Explanation:

After Jesus is hung on the cross, Matthew describes how he is mocked and humiliated. He then explains that darkness fell over the land for three hours. That darkness is a symbol of divine judgment. We can deduce this because there are other passages in Scripture that associate darkness and judgment. For example, when God prophesies judgement on Israel through the prophet Amos, he describes the horror of his judgment by saying that on that day, the earth will be darkened in broad daylight (Amos 8:9).⁴ Similarly, when God prophesies against the people through Isaiah, he explains that when he uses the nations to judge them, it will be darkness and distress (Isaiah 5:30). Also, in Joel 3:15 we learn that the day of the Lord’s judgment is near, which means the sun and moon are darkened. Thus, we can see that when darkness falls over the land in Matthew 27:45 the darkness indicates divine judgment. And since we know from Scripture that Jesus carries the curse of sin on the cross, we can conclude that the divine judgment has to do with Christ carrying the penalty of sin (Galatians 3:13).⁵

Counterargument:

While it is true that darkness and divine judgment are sometimes associated, this association is made explicit. That is to say, the biblical authors make it clear that there is judgment and there is darkness and that these concepts are clearly connected. When it comes to Matthew 27:45, there is no mention of judgment. Rather, we find the perfect God-man Jesus Christ, brutally mocked, and hung on the cross. The land then goes dark, before Jesus finally succumbs to his injuries. Matthew says nothing about divine judgment, but simply leaves the meaning of the darkness ambiguous, allowing the reader to fill in the blanks.⁶

Response to counterargument:

While it is true that Matthew does not specify that divine judgment transpires during the three hours of darkness, we can deduce that this is the case from other portions of Scripture. For example, in Romans 3:24–25, Paul explains that believers are redeemed through the blood of Christ, because God put Christ forward as a propitiation for our sins (Romans 3:24–25). In other words, Christ took on the penalty that our sins deserve. Also, the apostle Peter says that Christ bore our sins in his body on the cross so that we might die to sin (Matthew 20:28). Finally, Jesus himself told the disciples that he would give his life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:28). Thus, we can conclude that Jesus took on the punishment for sin through the cross. And since taking on the punishment for sin has to do with God’s judgment, and God’s judgment is associated with darkness, we can deduce that the reason darkness falls over the land while Jesus is on the cross is to symbolize God’s judgment on sin.

Explanation:

Matthew specifically mentions that after Jesus is mocked by the Jewish leaders and passers-by, darkness falls over the land for three hours. We can deduce that the darkness symbolizes God’s judgment against sin, because the period of darkness culminates in Jesus’ cry of desolation, My God, my God, what have you forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46). Jesus’ cry indicates that the full weight of God’s judgment for the sins of the world now rests on his shoulders, as he is abandoned by the Father to the sentence of death.⁷

Counterargument:

The problem here is that Matthew does not explain why Jesus cries out, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? That is to say, Matthew does not specify that the reason Jesus cries out in desolation is because he is undergoing God’s judgment. This leaves it up to the interpreter to decide why Jesus says this, and one plausible answer is that he has Psalm 22:1–31 in mind. The first line of the psalm is, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Given that religious people often recite Bible passages for comfort, it is no wonder that Jesus does the same here. Thus, Jesus may recite the psalm not because he was literally abandoned, but because in all his pain it felt that way.⁸

Response to counterargument:

Matthew does not need to explain why Jesus cries out in desolation, because the cry of desolation speaks for itself. Jesus is not ambiguous, when he cries out, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Thus, we ought to take Jesus at his word and conclude that in some mysterious sense, Jesus was abandoned by the Father on the cross.⁹

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that Matthew explains how darkness falls over all the land. That the darkness falls over all the land seems to indicate judgment on all those living in the land. That is, Matthew does not say that the darkness has to do with Jesus carrying the penalty for sin. If darkness fell over Golgotha, it would be clear that the darkness has to do with the cross. Given that it covers the whole land, and the people have handed God’s perfect Son over to the Romans for execution, it is possible the darkness represents judgment on the people.

