Matthew 12:22-32
This is a bit longer section than I normally like to do but I think that it contains all one thought. Jesus has been healing people of their diseases and infirmities but now a man who is demon possessed is brought to him. Jesus casts out the demon to the amazement of the audience however the Pharisees attribute his power to the power of Satan. Jesus then contrasts the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of God and the power of Satan to the power of the Holy Spirit (who is a key part of this passage). He uses two word pictures: that of a kingdom or household divided and that of an invasion of a strong man's house. The first word picture is to show that a kingdom that is divided cannot survive so it makes no logical sense that Satan would send Jesus to cast out demons. The second word picture makes the point that the only way a strong man can be defeated is if a stronger man fights him. The message is that if Jesus has been sent as a servant of Satan then he must be less powerful than Satan. However, Jesus is casting out demons which makes him stronger than Satan and not his servant, as the Pharisees were suggesting.
It is in this context that Jesus speaks the applicational point: just as the kingdom of evil cannot be divided , the kingdom of God is not divided. There is only one King and one Lord and everyone who is not with Him is against Him. There is no room in the kingdom for rebellion against the King. The most difficult concept in this entire teaching is the unforgiveable sin of blasphemy against the Spirit. In the context, it could be attributing the work of God to the power of the devil (which is what the Pharisees were doing). I have tended towards this interpretation and also tend to think that this was an unforgiveable sin for the generation to whom Jesus was speaking. However, the immediate context makes me think that blasphemy against the Spirit could be the equivalent of rebellion against the King.
Whatever the case, there are two things I am sure of: I must be careful about to whom I give credit for what is going on in the world. I don't want to speak against any work of God by saying that has been done in the power of the devil. At the same time, I must be very careful that the work I do and am a part of is done according to the King's agenda, character and guidance.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The Gentle Revolutionary
Matthew 12:15-21
I've always wondered why Jesus often told the people that he healed to not tell anyone about what had happened. I speculated that it was because Jesus was not coming to create a spectacle and he wanted people to know him as more than just a miracle worker. I guessed that Jesus knew that as soon as he went public that it would ultimately culminate in his death on the cross and he knew that there was a perfect agenda regarding the timing of his death. In this passage, Matthew tells us why.
The way that Jesus went about his ministry reminded Matthew of the words of Isaiah where God describes his servant as meek and gentle but with a core of strength. It's no wonder to me that Jesus' ministry would have recalled these words to Matthew. It matches very well with Jesus' ministry and his own description of how the kingdom will work: like some yeast hidden in some dough or like a mustard seed planted in a garden. The kingdom is not by force or by spectacle but by quiet, subversive, below the surface work that ultimately results in justice being led to victory and nations placing their hope in Christ.
Does my ministry reflect the ministry of Jesus? Am I shouting in the streets and creating spectacle or is my ministry such that a bruised reed would not suffer further damage, that a smoldering wick would not be snuffed out? Is my ministry all surface, all show and no root? I want to be like yeast hidden in dough: hidden, unobtrusive, subversive but radically redeeming the culture.
I've always wondered why Jesus often told the people that he healed to not tell anyone about what had happened. I speculated that it was because Jesus was not coming to create a spectacle and he wanted people to know him as more than just a miracle worker. I guessed that Jesus knew that as soon as he went public that it would ultimately culminate in his death on the cross and he knew that there was a perfect agenda regarding the timing of his death. In this passage, Matthew tells us why.
The way that Jesus went about his ministry reminded Matthew of the words of Isaiah where God describes his servant as meek and gentle but with a core of strength. It's no wonder to me that Jesus' ministry would have recalled these words to Matthew. It matches very well with Jesus' ministry and his own description of how the kingdom will work: like some yeast hidden in some dough or like a mustard seed planted in a garden. The kingdom is not by force or by spectacle but by quiet, subversive, below the surface work that ultimately results in justice being led to victory and nations placing their hope in Christ.
Does my ministry reflect the ministry of Jesus? Am I shouting in the streets and creating spectacle or is my ministry such that a bruised reed would not suffer further damage, that a smoldering wick would not be snuffed out? Is my ministry all surface, all show and no root? I want to be like yeast hidden in dough: hidden, unobtrusive, subversive but radically redeeming the culture.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Call the Sabbath Police!
