Jesus vs. Paul?

Misunderstood Verses #2

Matthew 6:14-15: For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. ~ Jesus

Ephesians 4:32: And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. ~ Paul

Recently I've become aware of a teaching that proposes that Jesus and Paul are at odds in these two statements. They say that Jesus says our forgiveness (which has to mean our salvation, since no one I'm aware of teaches one can be partially forgiven and go to heaven) is based on our forgiveness of others - that is our performance. Paul tells us that we forgive others because of how completely God has forgiven us.

The resolution they provide seems simple enough: Jesus was talking about a different era in God's redemptive history. Before the cross, before the resurrection, before Pentecost, whenever, God dealt with people on the basis of their performance. But now God deals with us based on Christ's all-sufficient work on the cross. It sounds plausible, because Hebrews tells us about the new and living way we have in Christ. But some (not all) who teach this are overzealous for the new and living way. In their exuberance they overlook a God who has always shown mankind mercy and grace.

If Jesus was saying that there was a time (obviously it had to include the time that Jesus was speaking) that God's forgiveness was conditional on our action, then that must mean no one from that era will be in heaven. I don't think I need to post any references to the fact that man can in no way earn God's favor, since if you've read this far you are interested enough in Scripture to understand that. God's grace has never been in this time or any other time based on man's performance.

To de-emphasize God's grace in previous times is to do injustice to our unchanging God and the great heroes of the Old Testament. Genesis 15:6 tells us, "He (Abraham) believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness." Three times in the New Testament (here, here and here) this verse is quoted as an illustration of the way we all must come to God. I'm thankful for the more complete revelation we have in Christ, but all God ever required, requires now and will ever require is belief in him.

So if Jesus was not saying that forgiveness is based on our performance, what did he mean? And how are Jesus' and Paul's statements rectified? To me it seems simple, because the key is in another verse in Ephesians: "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (2:10) If we as believers are ordained by God to walk in good works, is it not reasonable to assume that forgiveness will be one of those good works? And if so, then truly one who can never find it in their heart to forgive their fellow human knows nothing of the love, mercy and forgiveness of God.

We as believers will fail to forgive one another completely. If we wouldn't, why would Paul need to encourage us to forgive in the second verse above? We certainly deal with the works of the flesh in our hearts and lives. But we are just as certainly on the road to being the people God wants us to be. God promises to work in our lives to bring us farther on that road, but the journey won't be complete till we get to heaven.

The New F-Word?

This will be the first in a series of articles about verses that I think have been misapplied down through the years.

Misunderstood Verses #1

Matthew 5:22: And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

For most of my life, I've heard this verse explained to mean that Jesus does not want us to use the word "fool" to describe someone. I suppose that's not the best thing to say to a person, but I believe Jesus had a much deeper and more profound message than just that. If you think Jesus was adding another four-letter word to the list that nice people don't say, then you are missing the point.

I'm told the Aramaic (the dialect of Hebrew spoken in Palestine during Jesus' time) word "raca" means "empty-headed." Seems to me that's not much different than "fool." But you could be brought to the council for saying one and not the other. Why bring someone who uses one insult before the council and not another? The logical assumption is that "raca" was a profanity in Jesus' day.

Photo Credit

Every society has profanities - words, gestures, etc. They vary from culture to culture. My dad served a tour of duty in Vietnam with the Marines. He never did and still doesn't talk about very much of what he experienced there, but one thing I remember him talking about was the fact that an innocent-looking (to Americans) "come here" gesture was a vile profanity in Vietnam. One of the things they trained foreign soldiers before they arrived in Vietnam was to not use that particular gesture.

Profanities are a part of the human experience. Whether that's a good or bad thing, I'm not quite sure, but the fact remains every society has them. In Jesus' day, one of the worst things you could say was "raca." It was apparently so bad that even saying it in public would get you sent before the religious authorities. The religious authorities in Jesus' day had limited but real power. They couldn't criminally punish, but they could embarrass people in front of the community in a way that kept most people in line with Jewish customs.

What kind of words are so bad that Jesus would say they are worse than cuss words? Very simple: words that hurt and leave a lasting impression on their victims. It might not be pleasant, but think back: every one of us can remember something someone said that cut us to the core like a knife. Maybe it was a classmate or group of classmates at school. Maybe a coworker or a boss. Sadly for some folks it might be something a teacher or even their parents said. I could be wrong, but I'd be willing to guess the person who said memorably hurtful things to you didn't use a string of four-letter words. Even if they did, it wasn't the cuss words that hurt you nearly as much as what they were saying beyond those words.

