was a servant of God, without acknowledging that He was Himself the Lord. He did not therefore shelter arrogant men, "Ainsi done Christ n'a point voulu yei armer de response des glorieux et outrecuidez;" — "so then Christ did not intend here to arm, by His reply, haughty and presumptuous men." who without any commission, but out of their own hardihood, take upon themselves a public office; nor did He countenance, by His example, the art of suppressing the truth, as many crafty men falsely plead His authority. If wicked men lay snares for us, we ought not always to reply in the same way, but ought to be prudently on our guard against their malice, yet in such a manner that truth may not be left without a proper defense.
Baptism denotes here not only the sign of washing, but the whole ministry of John; for Christ intended to draw out a reply, Was John a true and lawful prophet of God, or an impostor? Yet this mode of expression contains a useful doctrine, Is the of John from God, or from men? For hence we infer, that no doctrine and no sacrament ought to be received among the godly, unless it be evident that it has come from God; and that men are not at liberty to make any invention of this nature. The discourse relates to John, whom our Lord, in another passage, raises, by a remarkable commendation, above all the prophets, (Luke 7:26, 28.) Yet Christ declares that His baptism ought not to be received, unless it had been enjoined by God. What, then, must we say of the pretended sacraments, which men of no authority have foolishly introduced without any command from God? For Christ plainly declares by these words, that the whole government of the Church depends on the will of God in such a manner, that men have no right to introduce anything from themselves.
But they thought within themselves. Here we perceive the impiety of the priests. They do not inquire what is true, nor do they put the question to their own conscience; "Et n'examinent point la chose selon leur conscience;"—" and do not examine the thing according to their conscience." and they are so base as to choose rather to shuffle than to acknowledge what they know to be true, that their tyranny may not be impaired. In this manner, all wicked men, though they pretend to be desirous of learning, shut the gate of truth, if they feel it to be opposed to their wicked desires. So then Christ does not allow those men to go without a reply, but sends them away ashamed and confounded, and, by bringing forward the testimony of John, sufficiently proves that He is furnished with divine power. "Qu'il est muni et authorizé d'une puissance divine;" — "that He is furnished and authorized by a divine power."
23 "Et qui est celuy qui t'a donné ceste authorité?" — "And who is He that gave thee that authority?"
24 "Et qui est celuy qui t'a donné ceste authorité?" — "And who is He that gave thee that authority?"
25 "Nous craignous le peuple;" — "we dread the people."
26 "Ainsi done Christ n'a point voulu yei armer de response des glorieux et outrecuidez;" — "so then Christ did not intend here to arm, by his reply, haughty and presumptuous men."
27 "Et n'examinent point la chose selon leur conscience;"—" and do not examine the thing according to their conscience."
28 "Qu'il est muni et authorizé d'une puissance divine;" — "that he is furnished and authorized by a divine power."
Commentary on Matthew 21:23-27
As with the First Reading, the Gospel also deals with the issue of authority. It is clear that the way Jesus used to teach was a source of disquiet among many of the Jewish religious leaders. They approach Him one day in the Temple and ask Him, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" Jesus seldom directly answers provocative questions put to Him and in this case, as He does elsewhere, He answers with a question of His own. If they will answer His question, He will answer theirs.
His question is, "Was the baptism of John the Baptist of divine or human origin?" Immediately His questioners are in a dilemma. If they answer "divine", they will be further asked why they did not receive John's baptism. We know that when John was baptizing they came to observe but they themselves clearly felt no need to be baptized themselves. To do so would have been to put themselves on the same level as the sinful and the unclean.
If they were to answer "human", then they would run the risk of offending the people who had no doubts about the matter. They all held that "John was a prophet". Lamely they answer, "We do not know." So Jesus refuses to reply to their question.
Ultimately the leaders were being accused of a stubborn blindness, unable and unwilling to see the hand of God either in the mission of Jesus or of John. They could not see that the authority with which Jesus spoke clearly resided in Himself. He was not just the bearer of a message; He was Himself the source of the message.
Perhaps a word about "authority" may be relevant here. The word comes from the Latin auctoritas, which is itself an abstract noun from the verb augere. Augere means "to increase, make bigger". We find the same verb in the word "author".
A person with 'authority' is not just someone who wields coercive power over others. The exercise of genuine authority is not to control, to keep in line but, on the contrary, to be an agent in releasing the potential that is in people, to be an empowering agent. Jesus did not wield coercive authority. He invited people to follow Him. He came to serve not be served. He came to give life, life in its fullness. He came to lead people into the full development of all they could be and were meant to be.
He did this dramatically when He got down on His knees and washed the feet of His disciples. This was an act of authority – the authority of outreaching love. It is up to each one to decide whether to follow the way of love or to go one's own way.
Perhaps each one of us could examine how we exercise authority in our own lives – as parents, teachers, employers, or in any capacity where we have some responsibility with regard to others. Very few of us have no authority at all.
1) Opening prayer
Lord our God, in a world of injustice, war and exploitation, in which more and more people
have the means to live but not many reasons to live for, you promise us a star to follow, Jesus, your Son.
God, keep in us the hope alive that He will come today and that, if we are willing to take the demands of the Gospel seriously, we can become indeed a new people completely renewed in Christ, our Savior forever and ever. Amen
2) Matthew 21,23-27
Jesus had gone into the Temple and was teaching, when the chief priests and the elders of the people came to Him and said, 'What authority have you for acting like this? And who gave you this authority?'
In reply Jesus said to them, 'And I will ask you a question, just one; if you tell me the answer to it, then I will tell you My authority for acting like this.
John's baptism: what was its origin, heavenly or human?' And they argued this way among themselves, 'If we say heavenly, He will retort to us, "Then why did you refuse to believe him?"; but if we say human, we have the people to fear, for they all hold that John was a prophet.'
So their reply to Jesus was, 'We do not know.' And He retorted to them, 'Nor will I tell you My authority for acting like this.'
3) Reflection
• The Gospel today describes the conflict that Jesus had with the religious authority of the time, after that He drove out the merchants from the Temple. The priests and the elders of the people wanted to know with which authority Jesus was doing those things: to go into the Temple and drive out the merchants (cf. Mt 21, 12-13). The authority considered itself the master of all and thought that nobody could do anything without their permission. This is why they persecuted Jesus and tried to kill Him. Something similar was also happening in the Christian communities of the years seventy-eighty, the time in which the Gospel of Jesus was written. Those who resisted the authority of the Empire were persecuted. There were others, so as not to be persecuted, tried to reconcile Jesus' project, with the project of the Roman Empire (cf. Ga 6, 12).
The description of the conflict of Jesus with the authority of His time was a help for the Christians, so that they could continue fearless in the persecutions and would not allow themselves to be manipulated by the ideology of the Empire. Today, also, some who exercise power, whether in society or in the Church and the family, want to control everything as if they were the masters of all the aspects of the life of the people. They even persecuted those who thought in a different way. Keeping in mind these thoughts and problems, let us read and meditate on today's Gospel.
• Matthew 21, 23: The question of the religious authority to Jesus. "What authority have you for acting like this? And who gave you this authority?" Jesus answered: "And I will ask you a question, just one, if you tell me the answer to it, then I will tell you my authority for acting like this. John's baptism, what was its origin, heavenly or human?
Jesus went back to the Temple. When He taught, the chief priests and the elders of the people went close to Him and asked: With what authority do you do these things? Who has given you this authority?" Jesus again goes around the great square of the Temple. Then appear some priests and elders to question Him. After everything that Jesus had done the day before, they want to know with which authority He does these things. They did not ask which was the true reason which urged Jesus to drive out the merchants from the Temple (cf. Mt 21, 12-13). They only ask with which authority He does those things. They think that they have the right to control everything. They do not want to lose control of things.
• Matthew 21, 24-25ª: The question of Jesus to the authority. Jesus does not refuse answering, but He shows His independence and liberty and says: "I also, will ask you a question, if you tell Me the answer to it, then I will tell you My authority for acting like this. John's baptism, what was its origin, heavenly or human?" This was an intelligent question, simple as a dove and cunning as a serpent! (cf. Mt 10, 16). The question shows the lack of honesty of His enemies. For Jesus, the baptism of John came from heaven, came from God. He himself had been baptized by John (Mt 3, 13-17). The men who had power, on the contrary, had plotted or planned the death of John (Mt 14, 3-12). And in this way they showed that they did not accept the message of John and that they considered His baptism like something from men and not from God.
• Matthew 21, 25b-26: Reasoning of the authority. The priests and the elders were aware of the importance or significance of the question and reasoned in the following way: "If we say heavenly, He will retort to us. Then why did you refuse to believe him? If we answer human, then we have the people to fear, for they all hold that John was a prophet". And therefore, so as not to expose themselves they answered: "We do not know!" This is an opportunist response, a pretence and interested one. Their only interest was not to lose their power over the people. Within themselves they had already decided everything: Jesus should be condemned to death (Mt 12, 14).
• Matthew 21, 27: Final conclusion of Jesus. And Jesus says to them: "Nor will I tell you my authority for acting like this". Their total lack of honesty makes them unworthy to receive an answer from Jesus.
4) Personal questions
• Have you ever felt that you are being controlled without any right, by the authority of the house, in work, in the Church? Which was your reaction?
• We all have some authority. Even in a conversation between two persons, each one has certain power, a certain authority. How do I use the power, how do I exercise authority: to serve and to liberate or to dominate and control?
5) Concluding prayer
Direct me in your ways, Yahweh, and teach me your paths.
Encourage me to walk in your truth and teach me since you are the God who saves me. (Sal 25,4-5)
Commentary on Matthew 21:23-27 by Dr. Knox Chamblin
"Between 21:23 and 22:46 there are recorded five controversies between Jesus and the authorities of Israel's religion. They are presented in the form of question and answer, a method used in connection with controversy material in the Talmud" (Hill, Matthew,296). The other four occur in 22:15-46.
Confronting and opposing Jesus in one or more of these controversies, are all elements of the nation's religious and secular leadership, namely the chief priests (controversy no. 1), the elders (no. 1), the Pharisees (nos. 2, 4 and 5), the Herodians (no. 2), and the Sadducees (no. 3).
II. THE OPENING QUESTION. 21:23. A. The Questioners.
Jesus is questioned by "the chief priests and the elders of the people" (Mk 11:27 includes "the teachers of the law" as well). The chief priests were "high functionaries of the Temple, former high priests [the term used here, archiereus, is used of Caiaphas in 26:3], and members of priestly families - mostly Sadduceean" (Hill, 296). The elders were "in this case probably no priestly members of the Sanhedrin, heads of the most influential lay families" (Carson, 447, following Jeremias, Jerusalem, 222-32, on "the lay nobility"). It is not at all surprising to find chief priests and elders working in concert (see Appendix A.).
B. The Question.
They ask, "By what authority are you doing these things? And who gave you this authority?" This twofold question (the nature of the authority depends on its source) embraces several things (note the plural "these things," tauta): Jesus' teaching ("while He was teaching," v. 23a), His healing miracles (v. 14), and His cleansing of the temple (vv. - 12-13). It is especially this last event that is in view; for the questioners are both directly involved in the workings of the temple and also very concerned about its stability and survival (cf. again Appendix A., on the Sadduceean and the lay view about the seat of power). Note that the "chief priests" were also among those who (on the preceding day) became indignant over Jesus' responses to the blind, the lame, and the children, while in the temple (v. 15).
C. The Motive.