Matthew 12:9-14
According to Matthew, this happens on the same Sabbath as his disciples picking grain. Jesus challenges the consciences of the synagogue rulers by asking questions and setting up scenarios. He points out the absurdities of their traditions: it is ok to rescue a sheep that fell into a pit but not ok to provide help and healing to a person. This healing seems to be the last straw for the Pharisees - as a result of Jesus breaking the Sabbath in this way, they go out and plot to kill him.
Talk about missing the point! Jesus is saying that humans are more important than laws and traditions. In another place he says that the sabbath was created to serve humans; humans weren't created to serve the sabbath. Jesus had just said that someone (meaning him) more important than the temple was present - if it's ok to break the Sabbath in service of the temple, it is ok to break the Sabbath in service of Christ. Now he is saying that someone (meaning humans in need) more important than sheep was present - if it is ok to break the Sabbath to rescue a sheep, it is ok to break the Sabbath to rescue a person.
I wonder how many times I have killed or supressed the work of God because it did not conform to my traditions and expectations. I wonder how many times I've missed helping people because I was caught up in my observance of holiness. We are a lot like the Pharisees in the way we teach our students to avoid evil - it's wrong to get drunk so you shouldn't drink and you shouldn't go anywhere drinking is happening and you shouldn't even hang out with people who maybe have ever had something to drink or might have gotten drunk at sometime in their past because that might tempt you to drink and you might get drunk. The layers of tradition that we've added to avoid breaking the rules have become rules themselves and we judge each other based on our ability to keep those rules. In the mean time there are blind, crippled, needy people at those parties living in darkness that are dying for the light but we're too afraid to take our light there because we might sin. We have become the Pharisees. Shouldn't we be teaching our students to take their light into the darkest places of this world, teaching them and showing them that they can trust the Spirit in them to keep them strong and from temptation and that they can trust the community of faith to which they belong to hold them accountable, to pray for them, to go with them to prevent them from falling as they go to shine their light? Isn't this what Jesus taught? Isn't this what Jesus did?
According to Matthew, this happens on the same Sabbath as his disciples picking grain. Jesus challenges the consciences of the synagogue rulers by asking questions and setting up scenarios. He points out the absurdities of their traditions: it is ok to rescue a sheep that fell into a pit but not ok to provide help and healing to a person. This healing seems to be the last straw for the Pharisees - as a result of Jesus breaking the Sabbath in this way, they go out and plot to kill him.
Talk about missing the point! Jesus is saying that humans are more important than laws and traditions. In another place he says that the sabbath was created to serve humans; humans weren't created to serve the sabbath. Jesus had just said that someone (meaning him) more important than the temple was present - if it's ok to break the Sabbath in service of the temple, it is ok to break the Sabbath in service of Christ. Now he is saying that someone (meaning humans in need) more important than sheep was present - if it is ok to break the Sabbath to rescue a sheep, it is ok to break the Sabbath to rescue a person.
I wonder how many times I have killed or supressed the work of God because it did not conform to my traditions and expectations. I wonder how many times I've missed helping people because I was caught up in my observance of holiness. We are a lot like the Pharisees in the way we teach our students to avoid evil - it's wrong to get drunk so you shouldn't drink and you shouldn't go anywhere drinking is happening and you shouldn't even hang out with people who maybe have ever had something to drink or might have gotten drunk at sometime in their past because that might tempt you to drink and you might get drunk. The layers of tradition that we've added to avoid breaking the rules have become rules themselves and we judge each other based on our ability to keep those rules. In the mean time there are blind, crippled, needy people at those parties living in darkness that are dying for the light but we're too afraid to take our light there because we might sin. We have become the Pharisees. Shouldn't we be teaching our students to take their light into the darkest places of this world, teaching them and showing them that they can trust the Spirit in them to keep them strong and from temptation and that they can trust the community of faith to which they belong to hold them accountable, to pray for them, to go with them to prevent them from falling as they go to shine their light? Isn't this what Jesus taught? Isn't this what Jesus did?
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
greater than the temple
Matthew 12:1-8
The key words and concepts in this section are: Sabbath, lawful and unlawful, and Lord. Jesus gives two examples of people that do not keep the strict requirement of the law: David and his men who ate bread from the temple that was not lawful to eat but was overlooked because it preserved their life and the priests who work on the Sabbath but are excused because they are looking after the temple.