This, I believe, is the point Jesus was making here. The religious authorities of Jesus' day (and lots of people today) thought saying swear words was the worst sin you could commit with your mouth. As long as they didn't say those words, they thought they were doing pretty good. But Jesus said real sin goes a lot deeper than that. Words spoken in anger, pride and condescension can do lasting damage to people, regardless of whether there are cuss words thrown in or not.

I'm not saying you ought to go around cussing a blue streak. Jesus didn't say the council was wrong for punishing people who swore. What Jesus was warning against was the attitude that says as long as I'm not saying the words on somebody's naughty list then whatever I want to say is fine. It's not fine. Paul said that our words should "impart grace" to those who hear them. That should be the ideal that you and I should strive for: to be the kind of people whose words bring encouragement and grace to others.

TOMS: Matthew 28 and Intro to Mark

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Jan. 11, 2007

This chapter tells the story of the Resurrection. Matthew tells us very little about the events of the Resurrection, except for one detail that once again demonstrates one of Matthew's purposes: to demonstrate the depths to which the Jews had sunk in their rejection of Jesus:

“While they were going, behold, some of the guard went into the city and told the chief priests all that had taken place. And when they had assembled with the elders and taken counsel, they gave a sufficient sum of money to the soldiers and said, ‘Tell people, “His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep.” And if this comes to the governor's ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.’ So they took the money and did as they were directed. And this story has been spread among the Jews to this day.” (28:11-15, ESV)

The Jews were willing to lie to themselves and to their fellow Jews to keep the truth about Jesus suppressed. Matthew wrote this just in case a Jewish Christian heard this story and believed it might be true.

So that wraps up the book of Matthew.

Mark is quite different. Mark is a psychologist. He is more concerned with other people and their reaction to Jesus. Not that he does not faithfully record important events in the life of Jesus- of course he does. But he also investigates the reactions of the disciples, the people whom Jesus healed, and His opponents. Mark is dreadfully honest and painfully forthright in his descriptions of Jesus' ministry, writing about how His own family mocked Him and how many people who seemed to be honest in seeking to know Jesus were offended by the things He said. And in many cases, I can hardly blame them. But we'll get to that when we get to that.

As a journalist, I identify with Mark's gospel. His writing is brief and to the point. And Mark seems more concerned with the human impact of what Jesus did. I know there are plenty of comparisons between the Gospels, but here is mine: John is the omniscient narrator. He tells us many times what Jesus was thinking or what Jesus knew. He interjects a lot of his own (inspired) commentary into the story. Matthew and Luke are in the front row, feverishly writing down everything Jesus says. They are the court reporters. They give us long stretches of Jesus' teaching. Mark is on the fringe of the crowd. He hears Jesus, but he seems just as interested in what people are saying around him. Mark records a lot of miracles and "facts" about Jesus, much like a journalist would.

TOMS: Matthew 26

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Jan. 9, 2007

This chapter begins the story of the Crucifixion. All four Gospels approach the Crucifixion a little bit differently. John spends about five chapters on the night before Jesus was crucified, for example. Matthew just gives us the basics.

Matthew starts with a banquet at the house of Simon the leper. No doubt Jesus healed him of his leprosy. Remember that leprosy mentioned in the Bible is not the same as Hanssen's disease, which is the modern disease described as leprosy. Leviticus goes into a lot of detail describing the symptoms of leprosy, and they are not the same. I actually think I may have had some symptoms of what the Bible calls leprosy when I took some prescription medication I was allergic to. I had awful blisters all over my body and had constant fever. I switched meds and I was fine.

That has nothing to do with this. Anyway, at the banquet, an unnamed woman comes in and anoints Jesus with a flask of ointment. This is possibly the same incident described in John 12 in which the woman is identified as Mary, the sister of Lazarus. Both incidents occurred at Bethany, and both occurred during the week of Jesus’ crucifixion. This is not the same incident when a woman does something similar and everyone is shocked because the woman was a prostitute.

Next we have the scene in the upper room. Matthew just tells us that they had a traditional Passover meal and mentions the fact that Judas went out to betray Jesus. He also mentions the institution of the Lord's Supper.

I am breezing through this because this is such a long chapter, and I am sure you are very familiar with the crucifixion of Christ.

One thing I will mention at this point: Jesus Christ's death on the cross is a substitutionary payment for everyone who believes, past, present  and future. Now you may say that is so simple that everyone knows that. Don't bet too much that all Christians understand that. Obviously we don't have to understand every detail of doctrine in order to be saved. If that were true, none of us would make it. 

But listen to the statements people make: "It took just as much of the blood of Jesus to save that murderer as it did this little child," as if God has a magic eyedropper with the blood of Jesus and dabs an equal amount on all who believe. Of course Christ's sacrifice is sufficient, but it's not as if God parcels it out.