Explanation:

Matthew explains that darkness fell over the land for three hours, but he does not explain why. In fact, there are multiple possible interpretations for why darkness falls on the land. For one, the darkness could be a sign of judgment. Second, it could indicate heavenly sorrow. And third, it could mean that the sun covers its face in shame so as not to witness the spectacle. In other words, Matthew has left the meaning of the darkness purposely ambiguous in order to create suspense. It is as though Matthew wants us to see that as darkness falls on the land, the whole world holds its breath as it anticipates something earth-shattering.¹⁰

Counterargument:

That one can interpret the meaning of darkness falling on the land in a number of different ways does not entail that Matthew has left the meaning of the darkness ambiguous. Rather, it means that we must utilize whatever interpretive skills we can muster to understand Matthew’s intended meaning. And when we muster our interpretative skills, we can see that the event means more than that the whole world held its breath. First, this view holds that what Matthew recorded was a historical event. By some supernatural means the sun was darkened so that darkness fell over the land, and the timing of this darkness coincided with the time when Jesus suffered on the cross. To suggest that darkness falling over the land is ambiguous is to suggest that there is no conceivable reason why, when Jesus was crucified, darkness would fall on the land. Of course, when one considers that through the crucifixion Jesus takes on the sin of the world so that humanity is finally reconciled with God, it is not hard to understand what it means that darkness fell on the land. Likely the darkness fell on the land because Jesus was bearing the punishment for the sins of the world. In any case, the point is that we cannot conclude from the fact that there are multiple interpretative options that Matthew is purposely ambiguous. Matthew records a historical event that we as interpreters are tasked with interpreting.

Response to counterargument:

While it is true that Matthew records a historical event that we are tasked with interpreting, the ambiguity allows for multiple meanings. Sometimes an event might have several layers of meaning. For example, that God brought darkness over the land could be God’s way of demonstrating his judgment, his sorrow, and the fact that something earth-shattering is about to take place. Since Matthew does not want to limit the meaning of the darkness, he leaves the meaning ambiguous, not in the sense that the darkness does not mean anything, but in the sense that the reader is free to fill in what they think the darkness means. Thus, the meaning of the darkness is likely multi-layered, but it does not mean just anything.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that it wants to leave open what the darkness means while limiting possible meanings. That is, the view does not want us to conclude that the darkness can mean anything at all, but by saying the darkness is ambiguous, it gives us no interpretive clues to work with.

Explanation:

While Jesus is on the cross, darkness comes over the land for three hours. To understand what the darkness symbolizes, it is important to identify the role that darkness plays in Scripture. What one finds is that darkness has to do with end-time judgment, the judgment of God that will happen at the end of times. We know that darkness is related to end-time judgment from a number of passages. For example, in Joel 2:31 we read that the sun will be turned to darkness on the great and awesome day of the Lord. Similarly, in the book of Revelation after the sixth seal is opened the sun becomes black as sackcloth and the moon turns to blood before the day of wrath (Revelation 6:12). Also, in Matthew’s own Gospel, Jesus explains that at the end, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light (Matthew 24:29). Thus, we ought to see it that the darkness signals God’s end-time judgment.¹¹

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that if the darkness signalled God’s end-time judgment, this would imply that the end of the universe had come. Of course, the end had not come; rather, a new beginning has come, for we know that following the crucifixion is Christ’s glorious resurrection and humanity’s restored relationship with God. The fact is, while darkness has to do with end-time judgment, it also has to do with judgment in general. Since there is nothing in Matthew 27:45 to suggest end-time judgment, we should interpret the judgment as God’s judgment on Christ.¹²

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that it confuses judgment with end-time judgment. In Scripture, darkness is associated with both judgment and end-time judgment. Since the cross was not the end of the universe but the beginning of a new era in history, we cannot say that the darkness had to do with end-time judgment.