I'm not sure if "at that time" indicates that this happened immediately after chapter 11 or if it is more along the lines of "at another time" or "another thing that happened while Jesus was here". Whatever the case, Matthew includes this story because it speaks to Jesus' authourity to interpret the Law and his authourity over the Law; he is Lord of the Sabbath. This means that Christ defines the Sabbath, the Sabbath does not define or restrict Christ.
The other key is that Jesus is setting himself up as greater than the temple which was THE symbol and center of the Jewish religion. His argument is this: the priests can profane the Sabbath because they serve the temple which is great. Therefore the disciples can profane the Sabbath because they serve Jesus who is greater. The main point is that Jesus is setting himself up in opposition to or as superior to religion. There is no longer a system needed to approach God - everyone can have access to his holy presence through Christ. The temple was a symbol of the holy presence of God on earth but Jesus was the essential physical manifestation of God's holy presence. Jesus is obviously greater than the temple.
Jesus' main point is that mercy is greater than sacrifice. In other words that there is something more important than a strict observance of the law: honouring God, serving people and preserving life has to take precedence. I wonder what I have set up in my own life as more important than Christ. I wonder if there are rules that I keep to the detriment of honouring God. I wonder if there are legalistic tendencies in my life that rob God of his glory.
The key words and concepts in this section are: Sabbath, lawful and unlawful, and Lord. Jesus gives two examples of people that do not keep the strict requirement of the law: David and his men who ate bread from the temple that was not lawful to eat but was overlooked because it preserved their life and the priests who work on the Sabbath but are excused because they are looking after the temple.
I'm not sure if "at that time" indicates that this happened immediately after chapter 11 or if it is more along the lines of "at another time" or "another thing that happened while Jesus was here". Whatever the case, Matthew includes this story because it speaks to Jesus' authourity to interpret the Law and his authourity over the Law; he is Lord of the Sabbath. This means that Christ defines the Sabbath, the Sabbath does not define or restrict Christ.
The other key is that Jesus is setting himself up as greater than the temple which was THE symbol and center of the Jewish religion. His argument is this: the priests can profane the Sabbath because they serve the temple which is great. Therefore the disciples can profane the Sabbath because they serve Jesus who is greater. The main point is that Jesus is setting himself up in opposition to or as superior to religion. There is no longer a system needed to approach God - everyone can have access to his holy presence through Christ. The temple was a symbol of the holy presence of God on earth but Jesus was the essential physical manifestation of God's holy presence. Jesus is obviously greater than the temple.
Jesus' main point is that mercy is greater than sacrifice. In other words that there is something more important than a strict observance of the law: honouring God, serving people and preserving life has to take precedence. I wonder what I have set up in my own life as more important than Christ. I wonder if there are rules that I keep to the detriment of honouring God. I wonder if there are legalistic tendencies in my life that rob God of his glory.
Monday, March 23, 2009
light burderns
Matthew 11:25-30
The key words in this passages are: hidden, revealed, come, burdened, easy and light. There are a couple of lines that are repetitive, almost poetic in nature: No one knows the Son except the Father and no one knows the Father except the Son. There is also a contrast between the burdens that religion places on people and the rest that Christ brings. There is also a contrast between the knowledge of the intellectuals and the faith of the children.
The word "reveal" is used twice. Once to talk about how the Father has revealed the truth to the simple and child-like and the other to indicate that Jesus chooses to reveal the Father to certain people (likely the simple and child-like as well).
Jesus is saying that the truth is revealed by the Father through Jesus and that the Father and the Son (I believe that the implication is that the Spirit is involved as well) work together to decide to whom the truth should be revealed to. The implications for this are huge! It is obvious to me that God in his sovreignty is choosing to reveal the truth to some and keep it hidden from others. I find this conclusion troubling but can't conclude otherwise from my study of Scripture. I can see how people would see God as vindictive, playing favourites and unfair. I have to work really hard to see the justice and grace of God in this but his grace is seen in his choosing anyone to reveal truth to. Because of our rebellion, he is not obliged to reveal his truth to anyone. And yet, I find it hard to argue for fairness when he only chooses to reveal truth to a few. Any thoughts?