Or how about this one: "Jesus took our hell so we don't have to." The substitutionary atonement means that God treats us believers as if we have the righteousness of Christ, and He treated Christ on the cross as if Jesus had lived my life and your life. Christ died my death and your death. I know the Apostles' Creed says that Christ went to hell, but that is used in the Old Testament sense of the word as being the abode of the dead, both believers and unbelievers. (I happen to believe that all believers of all time have gone to the presence of God when they died, but that is not the traditional Jewish assumption, and it is reflected in some of the Old Testament. We will discuss this at length when we get to Luke 16.) Modern people do not think of "hell" as the neutral abode of all the dead. We think of it as the place of God's judgment against unbelief. I'm not attacking the Apostles' Creed, but I am suggesting that we read it in the sense that it meant to those who wrote it centuries ago.

Don't get the idea that He was tortured for three days. That's definitely not what the Apostles' Creed is teaching. Jesus was no sinner. God treated Him as if He was while He was dying, but once His earthly body died He was once again the great King of Kings. Hell is not a place where you pay for your sin. If Christ paid for our sins in hell, then He is still there because three days is not long enough to pay for anybody's sin if eternity is the price for one person's sin. I don't pretend to know all the answers to all the possible questions, but I just find it sad that so many Christians don't understand the basics of what Jesus did for them.

TOMS: Matthew 25

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Jan. 8, 2007

Hey, I'm sorry I haven't posted in a while, but mostly I just forgot. Right now it's halftime of the Florida-Ohio St. game, and the result has been shocking to say the least. But I must say that I'm glad. Anything that creates more chaos in college football until we get a real playoff is wonderful.

Anyway this chapter basically consists of three very familiar passages: the 10 virgins, the talents and the sheep and goats judgment. The point of the parables is that we need to be watchfully busy until the Lord returns.

The parable of the virgins is very simple. There were five who brought oil in their lamps, and there were five who did not. When the groom came, the five foolish virgins had to scramble to find some oil, and when they finally got some, the door to the wedding was locked. It's always dangerous to make a parable say more than what the obvious simple point is, so it is not wise to say, for example, that Jesus is saying that half of the professing church is not truly born again. I've heard preachers and teachers say that exact thing, and maybe you have heard that or something similar. That's just conjecture and not sound interpretation. What it simply means is that there will be many who claim to be followers of God who will not be ready when Jesus returns to set up His kingdom, and they will be shocked to find themselves on the outside looking in. That should be kind of obvious, but some folks get all excited about "hidden meanings" in the text and ignore the obvious point Jesus was making.

The second parable, the talents, has more direct application for us. A man gave one servant five talents, another two and another one. A talent was a large amount of money, more than $100,000 in our terms.

I shouldn't say anything, but it is terribly ironic that the Ohio St. band is playing the song from "Titanic" right now during the halftime show. I guess they think the Buckeyes are a sinking ship.

The ones who got five and two doubled their money through investments. The man who got one buried his money so he wouldn't lose it. God has given us all responsibilities. If we waste the ones God gives us, we will suffer loss.

Then we have the judgment of the nations. This is the judgment of the sheep and the goats. The sheep are welcomed into the Kingdom because they helped "the least of these my brothers." I believe the sheep and the goats is are the righteous and unrighteous Gentile survivors of the Tribulation. I could be completely wrong, but that's the interpretation that makes the most sense to me. During the Tribulation the Jews will be persecuted to the end of the earth by the Antichrist. Those who helped protect and serve them - clothe and feed them, visit them in prison, etc. - will enter Christ's millennial kingdom as mortals along with the surviving Jews.

As I said yesterday, I try not to make a big deal about interpretation of prophecy. But we are here in Matthew 25 and I try to have a take on it. If it doesn't happen that way, it won't shake my confidence in God the least bit.

TOMS: Matthew 24

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Jan. 4, 2007

Matthew 24 and 25 are a minefield to try to interpret, especially 24. This is Jesus' great Olivet Discourse, where He gives a prophetic view of the future. Here's the problem I have with prophecy: it's impossible to predict with certainty what a prophecy means or how it will be fulfilled. That is why there are so many different beliefs out there about the end of the age, even among brethren who would agree for the most part on the rest of Scripture.

Primarily, this chapter in particular deals with the Tribulation Period, although the first part of Chapter 24 may be partially fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. And then there is a section that seems to deal with the Rapture, although there are some who dispute that.

In 24:4-14, Jesus describes the end of the age, which definitely includes our time. The next section, 24:15-26 deals with the abomination of desolation. Jesus speaks of "the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel." Well, that verse was already fulfilled (Jesus' audience would have thought) by Antiochus Epiphanes in the second century B.C. But Jesus tells us here that the ultimate fulfillment will come later. This section clearly refers to the Tribulation.

