Matthew 23:2–3 in Context, History, and Theology

One verse, lifted from its setting, can be made to carry far more weight than it was ever meant to bear. Matthew 23:2–3—“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you”—has often been invoked to claim that Yeshua granted ongoing religious authority to Rabbinic Judaism and its Oral Law. A careful reading of the text, however—within its historical, literary, and covenantal context—shows that this conclusion does not follow.

1. The danger of building theology on a single, de-contextualized verse

Sound theology is cumulative. It arises from the harmony of Scripture, not from a solitary line abstracted from its narrative flow. At the point where Yeshua speaks these words, the new covenant had not yet been inaugurated through His death and resurrection, and the temple was still standing. He is addressing Israel within the structures of Second Temple Judaism—structures He repeatedly critiques and ultimately transcends.

If Yeshua intended His disciples to submit to Rabbinic authority, we would expect that instruction to recur—clearly and consistently—across the Gospels and the apostolic writings. It does not. The apostles never commanded believers to follow the rabbis or the Oral Law. Instead, they proclaim Messiah as the final and faithful interpreter of Torah and the fulfillment of Moses and the Prophets.

2. Yeshua’s own practice contradicts Rabbinic absolutism

Yeshua’s life interprets His words. Again and again, He refuses to subordinate God’s command to human tradition.

• He does not observe ritual hand-washing according to Pharisaic custom (Matt. 15:1–9).
• He openly rebukes religious leaders: “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!” (Mark 7:9).
• He echoes the prophets’ ancient critique: “This people draw near with their mouth … while their fear of me is a commandment taught by men” (Isa. 29:13).

It would be incoherent to suggest that, in a single sentence, Yeshua reverses this consistent stance and enshrines the very authority He elsewhere dismantles.

3. Which rabbis, exactly?

The claim also collapses historically. In Yeshua’s day, there was no monolithic “rabbinic Judaism.” Competing schools—most famously the houses of Shammai and Hillel—held sharply opposing interpretations of Torah. If Yeshua were commanding obedience to rabbinic authority, to which school? Scripture is silent, because the premise itself is mistaken.

Even more striking: Matthew 23 is not a chapter of endorsement but of indictment. Immediately after acknowledging that the scribes and Pharisees “sit on Moses’ seat,” Yeshua unleashes a series of devastating “woes,” exposing their hypocrisy and warning His hearers not to imitate their deeds. Any interpretation that turns this chapter into a charter for rabbinic authority runs directly against its rhetorical force.

4. What, then, is “Moses’ seat”?

The phrase does not denote a transferable chain of rabbinic power. Rather, it refers to a place.

In the synagogue of the Second Temple period, “Moses’ seat” was the physical seat or platform from which the Torah was read aloud. This was not symbolic authority; it was functional proclamation. Most Jews did not own personal copies of the Scriptures. There were no bookstores, no printing presses, no digital texts. To hear Moses, one went to the synagogue.

Archaeology confirms this. In Chorazin, north of the Sea of Galilee, excavations of a synagogue (dating to the fourth century) uncovered an actual stone seat identified by inscription as “the seat of Moses.” The custom did not suddenly arise centuries after Yeshua; it reflects a long-standing synagogue practice.

This understanding is reinforced by Jewish scholarship. Hananel Mack of Bar-Ilan University, in his study “The Seat of Moses,” argues—on the basis of archaeology and early rabbinic sources such as Pesikta de-Rab Kahana (7b)—that the New Testament phrase refers to the synagogue seat from which Scripture was read, not to doctrinal supremacy.

5. “Do and observe”: hearing Scripture, not sanctifying tradition

Read this way, Yeshua’s instruction becomes clear and coherent. When the scribes and Pharisees read Moses publicly from the synagogue seat, the people should listen. Why? Because Moses is God’s word—and because Moses testifies about the Messiah.

Yeshua Himself explains this logic elsewhere: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me” (John 5:46). The Torah read from Moses’ seat bears witness to the coming Prophet promised in Deuteronomy 18:15. Hearing Moses faithfully should lead Israel to Yeshua, not away from Him.

Thus, Yeshua is not authorizing rabbinic tradition; He is directing His hearers to the written Scriptures that point unmistakably to Himself.

6. From Moses to Messiah

Once the new covenant is established, the center of authority shifts decisively. The apostles do not appeal to “Moses’ seat” or rabbinic rulings; they proclaim the risen Messiah as Lord, through whom the meaning of Torah is unveiled. Moses is not abolished—but fulfilled, transfigured, and interpreted in the light of Christ.

In this sense, Matthew 23:2–3 is not a mandate for eternal rabbinic authority. It is a moment in salvation history, acknowledging a synagogue function while preparing Israel to move beyond it. Moses’ seat served its purpose: to read the Scriptures aloud until the One to whom they testify stood among the people and said, “You have heard… but I say to you.”

Conclusion

Yeshua did not hand His followers over to rabbinic Judaism. He called them to hear Moses—and, in hearing Moses rightly, to recognize Him. The seat was wooden or stone; the authority was never ultimate. The Word read there was holy, but it was always meant to lead beyond the seat, beyond the synagogue, beyond tradition—to the living Torah made flesh.

To listen to Moses is good. To stop at Moses’ seat is to miss the point.