Matthew 17:22-24
It's interesting how Matthew ties these events to geographical locations. This pronouncement of Jesus happened when the disciples had gathered together in Galilee. I don't think that the location is important except that it adds credibility to Matthew's record and it helps scholars trace the path of Christ. Maybe the geographical locations helped Matthew remember the events. I watch the Amazing Race - more out of habit than because it is fresh. One of the tasks towards the end of the race is to match events to the location they occurred in. Some of the players think in terms of the location first (i.e. "first we went here, then we went there...") and match the activity to the location. Some players think in terms of activity first (i.e. "first we did this, then we did that...") and match the location to the activity. My guess is that Matthew thinks more in terms of location and then remembers the activities that occurred in that location. I don't know how important this is. It's just interesting to me.
The thing that happens in Galilee this time is that Jesus tells his disciples for the second time that he is going to be betrayed and killed and raised again on the third day. It's obvious that the disciples don't really understand what Jesus is talking about because no one asks him what he means that he is going to be raised again on the third day. They just grieve. I would like to think that if someone made a statement like that, I would ask them a question or two. On the other hand, I don't want to appear stupid and if I think everyone else in the group understands what's going on, I can see where I wouldn't ask any questions either.
So, the lesson for me is to ask questions. When I don't understand something, even if I think I'll look stupid, ask. I really wonder if Jesus was hoping that someone would ask the question. If there would be one person who would seek to understand and therefore better able to share his burden. My resolution is to ask more questions.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
move!
Matthew 17:19-21
This is the conclusion of the story about the man who wanted Jesus to heal his son. The disciples wanted to know why they couldn't cast the demon out and Jesus tells them that it was because they had so little faith. He explains in one of the more famous verses in the Bible: If you have faith as small as a grain of mustard, you can say to this mountain, "Move!" and it will move.
Again, this is a fairly harsh response: the mustard seed was very small. If I was one of the disciples, I wouldn't have been thinking, "What a nice picture! I can move mountains!" I would have been thinking, "All I need to move a mountain is that much faith? I can't even muster up that much..." I would have been ashamed, felt rebuked and maybe even a bit defensive at the harshness of Jesus' response. However, unlike Jesus' response to the father in the previous verses, I can at least understand Jesus' response here. He has been with his disciples for a while now and they should be able to have at least a mustard seed sized faith.
It is obvious that the faith the disciples lacked was in Christ himself. Perhaps they doubted their own ability but that misses the point. They aren't supposed to have faith in their own abilities. They are supposed to have faith that Christ can work through them. I have a tough time with this because I have been given good gifts and abilities. I know that they come from God and that they are completely dependent on God. I know that he could take them away at any time. However, the abilities God has given me in the areas of strategic planning sometimes make me more self-sufficient than Christ sufficient. If there's a mountain to be moved, I'm already figuring out how many bulldozers and earth movers we need and how much it's going to cost and how we're going to raise the money. Forget the mustard seed, bring on the earth movers!!
I don't think it's wrong to plan strategically but the danger comes when I take pride in my abilities (forgetting that they come from God in the first place) and I rely on my abilities without depending on God for his wisdom, direction and power.
This is the conclusion of the story about the man who wanted Jesus to heal his son. The disciples wanted to know why they couldn't cast the demon out and Jesus tells them that it was because they had so little faith. He explains in one of the more famous verses in the Bible: If you have faith as small as a grain of mustard, you can say to this mountain, "Move!" and it will move.
Again, this is a fairly harsh response: the mustard seed was very small. If I was one of the disciples, I wouldn't have been thinking, "What a nice picture! I can move mountains!" I would have been thinking, "All I need to move a mountain is that much faith? I can't even muster up that much..." I would have been ashamed, felt rebuked and maybe even a bit defensive at the harshness of Jesus' response. However, unlike Jesus' response to the father in the previous verses, I can at least understand Jesus' response here. He has been with his disciples for a while now and they should be able to have at least a mustard seed sized faith.
It is obvious that the faith the disciples lacked was in Christ himself. Perhaps they doubted their own ability but that misses the point. They aren't supposed to have faith in their own abilities. They are supposed to have faith that Christ can work through them. I have a tough time with this because I have been given good gifts and abilities. I know that they come from God and that they are completely dependent on God. I know that he could take them away at any time. However, the abilities God has given me in the areas of strategic planning sometimes make me more self-sufficient than Christ sufficient. If there's a mountain to be moved, I'm already figuring out how many bulldozers and earth movers we need and how much it's going to cost and how we're going to raise the money. Forget the mustard seed, bring on the earth movers!!
I don't think it's wrong to plan strategically but the danger comes when I take pride in my abilities (forgetting that they come from God in the first place) and I rely on my abilities without depending on God for his wisdom, direction and power.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
an unusual reaction
Matthew 17:14-18
This is a very intriguing story and I don't quite understand Jesus' reaction in it. After Jesus comes down from the mountain he is approached by a man who asks him to heal his son. Jesus responds with some very harsh words for the entire generation of Israelites and I can't figure out what provokes Jesus' response. It seems uncharacteristic for Jesus and not at all merciful. The only thing I can think of is that the man had first taken the son to the disciples but they could not heal him. I could see how some people might say that this passage means that we should only come to Jesus for our needs and not to other people but Jesus never rebukes his disciples for trying to heal the boy. In fact, he later tells them why they could not heal him and gives them some instruction on what they should have done.