The last section of the chapter is the hardest to interpret. There are parts that seem to refer to the Rapture: "Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left." (24:40) There are those who teach that this example and others refer to being taken away to fall under God's judgment. I just don't see it. Maybe I haven't done enough study, but it seems to me that the last part of chapter 24 and the first two parables of Chapter 25, which speaks of being ready for the Lord's return, seem to be more indicative of the Rapture than of the Second Coming. Maybe I've misunderstood it, but it seems to me that for the Jews the Second Coming will be a time of absolute desperation, and they will all be looking for their Savior, but maybe they won't be. Certainly the lessons of this section are applicable to those of us who look forward to the Rapture, but I guess primarily they are for Jews to remain confident that God will not abandon them in their darkest hour.

Passages like this are not worth crossing swords with a brother over. This is certainly by no means a simple passage, and the most important lesson we need to learn is to be ready and faithful. In my experience, getting bogged down over the little details of these passages will only cause trouble where none is necessary.

TOMS: Matthew 23

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Jan. 3, 2007

This is an incredible chapter. You need to read it for yourself. Jesus pronounces seven woes upon the Pharisees. You will never find a more scathing attack on a group of people anywhere in the Bible, with the possible exception of the chapter we discussed a few months back in which Ezekiel is given a vision of some of the wicked things going on in Jerusalem and he describes it in detail and names the names of those involved.

I am kind of rendered speechless by this powerful passage. I will just basically briefly summarize the seven woes:

1) They shut the door to the kingdom in people's faces

2) They doomed their proselytes to hell

3) They had buzzwords by which they could "swear" and really tell lies

4) They tithed out of their produce, but they neglected justice, mercy and faithfulness

5&6) (these go together) They cleaned the outside of the cup but neglected to clean the spiritual filth on the inside and they were like whitewashed graves- clean on the outside but full of dead men's bones within

7) They built and decorated the tombs of the prophets of the past, but they were about to kill the greatest Prophet, the One about whom all those other prophets were speaking of

At the end of this chapter, Jesus weeps over Jerusalem, that they had rejected Him.

TOMS: Matthew 21

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Jan. 1, 2007

This chapter begins with the Triumphal Entry, what we celebrate as Palm Sunday. There weren't too many people in the crowd that day who did not know what Jesus was doing. In fact, most people today miss the significance. Every observant Jew would have been familiar with the passage in Zechariah which prophesied of this event.

One of the commands in Moses' Law about Hebrew kings was that they were not to multiply horses. Horses were an outward show of strength, and God wanted the king to be humble. Saul is always spoken of in the historical books as riding a mule, and David is also often described as riding a mule or a donkey. By the time of Solomon, though, this idea was abandoned. Yet Zechariah predicted that the future Messiah would renew that tradition when he wrote:

"Behold your king is coming to you; righteous and having salvation is he, humble and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey." (Zechariah 9:9)

This is why there was an uproar in Jerusalem when this happened. That is why the Pharisees demanded that Jesus stop the show. They knew He was claiming to be the Messiah, coming to set up the Kingdom. And they, even more than the Romans, who did not care about the Jewish traditions, were determined to see Jesus stopped.

After arriving in Jerusalem, Jesus goes to the Temple and runs out the money changers and vendors. This must have been a hilarious scene. A man running around setting loose sheep, goats, cattle and birds in the outer court of the Temple, kicking over tables and chasing people out would have been great entertainment for the people who were weary of the money machine the holy days had become.

The next section, which covers most of three chapters, is an extended conversation between the religious leaders and Jesus. First, they asked Jesus a question: "By what authority are you doing these things?" Jesus did not answer, but responded with another question: "The baptism of John, from where did it come? From heaven or from man?" Jesus revealed by this question that they were not concerned about learning the facts. They only wanted to make Jesus look bad. When Jesus turned the tables on them, they could not respond, because they could not say it was from God, because then He would ask why they rejected him. And if they said it was of men, then the people would be incensed, because everybody viewed John as a prophet.

Then Jesus tells a couple of stories that demonstrated what the religious leaders really were. The first story is of a father with two sons. He told both of them to do a certain job. The first one refused, but later repented and did it. The second said he would do it, but never did it. Jesus said the religious leaders were like the second son, and those who followed Him were like the first son. Yes they used to be sinners, but they changed and are now in more favor than those who claim to obey.