The key words in this passages are: hidden, revealed, come, burdened, easy and light. There are a couple of lines that are repetitive, almost poetic in nature: No one knows the Son except the Father and no one knows the Father except the Son. There is also a contrast between the burdens that religion places on people and the rest that Christ brings. There is also a contrast between the knowledge of the intellectuals and the faith of the children.
The word "reveal" is used twice. Once to talk about how the Father has revealed the truth to the simple and child-like and the other to indicate that Jesus chooses to reveal the Father to certain people (likely the simple and child-like as well).
Jesus is saying that the truth is revealed by the Father through Jesus and that the Father and the Son (I believe that the implication is that the Spirit is involved as well) work together to decide to whom the truth should be revealed to. The implications for this are huge! It is obvious to me that God in his sovreignty is choosing to reveal the truth to some and keep it hidden from others. I find this conclusion troubling but can't conclude otherwise from my study of Scripture. I can see how people would see God as vindictive, playing favourites and unfair. I have to work really hard to see the justice and grace of God in this but his grace is seen in his choosing anyone to reveal truth to. Because of our rebellion, he is not obliged to reveal his truth to anyone. And yet, I find it hard to argue for fairness when he only chooses to reveal truth to a few. Any thoughts?
Thursday, March 19, 2009
apparently miracles are not the best evidence after all
Matthew 11:20-24
In response to the people's response to him (v. 19), Jesus warns the towns in which he performed his miracles of the coming judgement. He compares the evil of Chorazin and Bethsaida to the evil of Tyre and Sidon and the evil of Capernaum to that of Sodom. In both cases, the OT towns would be seen as more evil. Then he compares the coming judgement on Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum to the coming judgement on Tyre and Sidon and the judgement already poured out on Sodom. His conclusion is that it will be more bearable for the apparently more evil cities than for the cities/towns in which he performed miracles but saw no response to the message of the kingdom.
I sometimes think it would be much easier to convince people of the truth of our faith if miracles were still being performed like in Jesus' day. However, we see that the miracles that Jesus himself performed did not convince the people. They were attracted to the spectacle but the spectacle did not result in many life changes or many citizens of the kingdom of God. What's the point? I think we should look for the kingdom more in the quiet and subtle than in the spectacular and I think we should stop trying to convince people through spectacle and begin to influence people more like yeast in dough than like sledgehammers.
In response to the people's response to him (v. 19), Jesus warns the towns in which he performed his miracles of the coming judgement. He compares the evil of Chorazin and Bethsaida to the evil of Tyre and Sidon and the evil of Capernaum to that of Sodom. In both cases, the OT towns would be seen as more evil. Then he compares the coming judgement on Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum to the coming judgement on Tyre and Sidon and the judgement already poured out on Sodom. His conclusion is that it will be more bearable for the apparently more evil cities than for the cities/towns in which he performed miracles but saw no response to the message of the kingdom.
I sometimes think it would be much easier to convince people of the truth of our faith if miracles were still being performed like in Jesus' day. However, we see that the miracles that Jesus himself performed did not convince the people. They were attracted to the spectacle but the spectacle did not result in many life changes or many citizens of the kingdom of God. What's the point? I think we should look for the kingdom more in the quiet and subtle than in the spectacular and I think we should stop trying to convince people through spectacle and begin to influence people more like yeast in dough than like sledgehammers.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Building Up John
Matthew 11:7-19
After gently admonishing John and his doubts, Jesus turns his attention to the crowd and admonishes them about their response to John. It seems that Jesus' perception is that the people listened to John because of the spectacle that he was and that they had completely missed his message about the coming Messiah. Jesus tries to help the people put John's ministry in perspective in terms of the overall redemption narrative: if John is the promised "Elijah" then the implication is that Jesus is the promised Messiah. Therefore the use of the phrase, "if you are willing to accept it". In other words, "if you are willing to accept that John is the Elijah, you will accept that I am the Messiah."
Jesus also reveals the fickle tendencies of the people. John didn't feast or drink and he was accused of being mad or having a demon. Jesus feasts and drinks and he is accused of being a glutton and a drunkard.
There are two lessons I glean from this passage: one is that I should be careful not to miss the messengers of God. I need to make sure I don't get sucked in or distracted by the spectacles out there and learn to discern the quiet voice of God in the middle of all the noise. I don't want to miss the message, direction, instruction, etc. that God is bringing my way.