Jesus prophesied that His suffering and death would come about at the hands of "the chief priests and the elders" (16:21; 20:18). Yet this (21:23) is the first time that either group has directly confronted Him; here they do so together. As there is no prior reference in Mt to their antagonism toward Jesus, we shall have to depend on the present passage for glimpses into their attitude toward Him and into their motives for asking the question.
From one standpoint the question is legitimate: "The Sanhedrin was concerned to learn why Jesus [in cleansing the temple] performed what appears to be an official act if He possesses no official status" (Lane, Mark, 413). Whether there are more hostile orsinister motives lurking beneath the surface, we shall have to see.
A. Jesus' Question. 21:25.
Jesus hereby does three things: (1) He makes explicit the fundamental question concerning the source of authority, namely whether it is divine or human. (Were the questioners implying the same thing? or were they more concerned to learn whether Jesus had received the proper human authorization? See below.)
(2) By drawing attention to John the Baptist, He implies that the source of John's authority is the source of His as well.
(3) Thus He further implies that anyone who correctly identifies the source of John's authority (and therefore of His baptism) will thereby identify the source of Jesus' as well.
B. The Effects.
Jesus brings to light His interrogators' true condition.
1. Their pragmatism. Astonishingly, they admit that they are "afraid of the people" (v. 26). This admission reveals something else, namely their belief that John was nothing more than self-authorized. While the people "hold that John was a prophet," they do not; but they refuse to say so, because they fear the people. "That the Jewish leaders admit to themselves their policy of political expedience intensifies their guilt" (Gundry,420).
2. Their unbelief. By their own admission, they "did not believe" John (v. 25). Why should they? For in their eyes his authority is merely human and merely private - whereas theirs is corporate and divine (cf. comments on 15:1-9). Their failure to believe John, reveals in turn their failure to believe Jesus; believing the one would lead inevitably to believing the other (cf. comments on 11:7-19). It is interesting, in view of the leaders' present indignation over Jesus' ministry to the common people (vv. 14-15), to observe the same division in Mt 3: whereas ordinary Israelites confess their sins and receive John's baptism (3:5-6), the Pharisees and Sadducees are the objects of the Baptist's scathing denunciation (vv. 7-10).
3. Their imperceptions. Their unbelief rests on a failure to perceive the divine authority that underlies the ministries of both John and Jesus. This helps to explain Jesus' response. If the questioners recognize the source of John's authority, they will surely recognize the source of His own. But the chief priests and elders, having witnessed the ministries of John and Jesus, have nevertheless failed to recognize that God has authorized both.
This means that even if Jesus had answered the question of v. 23 with the words "God authorized Me," the questioners would have been no closer to faith. That kind of answer would simply provide the occasion for more skepticism ("How do we know that God sent you?") for persons who find it necessary to raise the question of v. 23 in the first place. Bruce comments: "If spiritual authority...is not recognized as self-authenticating, no amount of argument, not even a sign from heaven (cf. 12:38; 16:1) will validate it" (Matthew, 69). Cf. WCOF, Ch. 1, sec. V., on the self-authenticating character of Holy Scripture by virtue of the work of the Holy Spirit.
4. Their hostility. The questioners' attitude toward John, reveals their attitude toward Jesus. To their minds both John and Jesus are self-authorized. From the foregoing, three considerations that the question of v. 23 conceals a hostile intent and a desire to trap Jesus into self-betrayal. (This conclusion gains support from the Markan parallel.
According to Mk 11:27 "the teachers of the law" join the others in questioning Jesus. We know from Mt that these "scribes" have already demonstrated a suspicion and growing antipathy toward Jesus: cf. Mt 9:3; 12:38; 15:1.) By prodding Jesus into an open admission that God has authorized Him, the questioners seek to expose the absurdity of His claim.
For how (they reason) could God possibly authorize such a person to take the action of Mt 21:12-13? Not only does He lack priestly credentials. He has already shown Himself to be the enemy of the Law. The hostility that Jesus exposes, will continue to build until it comes to final expression in the crucifixion (16:21; 20:18; 21:45-46; 26:3-4 etc.).
Authority! - Matthew 21:23-27
Jesus went into the temple area. While Jesus was teaching there, the leading priests and the older leaders of the people came to Jesus. They said to Jesus, "Tell us! What authority (power) do you have to do these things? Who gave you this authority?" Jesus answered, "I will ask you a question too. If you answer Me, then I will tell you what authority I have to do these things. Tell Me: When John baptized people, did that come from God or was it only from other people?" The priests and the Jewish leaders talked about Jesus' question. They said to each other, "If we answer, 'John's baptism was from God,' then Jesus will say, 'Then why didn't you believe John?' But we can't say John's baptism was from someone else. We are afraid of the people, because they all believe that John was a prophet." So they answered Jesus, "We don't know {where John's authority came from}." Then Jesus said, "Then I won't tell you what authority I have to do these things!" (ERV)
Key Thought
"By what authority?" Mmmm ... interesting question isn't it. By what authority did Jesus do all that He does in His ministry? This is the quintessential question of the Gospel. This is the ultimate question each of us must ask. Did Jesus do what He did based on the authority of God, as God's Son? Or was Jesus just another crackpot Messiah? The way we answer that must leave us in no lukewarm and safe place. Either we recognize Jesus as Lord with all authority or we do not. Incredibly, the journey through Jesus' crucifixion is supposed to be the asserting of religious and political authority over a rebellious peasant. In fact, even the trial scenes reveal that Jesus is the only one through all of it who has authority. The real question for us is whether we are ready to submit to that authority!
Today's Prayer
Almighty God, I believe Jesus has all authority. I want to live more and more each day under that authority, yielding to your will and doing your work in the world. In Jesus' precious and powerful name I pray. Amen.
Today's Verses in Context — Matthew 21:12-22
Jesus went into the temple area. He threw out all the people that were selling and buying things there. Jesus turned over the tables that belonged to the men that were exchanging different kinds of money. And Jesus turned over the benches of those men that were selling doves. Jesus said to all the people there, "It is written {in the Scriptures }, 'My house will be called a house for prayer.' But you are changing God's house into a 'hiding place for thieves.' " Some blind people and some crippled people came to Jesus in the temple area. Jesus healed these people. The leading priests and the teachers of the law saw what Jesus did. They saw that Jesus was doing great things and saw the children praising Jesus in the temple area. The children were saying, "Praise to the Son of David. " All these things made the priests and the teachers of the law angry. The leading priests and the teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Do you hear the things these children are saying?" Jesus answered, "Yes. The Scripture says, 'You (God) have taught children and babies to give praise.' Have you not read that Scripture?" Then Jesus left that place and went out of the city to Bethany. Jesus stayed there that night. Early the next morning, Jesus was going back to the city. Jesus was very hungry. Jesus saw a fig tree beside the road. Jesus went to the fig tree {to get a fig to eat}. But there were no figs on the tree. There were only leaves. So Jesus said to the tree, "You will never again have fruit!" And then the tree dried up and died. The followers saw this. They were very surprised. They asked, "How did the fig tree dry up and die so quickly?" Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth. If you have faith and no doubts, you will be able to do the same as I did to this tree. And you will be able to do more. You will be able to say to this mountain, 'Go, mountain, fall into the sea.' And if you have faith, it will happen. If you believe, you will get anything you ask for in prayer."
Jesus' Reasoning in Mark 11:27-33 (Matt 21:23-27; Luke 20:1-8) - By Jeremy Pierce
In Mark 11:27-33 (also related in Matthew 21:23-27 and Luke 20:1-8), Jesus is questioned by the Pharisees, and He seems to ignore their question entirely. What's buried behind His silence is an argument against their authority even to ask the question.
And they came again to Jerusalem. And as He was walking in the temple, the chief priests and the scribes and the elders came to Him, and they said to Him, "By what authority are you doing these things, or who gave you this authority to do them?" Jesus said to them, "I will ask you one question; answer Me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. Was the baptism of John from heaven or from man? Answer Me." And they discussed it with one another, saying, "If we say, 'From heaven,' He will say, 'Why then did you not believe him?' But shall we say, 'From man'? they were afraid of the people, for they all held that John really was a prophet. So they answered Jesus, "We do not know." And Jesus said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things." (Mark 11:27-33, ESV)
The chief priests, scribes, and elders are challenging Jesus' authority, asking Him to testify in their court of law as to what gives Him the authority to do what He's been doing. He could have simply said that His authority comes from God. In other instances, He did as much. What He does in this instance is fairly interesting. He turns their challenge on its head. He asks them where John the Baptist's authority came from. They won't answer the question, because admitting to John's authority from God would mean that the one He explicitly said His ministry was pointing toward must be from God. They can't say what they believe, however, because the people would be mad due to John's popularity. Thus Jesus silences them.
Now this looks like a mere rhetorical trick. I won't answer you unless you answer Me first. That's no argument. I think it's a mistake to see it that way, though. What Jesus has done is itself an argument. They've asked Him a question, challenging His authority and seeking for Him to show that He's from God. He, of course, has already done so through His actions. They don't accept that evidence. That's the real issue here. His question about God brings that forth. The evidence is all out there regarding John. They know what He did. They know what He said. Yet they won't bring themselves to comment on that evidence, the sort of thing a genuine authority should be able to do. They won't allow their own courtroom to evaluate the evidence regarding John. This is despite their obvious opinion that He was not from God. Why should Jesus testify in their courtroom if they're so incompetent as to be unable to evaluate evidence in a reasonable manner and admit their conclusions in the same courtroom?
He has thus identified an inconsistency between their portrayal of their purpose and their actual methods. The argument is against them. He still hasn't answered their question, but He's shown that they have no right to expect an answer from Him until they can perform the job required of those who can ask such questions.
"THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW" Is It From Heaven Or From Men? (21:23-27)
1. While teaching in the temple, Jesus was confronted by the chief priests and elders...
a. They questioned His authority to teach - Mt 21:23
b. Jesus saw through their hypocrisy, and challenged them regarding the authority behind the baptism of John - Mt 21:24-25a
c. Since they would not be honest in their answer, Jesus refused to answer their question - Mt 21:25b-27
2. In the process of exposing their hypocrisy, Jesus revealed an important principle regarding authority in matters of religion...
a. All religious practices must come from one of two sources
b. They come either from heaven, or from men - Mt 23:25
3. What Jesus asked regarding John's baptism, could be asked of many religious practices...
a. Infant baptism
b. Sprinkling or pouring instead of immersion
c. Denominationalism, a clergy-laity distinction
d. The impossibility of apostasy, observing the Sabbath
e. Instrumental music, burning of incense, etc., in our worship
-- Are such practices from heaven, or from men?
In this study, we shall consider how one can know whether a particular religious practice is from heaven, or from man
1. For He has been given all authority - Mt 28:18
2. Both in heaven and on earth
Certainly if Jesus commanded it, it is from heaven
1. For Jesus delegated His authority to His apostles - Jn 13:20
2. They serve as His official ambassadors - 2Co 5:20
3. To ensure their reliability, Jesus promised the Spirit to remind them of what He taught, and to guide them into all the truth - Jn 14:26; 16:12-13
4. This is why the church continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine - Ac 2:42; 1Co 14:37; 1Th 2:13
If the apostles of Christ taught it, it is from heaven!
1. The apostles were given, and proclaimed, the whole counsel of God – Ac 20:27
2. They were given all things that pertain to life and godliness
- 2Pe 1:3
3. The faith revealed through them was delivered once for all
(lit., one time for all times) - Jude 3
There is no need for modern day revelations, for in the Scriptures we have all that is needed to be "complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2Ti 3:16-17). If a religious practice can be found to be taught by Jesus or His apostles, then it is truly from heaven! Religious practices that are from men, however, might come from a variety of sources...