The second story is more direct. It is about a farmer who loaned out his land to tenants. When the farmer wanted his share of the crop, the tenants beat the servant who came to collect. After sending several servants and having them all mistreated, the farmer says he will send his son, because they will respect him. But the tenants decide to kill the son and that way they can get the land for themselves when the old man dies. After the crowd responds that the man should kill the servants and give his land to someone else, Jesus says:

"Have you never read in the scriptures, 'The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes?' Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits." (21:42-43, ESV)

Jesus is predicting His own death and rejection by the Jews. They were already making plans to kill Him, and sayings like this only made them more angry. The Jews were always asking Jesus to tell them plainly if He was the Messiah. Well, He basically did in this chapter, and all it did was make them want to kill Him even more. They had already rejected Him in their hearts; they were just pretending to be curious.

TOMS: Matthew 20

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 30, 2006

This chapter starts out with a very strange story. Jesus tells the story of a man who went out and hired workers for the day. He hired them for a denarius, which we discussed a couple of days ago. When he needed more workers, he went out at 9:00, noon, 3:00 and then at 5:00. The people he hired last only worked one hour. At the end of the day, he paid everybody a denarius. The people who worked all day were outraged. But the man said they agreed to work for a denarius, and it wasn't their business what he paid the other workers. The man was insulted that the workers who worked all day were angry because he was generous to the workers who couldn't find work all day.

This parable was aimed primarily at the Pharisees again. They were so proud of their accomplishments for God. They were the people who worked all day. When they saw that those who worked less got a denarius, they thought they would get more. They were so busy comparing themselves to those other people who did less that they forgot about their agreement. We always overestimate our own goodness while easily seeing the flaws in others. I know I often wonder why other people who are obviously not as committed or experienced or smart as I am get recognition or promotions or whatever. This passage is a reminder for us to be the person God wants us to be and not worry about other people, as hard as that may be.

Next we have the story of James' and John's mother asking for the seats of honor in the kingdom. John doesn't mention this story in his gospel, probably because he was embarrassed by the whole thing. Anyway, their mom came up to Jesus and asked if her two sons could sit on either side of Jesus in the Kingdom. Jesus gave a very judicious answer, saying that those places were not His to give, that the Father would choose those places. Then Jesus tells them what kind of person will get those seats:

"You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."(20:25-28, ESV)

The last section of the chapter is the story of two blind men being healed. This story is very similar to the account in other gospels of Bartimaeus, except that there are two men. I think I remember reading one time when I was in college about the differences between these two stories, but I can't remember them now. I wish real life was as easy as college. All you have to do is learn and study and make enough money to survive, and you don't really need that much. Anyway, this is another example of Jesus acting like He wasn't interested in healing someone, but when they persisted He stopped and healed them. Jesus always responded when someone demonstrated faith in Him.

TOMS: Matthew 19

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 29, 2006

This chapter begins with Jesus confronting the Pharisees about a very important question: divorce. Jesus first responds to their question by saying, among other things, "What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." The Pharisees push Him farther, asking why then God allowed for divorce in Moses' law. Jesus responded:

"Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery."(19:8-9)

God never intended for people to divorce. He wants people to stay together for life. Now later in the New Testament Paul gives us additional instruction regarding divorce, but it does not nullify the overall teaching Jesus was giving us here. I hear lots of people say something like, "I love them, but if they ever cheat, it's over." What about the verse that says if a man (or woman, of course) looks at someone else with lust, they have already committed adultery in their heart? No marriage would be safe if people applied this passage to the extreme. Now I'm no expert on the subject, of course, but the bigger point is that God wants people to work things out and be committed to each other, even if it is painful. There comes a time when working things out is impossible. I understand that. But our society takes marriage so flippantly, and that is not God's plan at all.

Let's move on. Next we find the story of the rich young ruler. A man came running to Jesus and asked Him what he should do to gain eternal life. Now I must say that if he were to come to 99 percent of Christians with that question, either they wouldn't know what to say or (and I would probably include myself in this one) they would lead them through a plan of salvation they learned in Sunday School, get them to pray and then tell them they're saved.

That's not what Jesus did. First of all, He asked if he had kept the Law. Instead of admitting that he was indeed a sinner, he said that he had kept the whole Law since he was a little boy. Then Jesus tells him to go sell all he has and give it to the poor, and then follow Him. Of course the man went away.Then Jesus makes a startling statement to His disciples:

"Truly, I say to you, only with difficulty will a rich person enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."(19:23-24)

The disciples were astonished and asked, "Who then can be saved?" Centuries of Jewish tradition said that rich people were rich because they had gained favor with God. They were not unlike today's health and wealth preachers who tell people that if they're poor, it's because they don't have enough faith or they aren't doing enough good works. Jesus puts that idea to rest. God does not care about our material wealth. He is more concerned with our spiritual wealth. We'll come back to that in a second.