All I know for sure is that if I was the dad, I would be hurt and confused by Jesus' response. Thoughts?
This is a very intriguing story and I don't quite understand Jesus' reaction in it. After Jesus comes down from the mountain he is approached by a man who asks him to heal his son. Jesus responds with some very harsh words for the entire generation of Israelites and I can't figure out what provokes Jesus' response. It seems uncharacteristic for Jesus and not at all merciful. The only thing I can think of is that the man had first taken the son to the disciples but they could not heal him. I could see how some people might say that this passage means that we should only come to Jesus for our needs and not to other people but Jesus never rebukes his disciples for trying to heal the boy. In fact, he later tells them why they could not heal him and gives them some instruction on what they should have done.
All I know for sure is that if I was the dad, I would be hurt and confused by Jesus' response. Thoughts?
Monday, May 25, 2009
would the real Elijah please stand up?
Matthew 17:9-13
This conversation occurs as Jesus, James, John and Peter are on their way down the mountain just after seeing Jesus in all his glory, along with Elijah and Moses. The key words are: Son of Man, Elijah, and suffer. Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man twice in these verses which fits well with how he refers to himself through out the book of Matthew so far. It seems to be his favourite title for himself.
The teachers of the law (and the disciples) were looking for a literal Elijah to preceed the Messiah. Jesus makes it clear, and his disciples come to understand, that the prophecy was talking about a prophet with the same character and ministry as Elijah - one who called people back to worship of the true God. Elijah was a picture of the one who was to preceed the Messiah. Jesus indicates, and the disciples realize, that John the Baptist fulfills that picture.
In all of this discussion, the disciples seemingly miss two important points that Jesus makes: that he is going to die and be raised again and that he will suffer at the hands of the people who caused the suffering of John.
I know there have been lots of times when I have missed the important points that Jesus and other people have been trying to make because I have focused on the wrong thing. I saw a great example of this last night on t.v.: a daughter was trying to tell her mom that the mom's boyfriend was abusing her but the mother translated that conversation in such a way that all she heard was that the daughter was missing her dad. I'm terrible at reading the subtext. In this case, it's not even really subtext. Jesus initiates the conversation but the disciples are distracted with the order of fulfilled prophecy. I pray that I would be better at listening to what is actually being said, both by Jesus and by others, and not as pre-occupied with what I think they are saying or expect them to say.
This conversation occurs as Jesus, James, John and Peter are on their way down the mountain just after seeing Jesus in all his glory, along with Elijah and Moses. The key words are: Son of Man, Elijah, and suffer. Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man twice in these verses which fits well with how he refers to himself through out the book of Matthew so far. It seems to be his favourite title for himself.
The teachers of the law (and the disciples) were looking for a literal Elijah to preceed the Messiah. Jesus makes it clear, and his disciples come to understand, that the prophecy was talking about a prophet with the same character and ministry as Elijah - one who called people back to worship of the true God. Elijah was a picture of the one who was to preceed the Messiah. Jesus indicates, and the disciples realize, that John the Baptist fulfills that picture.
In all of this discussion, the disciples seemingly miss two important points that Jesus makes: that he is going to die and be raised again and that he will suffer at the hands of the people who caused the suffering of John.
I know there have been lots of times when I have missed the important points that Jesus and other people have been trying to make because I have focused on the wrong thing. I saw a great example of this last night on t.v.: a daughter was trying to tell her mom that the mom's boyfriend was abusing her but the mother translated that conversation in such a way that all she heard was that the daughter was missing her dad. I'm terrible at reading the subtext. In this case, it's not even really subtext. Jesus initiates the conversation but the disciples are distracted with the order of fulfilled prophecy. I pray that I would be better at listening to what is actually being said, both by Jesus and by others, and not as pre-occupied with what I think they are saying or expect them to say.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
It is good for us to be here...
Matthew 17:1-8
The characters in this story are Peter, James and John. It is interesting that Matthew identifies John as the brother of James. This would mean that James was more familiar to or had more authourity among Matthew's readers than John did. I did a small bit of reading to try to discover why and the best I can come up with is that James was older than John. One interesting aside: James is not mentioned at all in his brothers account of the life of Jesus. The other characters are Jesus, Elijah and Moses and the voice from heaven - obviously the Father. This passage is the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy at the end of Matthew 16 where he states that some among the disciples will not taste death unitl they see the Son of Man coming in the kingdom.
I've always been taught that Peter sees Moses and Elijah as equal to Jesus when he offers to build them "tabernacles" but the TNIV indicates that Peter is just being well-meaning: he wants to provide shelters for them, probably to protect them from the sun and heat. He probably wants to prolong the experience as long as possible - I mean how amazingly cool would it be to listen into a conversation between Moses, Elijah and the Messiah! - and didn't want anything to cause them to cut that conversation short. Whatever the case, it seems like Peter was taking the glory that only belongs to Christ and was trying to at least share that with the others and so God the Father steps in and reminds the three of them that the center of their attention and affection must be only Christ.