1. Many people will accept whatever most people think about something
2. Yet Jesus warned against following the majority - Mt 7:13-14
3. If you had followed the majority...
a. In Noah's day, you would have perished in the flood
b. In Joshua's day, you would have perished in the wilderness
What the majority believes or does is not likely to be from heaven, but from men!
1. Some believe "If it was good enough for Mom and Dad, it is good enough for me."
2. As much as we may love and respect our parents, Christ must come first - Mt 10:37
3. If every generation had simply followed their parents, then we who are Gentiles would likely still be idol-worshippers and polytheistic!
Let us honor our parents, not by following them blindly, but by applying principles they themselves likely taught us, such as seek to do the right thing, obey God, etc.
1. It is common for people to place their trust in their "preacher," "priest," or "pastor"
2. They reason that surely these "men of God" could not be wrong or lead them astray
a. Yet Paul warned of how we can easily be misled - cf. 2 Co 11:13-15
b. And Jesus warned about the "blind leading the blind" – Mt 15:12-14
3. Our attitude needs to be like that of the Bereans, who carefully examined Paul's teachings in light of the Scriptures - Ac 17:11
What a preacher teaches is only as good as the authority behind it; unless we wish to be led astray, we have the responsibility to ask "Is it from God, or men?"
1. This is where the denominations really get most of their authority
a. E.g., for such things as infant baptism, pouring or sprinkling instead of immersion
b. E.g, for such things as denominationalism, once saved always saved
2. Indeed, adherence to the creeds of men is what produces denominations
a. Accept the Bible only, and you become a Christian only
b. Accept some man-made creed or tradition, and you become something else!
1) Accept the Book of Mormon, and you become a Mormon
2) Accept papal authority, and you become a Roman Catholic
3) Accept the Lutheran Catechism, and you become a Lutheran
3. Creeds are really not even necessary...
a. If they say more than what the Bible says, they say too much
b. If they say less than what the Bible says, they say too little
c. If they say exactly what the Bible says, then why not let the Bible be our creed book?
The fact is creeds are filled with the traditions and commands of men, many of which conflict with and displace the commands of God! - cf. Mk 7:6-9
1. "Let your conscience be your guide" is the motto of many
2. But our conscience cannot always be reliable
a. Paul had served God with a good conscience throughout his life - Ac 23:1
b. Even at a time when he was persecuting Christians! - cf. Ac 26:9-11
3. Our conscience is like a clock, which works properly if set correctly
4. Once our conscience has been "set" by the "apostles' doctrine" then it can be a good guide
Unless what your conscience is telling you can be confirmed by the Word of God, then what you believe is from man, not God!
1. Many believe that through their own wisdom they can determine
right and wrong
a. If it makes sense to them, they reason it must be true
b. If it doesn't make sense, they won't accept it
2. But God's thoughts and ways are not always our own - cf. Isa 55:8-9
3. In fact, God has chosen to save man in a manner specifically designed to confound those who depend solely upon human wisdom - cf. 1Co 1:18-29
4. For us to know God's will, it was necessary for Him to reveal it to us - 1Co 2:9-12
a. This He has done through His Spirit-inspired apostles
b. Who in turn shared it with us through their writings – Ep 3:1-5
Appeal to human reason to justify a certain practice, and it will likely be from man, not God!
1. This is often the "standard of authority" for many people
a. Who go by whatever "feels right"
b. Who place stock in a religion "better felt than told"
2. Yet the Bible declares the danger of trusting in "feelings"
a. "There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death." - Pr 14:12
b. "He who trusts in his own heart is a fool..." - Pr 28:26
c. "O LORD, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps." - Jer 10:23
It should be evident that any religious practice or doctrine based upon "feelings" alone is from man, not God!
1. People will sometimes resort to the O. T. to provide authority for some practice
a. When they can't find authority for it in the teachings of Christ and/or His apostles
b. For example, a clergy-laity system, burning of incense and use of instrumental music in worship, keeping the Sabbath, etc.
2. But the O.T. was designed to be temporary, to fulfill a specific purpose and as a covenant has been replaced by the New Covenant (i.e., the New Testament)
a. It was given because of transgressions, till Christ should come - Ga 3:19
b. For those under the Law (Israel), it was a tutor
1) A tutor designed to lead them to Christ - Ga 3:24
2) A tutor that has been taken away - Ga 3:25
c. When those who were under the Law came to Christ...
1) They became dead to the Law - Ro 7:4
2) They were delivered from the Law - Ro 7:6
d. As prophesied by Jeremiah, God has made a "new covenant" to replace the "first covenant" which is now obsolete - He 8:7-13
3. In handling the issue of circumcision, the apostles demonstrated that one cannot use the O.T. to teach something which they did not command
a. Some sought to enforce circumcision and the Law upon Gentile believers - Ac 15:1,6
b. But the apostles, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit were able to defuse the problem by simply stating they themselves "gave no such commandment" - Ac 15:22-29
4. This is not to say the O.T. is not of value to Christians...
a. It was written for our learning, to provide patience, comfort, and hope - Ro 15:4
b. It was written for our admonition, that we not make similar mistakes - 1Co 10:6,11
c. We just can't use it to enjoin religious practices upon others which the apostles' themselves did not teach!
1. Do we want to avoid being led astray?
a. By "blind leaders of the blind"? - cf. Mt 15:14
b. By "false teachers...who will secretly bring in destructive heresies"? - cf. 2 Pe 2:1
2. Then we need to know how to ascertain whether a religious doctrine or practice...
a. Is from God or from men
b. Is based upon what the apostles of Christ taught, or some other "authority"
3. The solution is simple, but requires effort on our part...
a. We must "continue steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine" – Ac 2:42
b. We must "search the scriptures daily" - Ac 17:11
Only then can we be sure that what we believe or someone teaches is truly from God, and not from man!
Barnes' Notes on the Bible: See also Mark 11:27-33; Luke 20:1-9.
Matthew 21:23
When He was come into the temple - That is, probably, into the inner court - the court of the Israelites.
They took this opportunity of questioning Him on this subject when He was not surrounded by the multitude.
By what authority ... - There was a show of propriety in this question. He was making great changes in the affairs of the temple, and they claimed the right to know why this was done, contrary to their permission. He was not "a priest;" He had no civil or ecclesiastical authority as a Jew. It was sufficient authority, indeed, that He came as a prophet and worked miracles. But they professed not to be satisfied with that.
These things - The things which He had just done, in overturning the seats of those that were engaged in traffic, Matthew 21:12.
Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
By what authority doest thou these things? - The things which the chief priests allude to, were His receiving the acclamations of the people as the promised Messiah, His casting the traders out of the temple, and His teaching the people publicly in it.
Who gave thee this authority? - Not them: for, like many of their successors, they were neither teachers nor cleansers; though they had the name and the profits of the place.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And when He was come into the temple,.... The day following the cursing the fig tree: for the withering of it, and the notice the disciples took of it, and our Lord's discourse with them about it, were not in one and the same day, as is clear from the account the Evangelist Mark gives; but on the morning that Christ had conversed with His apostles by the way from Bethany to Jerusalem, concerning the strength of faith in prayer, and the success of it; when they were come into the city, and to the temple, whither He directly went, and entered upon His work of preaching to the people,
the chief priests and elders of the people came unto Him. The "chief priests" were not the high priest, and his "sagan", or deputy, but the principal of the priesthood, who were chosen from the rest of their brethren, to sit in the sanhedrim; and "the elders of the people" were the laity that were chosen from among the people, to be members of the same grand council: in this sense the Jewish writers interpret the word "elders", in Deuteronomy 21:2 "thy elders, and thy judges"; that is,
"thy elders, who are thy judges: it is a tradition, R. Eliezer ben Jacob says, , "thine eiders; this is the great sanhedrim" (a).
The other Evangelists Mark and Luke add to these, Scribes, who also were a part of this great assembly; so that the principal members of it, if not the whole sanhedrim, came in a body together, if possible, by their presence and authority, to daunt Christ, discourage his ministry, bring it into contempt with the people, and stop his proceedings and success. And this they did
as He was teaching; the people, that is, preaching the Gospel to them, as Luke explains it: He was instructing them in the things relating to Himself, and His kingdom, dispensing the mysteries of His grace, the doctrines of regeneration, justification, and salvation. Mark says, it was "as He was walking in the temple": and at the same time teaching the people, who flocked about Him in like manner, as the Peripatetic philosophers taught their scholars walking: whence they had their name,
And said, by what authority dost thou these things? that is, drive out the buyers and sellers out of the temple, which greatly provoked them, their own gain and interest being concerned therein; and perform these miracles of restoring sight to the blind, and causing the lame to walk; which He had very lately wrought in the temple; and particularly preach these doctrines, the work in which He was then engaged:
and who gave thee this authority? They do not object to His doctrines, or dispute whether they were true or false; nor examine His miracles, whether they were of God, or of the devil: in these points they might fear He would be able to put them to silence and confusion, of which some of them had had an experience before; but they proceed in another way, in which they might hope for success, and attack Him about His commission and authority under which He acted, whether He pretended to derive His authority from God, or from men: by this they designed to ensnare Him and hoped they should gain their point, let Him answer in what form He would. Should He say that God gave Him the authority to do these things, they would charge Him with enthusiasm and blasphemy, urging, that it was wickedness and presumption any man to pretend to be sent immediately from God; since the order of the priesthood, and of teaching was fixed, and none were to take upon them the office of a priest, or of a teacher of the people, but by their appointment; or none were called and sent, but through them, or by their means: and if He should say, that He had His authority from men, they would confront Him, and absolutely deny that He had any from them, who only had the power of giving men an authority of preaching in the temple; wherefore He must be an usurper of this office, and a turbulent, seditious person, that sought to destroy all order, civil and ecclesiastical,
(a) T. Hieros Sota, fol. 23. 3. Jarchi in Deuteronomy 21.2.
Geneva Study Bible
{6} And when He was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto Him as He was teaching, and said, By what {k} authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?
(6) Against those who neglect the doctrine and bind the calling and vocation to an ordinary succession, going about by that false pretext, to stop Christ's mouth.
(k) Or by what power.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Mt 21:23-46. The Authority of Jesus Questioned and the Reply—The Parables of the Two Sons, and of the Wicked Husbandman. ( = Mr 11:27-12:12; Lu 20:1-19).
Now commences, as Alford remarks, that series of parables and discourses of our Lord with His enemies, in which He develops, more completely than ever before, His hostility to their hypocrisy and iniquity: and so they are stirred up to compass His death.
The Authority of Jesus Questioned, and the Reply (Mt 21:23-27).
23. By what authority doest thou these things!—referring particularly to the expulsion of the buyers and sellers from the temple,
and who gave thee this authority?
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
21:23-27 As our Lord now openly appeared as the Messiah, the chief priests and scribes were much offended, especially because He exposed and removed the abuses they encouraged. Our Lord asked what they thought of John's ministry and baptism. Many are more afraid of the shame of lying than of the sin, and therefore scruple not to speak what they know to be false, as to their own thoughts, affections, and intentions, or their remembering and forgetting. Our Lord refused to answer their inquiry. It is best to shun needless disputes with wicked opposers.
People's New Testament
21:23 When He was come into the temple. Compare Mr 11:27 Lu 20:1. This was on Tuesday, after the discourse on the fig tree, which occurred the morning after the curse was pronounced.
The chief priests and the elders. Mark and Luke add the scribes. These three classes made up the Sanhedrin, and this was probably a deputation from that body.