Then Peter makes a bold statement: "See, we have left everything and followed you. What then shall we have?" (19:27) Most of us would have responded, "You'll get nothing with that attitude." But that's not what Jesus said:

"Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.(19:28-30, ESV)

Not once in the Bible will you find Jesus or anyone else telling us not to seek heavenly rewards. Keith Green was a wonderful songwriter and musician, greatly used by God, but I believe he was wrong when he wrote this phrase in his song 'Lord, you're Beautiful': "Help me to never seek a crown, for my reward is giving glory to you." Hebrews 11 is more than the chapter of faith; it is the chapter of heavenly rewards vs. earthly rewards. Abraham lived in tents, but he looked for a city in the heavens. Moses saw that it was "more profitable" to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin. God has no intention of cheating us out of happiness. He just wants us to enjoy it in eternity when we will never lose it and it is not mingled with sorrow like everything good is here on earth.

TOMS: Matthew 18

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 28, 2006

This chapter begins with the disciples wondering who would be the greatest in the Kingdom. Jesus calls a little child and says that the one who humbles himself like this child will be greatest in the Kingdom. This may mean many things, but one thing it surely means is that God is not impressed by our noise and pomp. He wants us to come to Him with the simplicity and joy of a little child. Kids don't care about most of the things we adults care about. Kids wake up in a new world every day, and they are excited about whatever comes along.

Next Jesus gives a dire warning: "And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire."(18:8-9, ESV)

Being saved or lost is a very serious thing, that we often take too lightly. We treasure our hands and feet and eyes. But Jesus says those things are expendable compared to missing heaven.

Next we have a simple parable about the lost sheep. Obviously this parable is teaching God's great love for us. He sought for us when we were lost and away from Him. I have heard some people go farther and say that the shepherd who goes after the one lost sheep is crazy, that no one would risk 99 over getting one back. And the point of the parable is that is how passionately God loves us. I'm not sure, but it is an interesting idea.

Finally we have the story of the unforgiving servant. A king was going over his books and found that one of his servants owed him 10,000 talents. This is an insane amount of money- several billion dollars. Nobody could even dream of paying the money back. The king forgave the man the debt. The relieved man went out and found somebody that owed him 100 denarii, and grabbed him and demanded his money now. This is not an insignificant amount of money. The denarius (plural denarii) was a standard laborer's day's wage. A good rule of thumb is to think of a denarius as $50 in today's money. I know minimum wage laws change and inflation happens and all that, but it still works for now. So that means the guy owed $5,000 in our money. The man who was forgiven had the man thrown in debtor's prison. Then the king had the man he had forgiven thrown in prison, because he did not show mercy to his neighbor.

For some reason the Authorized Version (KJV) translators thought they would make some money values easier for the common people to understand, so they traded out the word "denarius" (that's the exact word in the Greek) for the English word "penny." This is less than helpful. When you are teaching it, you have to first of all explain that "penny" means "denarius," and then you have to explain what a denarius is. This is an unnecessary extra step which usually only serves to confuse people. I know that has nothing to do with the story, but if you're reading the KJV you might not have any idea what Jesus is talking about. This story is more clear, but there are plenty of times when money is mentioned and the English coin names just don't make any sense at all.

Getting back to the parable, this is an important lesson for us to learn. Even if we are reading the KJV, we understand that 10,000 talents is obviously a lot more than 100 pence. In the same way we owe God an impossible debt- a debt of a lifetime of sin. Yet God, through Jesus Christ, has forgiven us that debt. Yet when people do us wrong, and yes even when they deserve it, we need to realize that they are just a sinner like us, and that instead of trying to get revenge we need to forgive.

TOMS: Matthew 17

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 27, 2006

This chapter begins with the story of the Transfiguration. I have often wondered why Jesus did this. Was it just to confirm His deity with His three core disciples? Or did He want to talk with Moses and Elijah? How did the disciples know they were looking at Moses and Elijah? Did Jesus mention them by name when He spoke to them? Anyway, the fact is that it happened. Jesus’ appearance changed to something similar to what He had looked like for all of eternity, or at least a lot closer than He looked to people around Him. He talked with Elijah and Moses. I think another account says they were talking about His coming death, but Matthew does not tell.

After they came down from the mountain, they were confronted with a serious problem: a young man possessed by a demon. When his father could not find Jesus, he came to His disciples at the bottom of the hill. They tried to cast out the demon, but could not. After Jesus cast the demon out, the disciples asked why they were unable to. Jesus said,

"Because of your little faith. For truly I say unto you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move, and nothing shall be impossible to you." (17:20, ESV)

I have a hard time understanding this passage. Jesus says very plainly that nothing shall be impossible, yet we encounter failure in our lives all the time. Paul even writes about friends who were near death and he was unable to do anything for them. It is clear that Jesus is using hyperbole. It is not because of a lack of faith that I'm not the radio voice of the Cardinals or an Oscar-winning movie director. Not that I have a great deal of faith, because I don't, but to take the passage literally, like some charismatic teachers do, is to do injustice to the Bible and to sincere people.