The second lesson is that I must not entrust myself to people. If I try to please everyone I will never get it right: I'll be accused of partying too much or not enough, being to strict or too lenient, being too conservative or too liberal, being to exclusive or too universal, emphasizing proclamation or emphasizing social action. I'll never get it right. The only person I must get it right with is God and I can only do that through the work of his Son. I pray that God will help me learn to live only for him, his glory and his kingdom.
After gently admonishing John and his doubts, Jesus turns his attention to the crowd and admonishes them about their response to John. It seems that Jesus' perception is that the people listened to John because of the spectacle that he was and that they had completely missed his message about the coming Messiah. Jesus tries to help the people put John's ministry in perspective in terms of the overall redemption narrative: if John is the promised "Elijah" then the implication is that Jesus is the promised Messiah. Therefore the use of the phrase, "if you are willing to accept it". In other words, "if you are willing to accept that John is the Elijah, you will accept that I am the Messiah."
Jesus also reveals the fickle tendencies of the people. John didn't feast or drink and he was accused of being mad or having a demon. Jesus feasts and drinks and he is accused of being a glutton and a drunkard.
There are two lessons I glean from this passage: one is that I should be careful not to miss the messengers of God. I need to make sure I don't get sucked in or distracted by the spectacles out there and learn to discern the quiet voice of God in the middle of all the noise. I don't want to miss the message, direction, instruction, etc. that God is bringing my way.
The second lesson is that I must not entrust myself to people. If I try to please everyone I will never get it right: I'll be accused of partying too much or not enough, being to strict or too lenient, being too conservative or too liberal, being to exclusive or too universal, emphasizing proclamation or emphasizing social action. I'll never get it right. The only person I must get it right with is God and I can only do that through the work of his Son. I pray that God will help me learn to live only for him, his glory and his kingdom.
Monday, March 16, 2009
what do you see?
Matthew 11:1-6
I'm not sure about the chronology of Matthew. I wonder if v. 1 actually belongs to the previous section and if John really responds to Jesus sending out his disciples by sending his own disciples to Jesus to find out what's going on. I wonder if Matthew is using John as an illustration of the potential cost of adopting and spreading the message of the Kingdom.
Whatever the order of events actually is, John is beginning to wonder if Jesus is really who John and Jesus have been claiming him to be. John's circumstances have given him a lot of time to think, wonder and doubt and now he needs some reassurance. The message that Jesus gives to John's disciples is: "go back and report what you see." Then he lists all the miraculous signs that fulfill his mandate as given in Luke 4: blind are seeing, lame are walking, lepers are cleansed, deaf are hearing, dead are living and the good news is being proclaimed to the poor.
This makes me wonder what people are seeing today. As they look for the truth and wonder about the claims that the Church is making about life, the world and Jesus, what evidence do they see that the claims are true? Are the oppressed being cared for? Are the prisonners being set free? Are the sick being cured and loved? Is the good news making a difference in people's lives? Is the Church showing people a new way of living or just offering something that can be added to the old life they are already living? Do people see Jesus in us? in me?
I'm not sure about the chronology of Matthew. I wonder if v. 1 actually belongs to the previous section and if John really responds to Jesus sending out his disciples by sending his own disciples to Jesus to find out what's going on. I wonder if Matthew is using John as an illustration of the potential cost of adopting and spreading the message of the Kingdom.
Whatever the order of events actually is, John is beginning to wonder if Jesus is really who John and Jesus have been claiming him to be. John's circumstances have given him a lot of time to think, wonder and doubt and now he needs some reassurance. The message that Jesus gives to John's disciples is: "go back and report what you see." Then he lists all the miraculous signs that fulfill his mandate as given in Luke 4: blind are seeing, lame are walking, lepers are cleansed, deaf are hearing, dead are living and the good news is being proclaimed to the poor.
This makes me wonder what people are seeing today. As they look for the truth and wonder about the claims that the Church is making about life, the world and Jesus, what evidence do they see that the claims are true? Are the oppressed being cared for? Are the prisonners being set free? Are the sick being cured and loved? Is the good news making a difference in people's lives? Is the Church showing people a new way of living or just offering something that can be added to the old life they are already living? Do people see Jesus in us? in me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