By what authority doest thou these things? Such acts as driving the money-changers and traders out of the temple, done the day before.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 23-ch. 22:14. - Our Lord's authority questioned: He replies by uttering three parables. (Mark 11:27-12:12; Luke 20:1-18.) Verses 23-27. - First attack, referring to His late actions: and Christ's answer. Verse 23. - When He was come into the temple. The conversation recorded here belongs to the Tuesday of the Holy Week, and took place in the courts of the temple, at this time filled with pilgrims from all parts of the world, who hung upon Christ's words, and beheld His doings with wonder and awe. This sight roused to fury the envy and anger of the authorities, and they sent forth sections of their cleverest men to undermine His authority in the eyes of the people, or to force from Him statements on which they might found criminal accusation against Him. The chief priests and the elders of the people. According to the other evangelists, there were also scribes, teachers of the Law, united with them in this deputation, which thus comprised all the elements of the Sanhedrin. This seems to have been the first time that the council took formal notice of Jesus' claims and actions, and demanded from Him personally an account of Himself. They had been quick enough in inquiring into the Baptist's credentials, when he suddenly appeared on the banks of Jordan (see John 1:19, etc.); but they had studiously, till quite lately, avoided any regular investigation of the pretensions of Jesus. In the thee of late proceedings, this could no longer be delayed. A crisis had arrived; their own peculiar province was publicly invaded, and their authority attacked; the opponent must be withstood by the action of the constituted court. As He was teaching. Jesus did not confine Himself to beneficent acts; He used the opportunity of the gathering of crowds around Him to preach unto them the gospel (Luke 20:1), to teach truths which came with double force from One who bad done such marvelous things. By what authority doest thou these things? They refer to the triumphal entry, the reception of the homage offered, the healing of the blind and lame, the teaching as with the authority of a rabbi, and especially to the cleansing of the temple. No one could presume to teach without a proper commission: where was His authorization? They were the guardians and rulers of the temple: what right had He to interfere with their management, and to use the sacred precincts for His own purposes? These and such like questions were in their mind when they addressed Him thus. Willfully ignoring the many proofs they had of Christ's Divine mission (which one of them, Nicodemus, had long before been constrained to own, John 3:2), they raised the question now as a novel and unanswered one. Who gave thee this authority? They resolve the general inquiry into the personal one - Who was it that conferred upon You this authority which you presume to exercise? Was it some earthly ruler, or was it God Himself? Perhaps they mean to insinuate that Satan was the master whose power he wielded - an accusation already often made. They thought thus to place Christ in an embarrassing position, from which He could not emerge without affording the opportunity which they desired. The trap was cleverly set, and, as they deemed, unavoidable. If He was forced to confess that He spoke and acted without any proper authorization, He would be humiliated in the eyes of the people, and might be officially silenced by the strong hand. If He asserted Himself to be the Messiah and the bearer of a Divine commission, they would at once bring against Him a charge of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65).
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Mark 11:27,28 And they come again to Jerusalem: and as He was walking in the temple,
Luke 19:47,48 And He taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the …
Luke 20:1,2 And it came to pass, that on one of those days, as He taught the …
the chief priests.
1 Chronicles 24:1 Now these are the divisions of the sons of Aaron. The sons of Aaron; …
By what.
Exodus 2:14 And he said, Who made you a prince and a judge over us? intend you …
Acts 4:7 And when they had set them in the middle, they asked, By what power, …
Acts 7:27 But he that did his neighbor wrong thrust him away, saying, Who made …
Wesley's Notes
21:23 When He was come into the temple, the chief priests came - Who thought He violated their right: and the elders of the people - Probably, members of the sanhedrim, to whom that title most properly belonged: which is the more probable, as they were the persons under whose cognizance the late action of Christ, in purging the temple, would naturally fall. These, with the chief priests, seem purposely to have appeared in a considerable company, to give the more weight to what they said, and if need were, to bear a united testimony against Him. As He was teaching - Which also they supposed He had no authority to do, being neither priest, nor Levite, nor scribe. Some of the priests (though not as priests) and all the scribes were authorized teachers. By what authority dost thou these things - Publicly teach the people! And drive out those who had our commission to traffic in the outer court? Luke 20:1; Mark 11:27
Chapter Contents
Christ enters Jerusalem. (1-11) He drives out those who profaned the temple. (12-17) The barren fig-tree cursed. (18-22) Jesus' discourse in the temple. (23-27) The parable of the two sons. (28-32) The parable of the wicked husbandmen. (33-46)
Commentary on Matthew 21:1-11
This coming of Christ was described by the prophet Zechariah, Zechariah 9:9. When Christ would appear in His glory, it is in His meekness, not in His majesty, in mercy to work salvation. As meekness and outward poverty were fully seen in Zion's King, and marked His triumphal entrance to Jerusalem, how wrong covetousness, ambition, and the pride of life must be in Zion's citizens! They brought the ass, but Jesus did not use it without the owner's consent. The trappings were such as came to hand. We must not think the clothes on our backs too dear to part with for the service of Christ. The chief priests and the elders afterwards joined with the multitude that abused him upon the cross; but none of them joined the multitude that did Him honor. Those that take Christ for their King, must lay their all under His feet. Hosanna signifies, Save now, we beseech thee! Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord! But of how little value is the applause of the people! The changing multitude join the cry of the day, whether it be Hosanna, or Crucify Him. Multitudes often seem to approve the gospel, but few become consistent disciples. When Jesus was come into Jerusalem all the city was moved; some perhaps were moved with joy, who waited for the Consolation of Israel; others, of the Pharisees, were moved with envy. So various are the motions in the minds of men upon the approach of Christ's Kingdom.
Commentary on Matthew 21:12-17
Christ found some of the courts of the temple turned into a market for cattle and things used in the sacrifices, and partly occupied by the money-changers. Our Lord drove them from the place, as He had done at His entering upon His ministry, John 2:13-17. His works testified of Him more than the hosannas; and His healing in the temple was the fulfilling the promise, that the glory of the latter house should be greater than the glory of the former. If Christ came now into many parts of His visible church, how many secret evils He would discover and cleanse! And how many things daily practiced under the cloak of religion, would He show to be more suitable to a den of thieves than to a house of prayer!
Commentary on Matthew 21:18-22
This cursing of the barren fig-tree represents the state of hypocrites in general, and so teaches us that Christ looks for the power of religion in those who profess it, and the savor of it from those that have the show of it. His just expectations from flourishing professors are often disappointed; He comes to many, seeking fruit, and finds leaves only. A false profession commonly withers in this world, and it is the effect of Christ's curse. The fig-tree that had no fruit, soon lost its leaves. This represents the state of the nation and people of the Jews in particular. Our Lord Jesus found among them nothing but leaves. And after they rejected Christ, blindness and hardness grew upon them, till they were undone, and their place and nation rooted up. The Lord was righteous in it. Let us greatly fear the doom denounced on the barren fig-tree.
Commentary on Matthew 21:23-27
As our Lord now openly appeared as the Messiah, the chief priests and scribes were much offended, especially because He exposed and removed the abuses they encouraged. Our Lord asked what they thought of John's ministry and baptism. Many are more afraid of the shame of lying than of the sin, and therefore scruple not to speak what they know to be false, as to their own thoughts, affections, and intentions, or their remembering and forgetting. Our Lord refused to answer their inquiry. It is best to shun needless disputes with wicked opposers.
Commentary on Matthew 21:28-32
Parables which give reproof, speak plainly to the offenders, and judge them out of their own mouths. The parable of the two sons sent to work in the vineyard, is to show that those who knew not John's baptism to be of God, were shamed by those who knew it, and owned it. The whole human race are like children whom the Lord has brought up, but they have rebelled against Him, only some are more plausible in their disobedience than others. And it often happens, that the daring rebel is brought to repentance and becomes the Lord's servant, while the formalist grows hardened in pride and enmity.
Commentary on Matthew 21:33-46
This parable plainly sets forth the sin and ruin of the Jewish nation; and what is spoken to convict them, is spoken to caution all that enjoy the privileges of the outward church. As men treat God's people, they would treat Christ Himself, if He were with them. How can we, if faithful to His cause, expect a favorable reception from a wicked world, or from ungodly professors of Christianity! And let us ask ourselves, whether we who have the vineyard and all its advantages, render fruits in due season, as a people, as a family, or as separate persons. Our Savior, in His question, declares that the Lord of the vineyard will come, and when He comes He will surely destroy the wicked. The chief priests and the elders were the builders, and they would not admit His doctrine or laws; they threw Him aside as a despised stone. But He who was rejected by the Jews, was embraced by the Gentiles. Christ knows who will bring forth gospel fruits in the use of gospel means. The unbelief of sinners will be their ruin. But God has many ways of restraining the remainders of wrath, as He has of making that which breaks out redound to His praise. May Christ be
He wanted them to admit that He was Jesus but when they wouldn't He refused to tell them anything. So, since they chose not to tell Him He did not tell them either.
Jesus answered a question with a question to test the Pharisees how well they know the LORD personally
JESUS many times spoke in Parables and "Beyond Humans Intelligence." JESUS knew the elders/scribes/Pharisees were only trying to Trap HIM. HE never gave them any answer nor would HE ever perform miracles around them. (Notice this: HE knew their hearts) HE knows ours too! If HE answered them either way they would have accused Him of evil as in (Luke11:14-23)
Because Jesus knew that the Pharisees' mind: trying to test Him, because of unbelief.
To find out what they truly believed and as a test of their faith. Their faith in God would have to be sincere or they would not have believed in His power from heaven.
Jesus answered the Pharisees with a question because they did not actually want an answer from Him, they just wanted to trap Him into committing premature declaration of who He really was. They would have called Jesus a blasphemer.
They, the Pharisees had made up their minds to trap Him with that question but they were caught in their own trap hence their refusal to answer the question. Poor they! they never knew who was in their mist because of their disbelieve.
" By their answer they revealed that they really did not care whether John's baptism was from God or not. They were not interested in the truth, nor were they willing to answer that question at all; they only cared about serving their own interests. Thus they revealed themselves as being opposed to God's authority, acting only out of the intrigues and craftiness of men."
The Pharisees thought they were extremely clever and could trap JESUS. As it were, knew what they were thinking and answered as such for the time had not yet come whereby JESUS would be handed over.
Jesus know that they are hypocrites and they wanted to use one case to nail Him. So He perceived this in His spirit because His time has not yet come.
Jesus answered the question with the question because Jesus Knew that the Pharisees would not recognize any authority by their own self even though they knew everything in order to protect their own law and prove that their law is superior.
Jesus knew that the Pharisees are unbelievers and wanted to trap Him and challenge Him. That is why He put question to them rather to trap them in their own net. They did not answer the question of Jesus to be on safe side.
Pharisees are unbelievers they want to trap the Jesus and they are still in doughty Jesus is a Son of God that is why Jesus answer a question with a question rather than telling the Pharisees by what authority you people will do..
He knew that they were trying to trap Him. And if He answered them then they would have accused Him of blasphemy and would have arrested Him and possibly crucified Him before it was time. Knowing their hearts He asked them a question knowing that they would not answer that so allowing Him not to fall in their trap.
Jesus answered a question with a question because He knew the Pharisees were trying to trap Him and they wouldn't believe Him. If He said He was doing these things under the authority of God His Father, they would have accused Him of blasphemy. The Pharisees were hypocrites. They acted pious but they really weren't. They added to God's Law to serve their own purposes.
By: Gregorio Magdaleno
Category: The Authority of Jesus Questioned