The last section of this chapter tells the story of the temple tax. As a rabbi, Jesus should have been exempt from the tax, but apparently the tax collector was pretty insistent, and Peter said he would pay the tax. Of course Jesus solved the problem by providing the money in a fish's mouth. This story teaches us that Jesus is concerned about the small things in our life and He has the resources to provide our needs.

TOMS: Matthew 16

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 26, 2006

Chapter 16 has a series of episodes. It's possible they all took place on one day or a couple of days, but it's also possible these events took place over the course of weeks or more. Not denying inspiration, just a reminder. The chapter starts with Jesus once again clashing with the Pharisees and Sadducees. At the beginning of the chapter, they ask Jesus for a sign, and He says they will not get a sign other than the sign of Jonah, which Jesus explained earlier would be that He would be buried for three days and three nights just like Jonah was in the whale's belly. The ironic thing is that He did give them a legitimate sign. If they had been paying attention, they would have seen it. But no. They wanted to see Jesus put on a show. A show He was of course perfectly capable of, but not a show that would have seriously changed any hearts by this point.

After the opponents leave, Jesus tells the disciples to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. The disciples foolishly thought that He was talking about bread, but Jesus explained and warned them to beware of the Pharisees' teachings.

Next Jesus asks a question: "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" (16:13) After hearing various answers, Jesus asks who they think He is. Peter answers, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."(16:16) Jesus responds with one of His most controversial statements:

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."(16:17-19, ESV)

I don't claim to have the ultimate number one answer, but I think the correct interpretation falls somewhere between the Protestant views - which say that the church is built on either Christ or Peter's profession - and the Catholic view, which says the church is built on Peter, which I think is untrue. I think, mostly based on verse 19, that Jesus was addressing all the apostles when He made this statement. Basically, Jesus was saying that Peter, whose name means "pebble," was a rock on which He would build the church. In Ephesians 2 Paul speaks of the church built upon the foundation of the apostles, with Christ being the head cornerstone. Peter himself wrote that every Christian is a "living stone" in the house of God, with Jesus being the cornerstone. If Peter were the one complete foundation of the church, it would have been mentioned clearly somewhere in Scripture, not in a vague statement that can clearly be interpreted in many ways. He is certainly a part of the foundation, but not the whole thing.

TOMS: Matthew 15

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 22, 2006

This chapter starts out with Jesus against the Pharisees once again. Matthew pays more attention to the Pharisees than the other Gospels; that's probably because he was writing to Jews and they would have been influenced by the Pharisees' teachings. If you've never read "Extreme Righteousness" by Tom Hovestol, you need to. It is an easy read and chronicles a lot of Jesus' conflict with the Pharisees and gives a lot of background on their teachings. It's very convicting as well - once you begin to read you begin to see that we all fall into the traps the Pharisees fell into.

This time the Pharisees were questioning Jesus because His disciples did not wash their hands before they ate. The Pharisees had all kinds of rules for ritual cleansing. Jesus answered their question with a question, and then provides a scathing answer:

"And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' But you say, 'If anyone tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father.' So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'"(15:3-9)

The P's did have a rule that a person could set aside a portion of money for God (it goes without saying that this was an easy way to line their own pockets) and be free of any other obligations on the money. The money did not have to be given right away. It could be kept by the person even until he died. Nowhere is such a provision found in Moses' law. It was something the Hebrews of the intertestamental period came up with. Jesus said this rule was in actuality enabling people to disobey one of the 10 Commandments: honor your father and mother.

Then Jesus attacked the rules about handwashing directly, saying that it is not what people eat that defiles them. What defiles them is the sin that comes out of their own hearts. When I was a kid I used to use that verse when someone said I should wash my hands before I ate. That's not really the point of what Jesus was saying.

Next we have a very strange story, at least I have always thought it was strange. Jesus comes upon a Canaanite woman who begs Him to heal her daughter, who was possessed by a demon. Jesus abruptly refuses, saying, "It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." (15:26). The woman responds: "Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table." (15:27, ESV)

What an example of determined faith! This lady was a Gentile, a Canaanite and a woman. In the Jewish playbook, that was three strikes against her with God. And Jesus kind of treats her that way at first. But this lady is not going to take no for an answer. She knows Jesus has the power to heal her daughter and she is willing to do whatever it takes to get that done.

At the end of the chapter we have the feeding of the 4,000. This story doesn't get as much attention as the 5,000, but it was just as miraculous. I guess a lot of people were like me - they're out of time.

I'm going home this weekend, so I won't be writing anything until Monday. Have a wonderful Christmas.

TOMS: Matthew 14

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 21, 2006

This chapter starts with the death of John the Baptist. John apparently was in prison for some time, because he sent messengers to Jesus several chapters ago. I know there is no real timeline to the Gospels, but it was certainly more than a few days. Anyway, it was Herod's birthday, and at the party his wife's (she was actually Herod's cousin, and was previously married to Herod's brother- talk about a twisted family) daughter danced (we assume seductively) for Herod, and he promised her whatever she wanted. She asked for John's head on a platter.

The wickedness of the Herodian family is well-documented. Of course Herod the Great, this Herod's father, tried to murder Jesus when He was born and succeeded in killing a multitude of young boys in Bethlehem. Herod the Great basically bought the loyalty of the Jews by building a huge Temple, much larger but not as ornate as Solomon's. It is part of Herod's Temple that is the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem today. Why God allows wicked people to rule people is beyond me. He has a plan for everything, but I wonder sometimes why God allowed people like Herod and all the evil rulers throughout history to kill and oppress innocent people.

Next is the story of the feeding of the 5,000. This must have been a favorite of those who saw it, because it is the only miracle recorded in all four Gospels. The message of this miracle is that God uses what we have. He doesn't need our help, but in His mercy He allows us to take part in His plan. 

Next we have the story of Jesus (and Peter) walking on the water. Peter must have been a lot of fun to be around. He was always impulsive, saying or doing things no one else would dare to. I'm sure his wife got exasperated at his antics many times. He was the undisputed leader of the 12, probably because he was older than the others. He is an interesting study in contrasts. At times he was boldly assertive, such as this situation and early in the book of Acts when he boldly pronounced to the Sanhedrin, "We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29, ESV) But then at other times he was very eager to please others at his own expense. This tendency caused him to deny Christ while He was being sentenced to death and later led to Peter's compromise with the Judaizers described in Galatians 2. We'll get into more detail on that incident when we get there.

TOMS: Matthew 13, Part 2

For an introduction to this series, click here.

Dec. 20, 2006

The second parable in this chapter is the parable of the weeds. A man plants wheat in his field, and someone comes by and sows weeds in the field. The man is upset, but tells his workers not to try to pull up the weeds right away, but to wait until harvest time, and then it will be easy to separate the wheat from the weeds.

Later in this chapter Jesus explains this parable. The wheat are the children of the kingdom, and the weeds are the children of the evil one. The harvest is the end of the age. This parable generally teaches that it's hard to tell who is truly saved and who is not, and it is not our job to try to cull out those who are not. 

This leaves us in kind of a conundrum. On the one hand, we are told to judge others - "You shall know them by their fruit" - while here Jesus tells us not to judge. It takes a lot of love - love for other people, love for the sanctity of the church - to do both in a right way. It's not our place to judge a person's faith until they make it obvious by their works that they aren't honestly following Jesus.

Between the parable and the explanation, Jesus tells two other parables that are related:

"The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make their nests in its branches...The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened." (13:31-33)

A lot of people stumble over the use of the word "leaven" in this parable. In other places, leaven is a picture of sin or, more often, wrong doctrine. Thinking that any reference to leaven must be negative, they come up with a weird explanation that fits this mold. But this parable, and its cousin, are plain and straightforward. This passage teaches that even though it seems small or is hidden, God is at work, and one day all will see the results. You can't tell by looking if a wad of dough has yeast in it or not, but you can tell when it begins to rise. A mustard seed is tiny, but it makes a large plant if it is allowed to grow.

Then Jesus gives three short parables:

“The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and gathered fish of every kind. When it was full, men drew it ashore and sat down and sorted the good into containers but threw away the bad. So it will be at the close of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (13:44-50, ESV)

The first two parables are mangled by some in the name of dispensationalism. They look at the part that says the man bought the field or the pearl and say that this pictures God seeking man. The plain meaning of the parables is that a lost man sees the world's greatest treasure, Jesus, and leaves everything else behind to follow Jesus. I don't know about you, but when I got saved, I wanted it more than anything else in the world. I didn't care what anybody else thought. Maybe that's not how everyone comes to Jesus, I don't know. Maybe the ones who didn't come to Jesus that way are some of those who have a problem with my (and many others') interpretation.

The parable of the net is similar to the parable of the weeds. The fishermen will throw out the bad fish and keep the good ones. We will all appear before God one day, and He will separate the good from the bad, according to His definition. God's standard for all time is faith.