text:
Bhupathi Raju Ravi Chaitanya Varma
Man, 26 years old from hyderabad, India
- About me
- Comments
- Share
xTip: Sending a positive vote will save this user to your account, like a personal bookmark. Additionally, they will see this vote and may like you back, which will allow the exchange of your private contact information.
Signed up: October 7th, 2012 (1223 days ago)
Profile hits: 75
Subscribers: 1
Age:26 years old
Region:Andhra Pradesh

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The well-known Scientology protester Keith Henson has filed an appeal to the Appellate Division of the Riverside County Superior Court of his criminal conviction in 2001 of misdemeanor "interfering with a religion" for picketing in front of a Scientology "base" in Hemet, CA. The ruling was roundly criticized as inconsistent with Henson's First Amendment rights to criticize Scientology: much of the evidence used against him consisted of general statements he made online that were very critical of Scientology but fell far short of the sort of "true threat" required to overcome his First Amendment rights. The trial court also limited his ability to explain his actions or present contrary evidence. The Court of Appeal should take a hard look at the case and reverse the conviction.
Scientology watchers will recall that Henson sought, and temporarily obtained, political asylum in Canada right after the verdict, then was arrested upon his return to the US in 2007.
The Church of Scientology has been one of the earliest, and most aggessive users of intellectual property and other claims to silence the speech of its online critics. This year Scientology supporters launched a raft of copyright complaints aimed at removing anti-Scientology videos on YouTube. In the Henson case there is a serious concern that the criminal law was misused in an effort not to respond to any real threats, but instead to silence one of the Church's loudest and most persistent online critics. It's time to undo that injustice.
- Obama's Total Information Awareness
The New Republic says no campaign in history has ever compiled more information on its supporters.
- FBI Turning Cell Phones Into Eavesdropping Devices
By remotely activating the microphone in mobile phones, the FBI has been able to eavesdrop on suspects.
- Analysis of the 2nd Circuit Decision on NSLs
Eugene Volokh goes deep inside the 2nd Circuits decision to ask whether the ruling is good for free speech.
- RIAA President Speaks
In an interview, Cary Sherman answers questions on the new RIAA plan to collaborate with ISPs to block users accused of piracy.
- Apple Bans Edgy Books From iPhone
Apple is refusing to allow what it considers "objectionable content" to be sold through its App Store, even in book form.
- Fooling Speed Cameras
High School students in Maryland have been tricking speed cameras into sending fines to innocent drivers.
- NSA on Facebook
The National Security Administration wants to be your "friend."
Two months ago, in In re Bilski, the Federal Circuit rejected the notion that anything that produces a "useful, concrete, and tangible result" is potentially patentable. Instead, to be patent-eligible, an idea must be "tied to a particular machine or apparatus," or it must "transform a particular article into a different state or thing." (To qualify for a patent, it also has to meet various other requirements, such as being novel.)
As to transformation, the court noted that not just any transformation will do. The transformation "must be central to the purpose of the claimed process," and the "articles" transformed must either be "physical objects or substances" or "representative of physical objects or substances."
Today, in a one-paragraph decision in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC, the Federal Circuit put those words into practice:
In light of our decision in In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc), we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment that these claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Dr. Classen's claims are neither "tied to a particular machine or apparatus" nor do they "transform[] a particular article into a different state or thing." Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.
Here is a claim from one of the patents that was at issue:
- A method of determining whether an immunization schedule affects the incidence or severity of a chronic immune-mediated disorder in a treatment group of mammals, relative to a control group of mammals, which comprises:
- immunizing mammals in the treatment group of mammals with one or more doses of one or more immunogens, according to said immunization schedule, and
- comparing the incidence, prevalence, frequency or severity of said chronic immune-mediated disorder or the level of a marker of such a disorder, in the treatment group, with that in the control group.
The claimed method is not tied to a particular machine or apparatus, but surely "immunizing mammals" transforms particular articles. Why, then, isn't this patent eligible?
The key is that the immunizing of the mammals is not "central to the purpose of the claimed process." While of course the mammals must be immunized in order for someone to ascertain whether the immunization schedule used is effective, that immunizing isn't the point of the claimed invention. Rather, the invention is directed to analyzing the results of the immunizing. The immunizing itself is (to borrow more language from Bilski) "insignificant extra-solution activity" or merely a "data-gathering step" that cannot convert the claim into patentable subject matter.
(As an aside, this decision was issued as a "non-precedential" ruling, which means the judges did not think it added significantly to the body of law. The Classen patents reminded many patent practitioners of the patent in Lab. Corp. of Am. v. Metabolite Labs., Inc. [pdf], the 2006 case where the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider the scope of patent eligibility, but then dismissed for technical reasons. Perhaps the Classen judges concluded that even if the legal issue was significant in 2006, post-Bilski it was an easy call.)
It's good to see that the Federal Circuit is taking steps to ensure that the Bilski machine-or-transformation test has teeth, and cannot be avoided by mere artful drafting.
The lawsuits are ending. It's about time.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the recording industry has halted its mass litigation campaign against music fans for Internet file-sharing, a campaign that has targeted more than 35,000 Americans over more than 5 years (for a complete history of the lawsuits, see our RIAA v. The People white paper).
Ending the lawsuit campaign is long overdue. The campaign has been, by any measure, a failure. The lawsuits have not reduced unauthorized file-sharing and have not gotten a single artist paid.
But the news today is not all good. First, the recording industry will continue to press the thousands of pending lawsuits, presumably pushing for the usual four figure settlements. How is it going to feel to be the last college student to settle in a fight that the recording industry has now admitted isn't worth the candle?
More troubling is the news that the RIAA is pressuring U.S. ISPs into adopting some sort of "3 strikes" approach, similar to those it's been seeking in Europe (see, e.g., the French "digital guillotine" proposal). According the the Wall Street Journal article:
[T]he Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers. The trade group said it has hashed out preliminary agreements with major ISPs under which it will send an email to the provider when it finds a provider's customers making music available online for others to take. Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.
This means more music fans are going to be harassed by the music industry. As Wired's Elliot Van Buskirk points out:
Due process has been prohibitively expensive for the RIAA. The organization has long sought a more efficient way to exert pressure on suspected file sharers, and these new agreements will grant it that wish, saving it money and allowing it to pressure far more suspected file sharers, all without filing a single subpoena.
The recording industry's efforts to push "3 strikes" legislation in Europe have been definitively rejected by the European Parliament and by Sweden. While UK ISPs have agreed to send notices for rightsholders, they've stopped short of automatic Internet disconnection. This leaves France as the sole European aberration.
The problem is the lack of due process for those accused. In a world where hundreds of thousands (or millions) of copyright infringement allegations are automatically generated and delivered to ISPs, mistakes are going to be made (just look at the innocents, 1, 2, 3, 4, who were swept into the RIAA litigation machine). Anyone who has ever had to fight to correct an error on their credit reports will be able to imagine the trouble we're in for.
And being added to a nation-wide "Internet blacklist"—like that in the pending French legislation—is a disproportionate punishment, even for those who are "caught" file sharing. By conservative estimates, 1 in 5 American Internet users is an active file-sharer. Does the recording industry really think that banning 20% of Americans from the Internet is the right answer? Do ISPs? Or will the millions of ISP "warnings" just give rise to more encrypted and anonymized file-sharing mechanisms, all the while getting no artists paid?
We still need a better way forward, that legalizes file-sharing and gets artists paid. So, while today's news is long-overdue, the more interesting development is the recording industry's recent willingness to discuss collective licensing with universities.
Earlier today, Yahoo! announced a new data retention policy providing for anonymization of search queries — as well as page views, page clicks, ad views and ad clicks — after 90 days.
Google's response:
Google takes privacy very seriously and we aim to strike the appropriate balance between protecting our users' privacy and offering them benefits of data retention, such as better security measures and new innovations. Earlier this year, we already committed to anonymizing IP addresses in our server logs after nine months, significantly shorter than our previous 18 month retention policy. When we make changes to our policies, they are dependent on what will be best for our users both in terms of the services we provide and the respect of their privacy. It is a balance that we are continually evaluating.
Microsoft's response:
Microsoft believes all major players in the market should move to effective privacy practices and welcomes Yahoo's steps on search anonymization following Microsoft's call for an industry standard last week. Microsoft believes that the method of anonymization is more important than the anonymization timeframe and believes all major search engines need to adopt a high standard.
Last week, Microsoft had challenged its search engine rivals to adopt a six month policy, saying "We are prepared to make this change [to six months] but believe it is imperative that all search companies adopt the same standard to truly protect people's privacy."
Representative Ed Markey, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet's statement:
"Privacy is a cornerstone of freedom and I applaud Yahoo's announcement today for recognizing that consumers deserve ample privacy protections in the digital era to ensure trust and freedom on the Internet. I have been pressing online companies for greater voluntary efforts to refrain from the massive, systematic gathering of information about individual consumer web use and the long term retention of such data in a form that can identify the web habits, interests, searches, and purchases of individual Americans," said Rep. Markey.
"Today, Yahoo voluntarily sets a new standard for such privacy protection, a standard against which Microsoft, Google, and others will now be compared."
Over the weekend, Newsweek revealed Thomas M. Tamm as the man who first blew the whistle on the Bush Administration's illegal warrantless wiretapping program. Last night, Mr. Tamm gave his first public interview on The Rachel Maddow Show:
I remember when I was figuring out that something was going on extra-judicially, I looked at the NSA websites, and they proudly talked about the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution: the right of the people to be secure in their persons and their places. That's part of the reason we fought the Revolutionary War.
And then... we learned that the only way we can be kept safe is for the government to break our laws? I just disagree with that. I think we are stronger and better as a nation when we follow the Constitution, when we follow the statutes, and when we follow the rule of law.
When asked whether he thought the illegal wiretapping program should result in prosecutions, Tamm put a finer point on his words about the rule of law:
Maddow: Do you think in order to move forward and pay tribute to the rule of law that their ought to be prosecutions?
Tamm: I certainly think it ought to be looked at. I really do... It offends me, that we feel that we're not strong enough as a country, that our laws are not strong enough, that our Congress is not strong enough, that our courts are not strong enough to protect us... I think it should be looked at very seriously.
Like AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein's interview with Keith Olbermann earlier this year, it's a great reminder of the basic principles at stake in the fight to hold telcos accountable for illegal spying.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) and ten other civil liberties organizations today sent an open letter today to Michigan State University (MSU) President Lou Anna K. Simon in defense of MSU student government leader Kara Spencer. Ms. Spencer was formally warned by MSU and labeled a "spammer" for sending e-mails to 391 faculty members raising concerns about a controversial change in the university's calendar.
MSU's email policy prohibits the sending of unsolicited e-mail "for personal purposes, advertising or solicitations, or political statements or purposes" to more than about 20-30 recipients without prior approval of University officials. EFF and the other organizations noted that, especially by prohibiting "political statements" such as Ms. Spencer's based on their content, the public university policy is constitutionally suspect. The policy also improperly grants unfettered discretion to MSU in selecting which messages can be sent to multiple students and faculty by requiring prior administration approval.
In signing today's open letter, EFF and the other organizations agree that MSU's actions against Ms. Spencer is "egregiously wrongheaded." They ask that President Simon immediately overturn the finding that Ms. Spencer is a spammer, since that label implies criminal wrongdoing. The organizations also offered to assist MSU in developing a constitutional acceptable use policy for the university.
Today, Yahoo upped the ante when it comes to protecting search engine users' privacy, announcing a new data retention policy providing for anonymization of search queries — as well as page views, page clicks, ad views and ad clicks — after 90 days. This announcement comes on the heels of Google's announcement in September that it would be anonymizing its logs after 9 months.
It's always good to see search companies competing to provide more privacy to their users, and with this aggressive move, Yahoo has sent a serious shot across Google's bow. Yahoo has shown that a retention period shorter than Google's — much shorter than Google's — is an achievable goal for a major search engine. This announcement should be followed by another from Google, promising to match or beat Yahoo's retention period. If it isn't, though, legislators, regulators and privacy advocates should demand an answer from Google to the question: "If Yahoo can do it, why can't you?"
Unfortunately, it's hard to gauge the true privacy impact of this policy change until we know exactly what steps Yahoo will be taking to anonymize the data. The devil's in the details, and if Yahoo's anonymization process isn't robust enough, this new logging policy may end up being more privacy PR than privacy protection. Fully anonymizing IP addresses and cookie data can be tricky, and even if that data is thrown away completely, there's still the possibility of individuals being identified based on the content of their search queries, as AOL's search data spill demonstrated.
So, as Yahoo finalizes its policy plans, it should take a look at EFF's newly-revised Best Practices for Online Service Providers, which recommends a range of techniques to strongly anonymize online user data. Hopefully, we'll see the details of Yahoo's plan soon, as well as new announcements from other search engines trying to keep up in this accelerating privacy competition. Internet users have long trusted search engines and internet portals like Yahoo and Google with the privacy of their most intimate and sensitive data, and we're glad to see those companies finally vying to earn that trust.
Subscribe to EFF Updates
Deeplinks Archives
Deeplinks Topics
- Fair Use and Intellectual Property: Defending the Balance
- Free Speech
- Innovation
- International
- Know Your Rights
- Privacy
- Trade Agreements and Digital Rights
- Security
- State-Sponsored Malware
- Abortion Reporting
- Analog Hole
- Anonymity
- Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
- Biometrics
- Bloggers' Rights
- Broadcast Flag
- Broadcasting Treaty
- Cell Tracking
- Coders' Rights Project
- Computer Fraud And Abuse Act Reform
- Content Blocking
- Copyright Trolls
- Council of Europe
- Cyber Security Legislation
- CyberSLAPP
- Defend Your Right to Repair!
- Development Agenda
- Digital Books
- Digital Radio
- Digital Video
- DMCA Rulemaking
- Do Not Track
- E-Voting Rights
- EFF Europe
- Encrypting the Web
- Export Controls
- FAQs for Lodsys Targets
- File Sharing
- Fixing Copyright? The 2013-2016 Copyright Review Process
- Genetic Information Privacy
- Hollywood v. DVD
- How Patents Hinder Innovation (Graphic)
- International Privacy Standards
- Internet Governance Forum
- Law Enforcement Access
- Legislative Solutions for Patent Reform
- Locational Privacy
- Mandatory Data Retention
- Mandatory National IDs and Biometric Databases
- Mass Surveillance Technologies
- Medical Privacy
- National Security and Medical Information
- National Security Letters
- Net Neutrality
- No Downtime for Free Speech
- NSA Spying
- Offline : Imprisoned Bloggers and Technologists
- Online Behavioral Tracking
- Open Access
- Open Wireless
- Patent Busting Project
- Patent Trolls
- Patents
- PATRIOT Act
- Pen Trap
- Policy Analysis
- Printers
- Public Health Reporting and Hospital Discharge Data
- Reading Accessibility
- Real ID
- Search Engines
- Search Incident to Arrest
- Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
- Social Networks
- SOPA/PIPA: Internet Blacklist Legislation
- Student and Community Organizing
- Student Privacy
- Stupid Patent of the Month
- Surveillance and Human Rights
- Surveillance Drones
- Terms Of (Ab)Use
- Test Your ISP
- The "Six Strikes" Copyright Surveillance Machine
- The Global Network Initiative
- The Law and Medical Privacy
- TPP's Copyright Trap
- Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement
- Travel Screening
- Trusted Computing
- Video Games
- Wikileaks
- Transparency
- Uncategorized


text:
Cambiar a Español
Your session cookie appears to be disabled. myLoyola needs this feature to function properly.
Please follow
these directions
to enable it.
Click here for instructions on enabling JavaScript.
myLoyola Username
Forgot myLoyola Username?
Forgot Password?
MyChart ® Epic Systems Corporation
New User?
Sign Up Now
Request a Code
Learn More...
Guest Pay
Patient User Guide
Privacy Policy
Terms and Conditions
For any issues logging in, please contact us at: firstname.lastname@example.com
Communicate with your doctor
Get answers to your medical questions from the comfort of your own home
Access your test results
No more waiting for a phone call or letter — view your results and your doctor's comments within days
Online Billing
Pay your bills fast and easy online
Manage your appointments
Schedule your next appointment, or view details of your past and upcoming appointments
MyChart® licensed from Epic Systems Corporation, © 1999 - 2012. Patents pending.


text:
So I posted a few months ago about #2 being on the way, but I miscarried very early in September and was pretty upset. We agreed to wait to TTC til next summer (lots of important family events in the next 9 months I'd rather not be pregnant for) but after being 4 days late I figured I had to test. Got my BFP this morning, due July 20th!!
My August LO was conceived 6 months after my very first m/c so apparently I have luck with rainbow babies! As unexpected as this was I'm so excited and had to share with someone since we're waiting as long as possible to share the news! Not even SO knows yet, I want to tell him in person when he comes home from work :) Stick, baby, stick!


text:
Add new comment
Posted on by Tom Wentworth.
Parts of the project were open source (not Drupal), specifically the front end. By all accounts, the front end development went really well. It was developed on GitHub, but was suspiciously removed after all the problems started emerging.
It's all the back-end integration pieces with all the legacy systems that were developed in a closed, "waterfall" methodology.


text:
Ready for a change of pace, Britney Spears revealed that she is now a brunette on Saturday (February 8).
Unveiled while plugging her new fragrances, the "Toxic" singer looks into a vanity mirror holding the bottle as her brown tresses fall in front of her shoulders.
Taking the pop music industry to all-new levels, Lady Gaga and Britney Spears have a special surprise in store for fans: a duet is soon to be in the works for the two pop queens!
An insider told Us Weekly, "It'll happen soon," and the "Perfume" and "Applause" singers discussed the possibility of teaming up at Britney's February 1st concert in Las Vegas, at which Gaga made a VIP appearance.
Sin City was the site for some serious girl power on Saturday (February 1) as Lady Gaga dropped by Planet Hollywood Resort and Casino to visit Britney Spears.
The "Just Dance " songstress enjoyed primo seats at Spears' Piece Of Me concert and hung out backstage just before the gig.
She just kicked off her two-year residency at Planet Hollywood, and Britney Spears revealed her expectation for the shows in the Winter 2014 issue of Vegas magazine.
Getting in a little retail therapy while on a break from her Vegas show, Britney Spears shopped in West Hollywood on Wednesday (January 22).
The "Work B--ch" singer looked cute in a cream-colored blouse, blue skinnies, and wedge heels as she headed back to her vehicle.
Staying fit and toned for her ongoing Las Vegas residency, Britney Spears squeezed in a workout on Monday (January 13) in Santa Monica, CA.
Joined by her boyfriend David Lucado, the happy couple seemed to have worked up quite a sweat as they both left in sweaty shirts with Brit toting bottles of SmartWater.
Always one to know that wardrobe malfunctions are part of the business, Britney Spears has one for the books, which occurred on Saturday, December 28th.
While in mid-performance, singing her hit song, "Circus" the 32-year-old's sequined corset opened up unexpectedly. a strange turn for her Las Vegas residency.
She's been selling out arenas and topping the charts for years, but Britney Spears never seemed to get any love from the 2014 People's Choice Awards.
However, that all changed last night (January 8) when the "Toxic" songstress walked away with her very first Favorite Pop Artist trophy!


text:
i made Carli's memorial video today, and posted it on my blog. so, was just wanting to see if i could get a couple of you ladies to check it out, make sure everything works/looks okay.
also, i found the video was pretty easy to do, so if anyone would like me to do one for their angel baby, let me know! i'd love to help!


text:
By Raf Casert
SOCHI, Russia — You have favourites for Olympic gold — and then you have Lee Sang-hwa. The defending Olympic champion has been so overwhelming the past two years it is tough to see anyone beating the South Korean during Tuesday's 500-meter races.
Lee could be feeling an even stronger desire to win after South Korea team mate and defending champion Mo Tae-bum could only finish fourth in the men's 500.
The competition for the other medals looks wide open.
Here are five things to watch for in the women's 500 metres at the Adler Arena:
OVERPOWERING LEE: Look at the statistics and the gold medal is all but a foregone conclusion. Lee won her first Olympic title at 20 in Vancouver. She has won the last two world 500 titles, and broke the world record three times this season. She is unbeaten in the World Cup this season, with a perfect seven-for-seven. "There is just one way to beat Lee, and that is if she makes mistakes on the ice," said Dutch sprinter Margot Boer.
MISSING YU: When Lee skipped the sprint world championships, everyone was hoping a credible challenger would emerge from the competition. No luck. Yu Jing of China took the title but injury forced her out of the Sochi Games.
WHO ELSE?: Olga Fatkulina is seeking to put the host nation on the medal stand again after Olga Graf unexpectedly won a bronze in the 3,000. Fatkulina won the only World Cup race this season that Lee did not enter. Also look for Heather Richardson from the United States. If she squeezes onto the medal stand, she will be the first American to medal in the event since Bonnie Blair took the last of her three golds in 1994. Also look for Wang Beixing of China to add a second medal to her bronze from Vancouver.
NO ORANGE: Perennial medal contenders over just about every distance in speedskating, the Dutch women are strangely subdued when it comes to sprinting, unlike the Dutch men who swept the podium in Monday's 500. No Dutch woman has ever medaled over the distance and it does not look they will change that in Sochi. Boer is seventh in the World Cup standings and Thijsje Oenema eighth.
TWO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE: Unlike any other speedskating event, the 500 is raced over two heats with the combined time determining the Olympic champion. The speed of the skaters is so high that by the time they hit the final turn, having an outside lane is a definite advantage. To make the racing fair, each skater starts once in the inside lane and once in the outside lane.
Follow Raf Casert on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/rcasert


text:
AdBlock blows! Please disable the add-on to ensure you get the most out of Tube8's features and functionality. Read about why you shouldn't use AdBlock. Close
Add to Favorite List:
Create a new folder:
Next »
Kat Otto Bauer Naughty Smoking Coed Taught About Ana Ass To Mouth Cum Swall
Recognize a pornstar in this video?
Help make pornstars easier to find on Tube8 by telling us who is in this video.
Thanks! The pornstar names will be added to this video when enough users submit the same names.
You must enter a pornstar name that already exists in our database.
- Category: Anal
- Views: 2,919
- Added: 3 years ago
- Description: Kat Otto Bauer Naughty Smoking Coed Taught About Ana Ass To Mouth Cum Swallowing Facial Cumshot Fingering Handjob Smoking
- Tags: kat, naughty, smoking, coed, ana, ass, mouth, cum, swallowing, facial, cumshot
- Pornstars: Add Pornstar
- Favorite by: 16
- Report This Video
Video Comments
All Video Comments (0)


text:
Microsoft Platform Ready (MPR) is designed to give you what you need to plan, build, test and take your solution to market. We've brought a range of platform development tools together in one place, including technical, support and marketing resources, as well as exclusive offers.
If you are an ISV implementing a Software as a Service application that serves up blob data to globally remote locations you need to be aware that Microsoft has a growing list of 20 physical edge nodes where data can be cached for fast retrieval.
This caching feature can be used to improve the delivery of performance-sensitive content around the globe.
Recently the Windows Azure team announced the current locations of these nodes.
Bill Zack


text:
|Quick links:
Latest Team Rankings
Free Text Alerts
Member Services
|ShopMobileRadio RSSRivals.com Yahoo! Sports
|College Teams
|High Schools
April 4, 2014
Dolphins Rally For Win
Hayley Leach drove home the go-ahead run in the bottom of the sixth inning to help Cape Henry Collegiate rally back to defeat St Catherines of Richmond by a final score of 5-4. Leach drilled a grounder deep in the infield for a single.
Hayley Welch pitched a perfect 1-2-3 seventh inning to pickup the win. She threw a complete game striking out nine Lady Saints. All four of St Catherine's runs were unearned.
The Dolphins trailed 3-0 before tying the game with a big fourth inning. Eighth-grader Rileigh Ramirez singled with the bases-loaded plating Mariel Kondas and Mackenzie Cafferty to even the score at three.
Junior Angel Thornton finished 2 of 4 from the plate with a double with an RBI for Cape Henry. St Catherines received two hits each from Caroline Vath and Mia Harris.
The Dolphins host rival Norfolk Academy on Friday.
Virginia NEWS
Latest Headlines:


text:
Cassini Raw Images: DAPHNIS: N00195950.jpg
|Full-Res: N00195950.jpg
N00195950.jpg was taken on October 06, 2012 and received on Earth October 09, 2012. The camera was pointing toward DAPHNIS, and the image was taken using the CL1 and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2013.
For more information on raw images check out our frequently asked questions section.
Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute


text:
This post was sponsored by Nature Made® as a part of a Blog Blast for Influence Central
We're halfway through February (already?!), so that means that for most of us, our New Year's resolutions are (hopefully) in full swing. For me, I wanted to make simple changes to eat better, create something everyday and spend time outdoors each day, as well. For me, big, sweeping changes aren't realistic; I'm more apt to lean towards small changes that will, over time, make a big impact.
Nature Made gets this, and has created a site called Daily Boost, whose goal is to inspire us all to do right by our bodies through small, simple steps that don't take up a lot of time. Nature Made, as you may be aware, is the nation's #1 best-selling brand for quality vitamins and supplementsm* to help support nutritional gaps*, and is also the #1 recommended supplement brand in 9 categories.**
Always on the lookout for easy ways to inspire my own health and wellness, I signed up for Daily Boost, and encourage you to give it a try, too!
You can purchase your Nature Made vitamins and supplements at Walmart, and, as an incentive, you can enter here through February 25th to win one of 20 $50 Walmart gift cards!
Nature Made Wellness
*I-C will randomly select 20 winners from all program entries and will handle fulfillment of the winning prizes.
You can also find Nature Made here:
facebook / twitter
*Based in part on data reported by Nielsen through its Scantrack Service for the Vitamins Category for 52-week period ending 9/26/2015, for the xAOC, FDM, and FM Markets. Copyright © 2015 Nielsen.
**Based on US News & World Report – Pharmacy Times Survey, Nature Made is the #1 Pharmacist Recommended Brand in Nine Categories – Letter Vitamins, Omega-3/Fish Oil, Coenzyme Q10, Flax Seed Oil, Herbal Supplements, Cholesterol Management-Natural, Garlic, Diabetic Multivitamins and Mood Health Supplements


text:
Owner of Napoli Pizzeria, Mike Guerrera, makes the first pizza of the day Tuesday in Vacaville. Guerrera recently expanded the restaurant to hold more booths and tables for the local pizzeria. (Conner Jay/Daily Republic)
The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.
Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Email Address


text:
Give yourself permission to shine with this bewitching Mac Duggal 6033D Couture strapless fit-and-flare gown! The pleated sweetheart bodice segues into a fitted midsection thats awash in sparkling bands. The skirt flares out elegantly to complete this unforgettable look.
Find a lower price and we will match and beat it by 5%
We are an authorized retailer of all the dresses we sell. We only sell 100% authentic dresses.
Please refer to our return policy.
Free ground shipping on orders over $50.
4.8 out of 5 (13 Reviews)
Read More


text:
Sign in now to view, license and download this image or contact us to see this image without a watermark. Want to embed this image on a non-commercial website or blog? Learn more.
Similar imagesView all
Missouri 1916 Heaths Creek Township Lookout Postal Pettis County Stock Illustration1916,Antique,Archival,Cartography,City Map,Color Image,History,Illustration,Mail,Map,Missouri,No People,Old,VerticalPhotographer Historic Map Works LLCCollection: Historic Map Works Missouri, 1916, Heath's Creek Township, Lookout, Postal, Pettis County


text:
Advertisement:Close [X]
Pix & Video At Pix & Video we provide you with just that! Some of the sexiest girls in the world right at your finger tips! Watch them suck, fuck and lick until your balls are drained.
84% 131137,541
Clara G can still get off even when she has to...Want to subscribe to this channel?
Sign in to add this channel to your list
Sign in or Register to Pix & Video1688


text:
Picture: Julia Roberts "Charlotte's Web" movie premiere held at the ArcLight Theatre Los Angeles, California - 10.12.06
Oscar winner Julia Roberts will star in the big screen family drama THE FRIDAY NIGHT KNITTING CLUB. The Erin Brockovich star has been an avid knitter for years and regularly indulges in her hobby during down time on film sets. Roberts will also produce the project through her Red Om production company. The film is based on KATE JACOBS' upcoming novel and centres on a single mother who juggles the demands of running a Manhattan, New York knitting store with raising her spirited teen daughter. Her regular customers gather once a week to work on their latest projects and chat, but when a tragedy occurs, the customers realise they've created more than just a knitting club.