This is a good caution for us. In an age that worships celebrity, the Church is not immune from giving more credence and weight to the writings, sayins and sermons of our celebrities than the writings, sayings and sermons of Christ. This doesn't mean that there is not a lot we can learn from gifted teachers and writers. We must value and acknowledge the gifts they have been given and we must recognize that they have been given those gifts to help the Church reach maturity in Christ. However, we must not put them on equal footing, in word or in practice, with Christ.
The characters in this story are Peter, James and John. It is interesting that Matthew identifies John as the brother of James. This would mean that James was more familiar to or had more authourity among Matthew's readers than John did. I did a small bit of reading to try to discover why and the best I can come up with is that James was older than John. One interesting aside: James is not mentioned at all in his brothers account of the life of Jesus. The other characters are Jesus, Elijah and Moses and the voice from heaven - obviously the Father. This passage is the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy at the end of Matthew 16 where he states that some among the disciples will not taste death unitl they see the Son of Man coming in the kingdom.
I've always been taught that Peter sees Moses and Elijah as equal to Jesus when he offers to build them "tabernacles" but the TNIV indicates that Peter is just being well-meaning: he wants to provide shelters for them, probably to protect them from the sun and heat. He probably wants to prolong the experience as long as possible - I mean how amazingly cool would it be to listen into a conversation between Moses, Elijah and the Messiah! - and didn't want anything to cause them to cut that conversation short. Whatever the case, it seems like Peter was taking the glory that only belongs to Christ and was trying to at least share that with the others and so God the Father steps in and reminds the three of them that the center of their attention and affection must be only Christ.
This is a good caution for us. In an age that worships celebrity, the Church is not immune from giving more credence and weight to the writings, sayins and sermons of our celebrities than the writings, sayings and sermons of Christ. This doesn't mean that there is not a lot we can learn from gifted teachers and writers. We must value and acknowledge the gifts they have been given and we must recognize that they have been given those gifts to help the Church reach maturity in Christ. However, we must not put them on equal footing, in word or in practice, with Christ.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
radical commitment
Matthew 16:24-28
Here, Jesus expands on what he meant in the previous paragraph when he contrasted human concerns with God's concerns. The key words are: disciple, deny, cross, follow, Son of Man, kingdom. Jesus contrasts human concerns (i.e. saving your life, gaining the world) with the concerns of God (i.e. denying self, losing your life, the soul). His main point is that we want to be disciples of Jesus, we must live a life that is not centered on self but is centered on the glory of God. He uses two rhetorical questions: what good is it if you get everything and yet lose your soul? and how valuable is your soul?
These are great questions. In the immediate, human concerns are so urgent and demand so much attention. In the immediate, a small compromise here or there doesn't seem to matter much but each time a piece of my soul is being auctioned off. In the immediate it doesn't seem like such a big deal and often the argument is used that this compromise will lead to a greater good. However, in the end, when we stand before Christ, we would be willing to give anything to have our soul back. In that moment we will recognize the great cost of our compromise and there will be nothing we can do except depend on the mercy of God and the finished work of Christ. In that moment there is no way to purchase our soul back. That transaction can only be done in this lifetime. A thousand times a day I sell a piece of my soul. Father, help me to recognize its value and to never exchange the world for my soul. The cost of discipleship is to deny myself here but the gain is my soul. In light of the gain, the cost is nothing.
Here, Jesus expands on what he meant in the previous paragraph when he contrasted human concerns with God's concerns. The key words are: disciple, deny, cross, follow, Son of Man, kingdom. Jesus contrasts human concerns (i.e. saving your life, gaining the world) with the concerns of God (i.e. denying self, losing your life, the soul). His main point is that we want to be disciples of Jesus, we must live a life that is not centered on self but is centered on the glory of God. He uses two rhetorical questions: what good is it if you get everything and yet lose your soul? and how valuable is your soul?
These are great questions. In the immediate, human concerns are so urgent and demand so much attention. In the immediate, a small compromise here or there doesn't seem to matter much but each time a piece of my soul is being auctioned off. In the immediate it doesn't seem like such a big deal and often the argument is used that this compromise will lead to a greater good. However, in the end, when we stand before Christ, we would be willing to give anything to have our soul back. In that moment we will recognize the great cost of our compromise and there will be nothing we can do except depend on the mercy of God and the finished work of Christ. In that moment there is no way to purchase our soul back. That transaction can only be done in this lifetime. A thousand times a day I sell a piece of my soul. Father, help me to recognize its value and to never exchange the world for my soul. The cost of discipleship is to deny myself here but the gain is my soul. In light of the gain, the cost is nothing.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
from here to zero...
Matthew 16:21-23
The key words in this passage are: third day, stumbling block and concerns. Jesus contrasts the concerns of God with the concerns of humans. This follows right on the heels of Peter's confession of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. I think this gives further evidence for Peter being the rock upon which Jesus will build his Church because I think Jesus and Matthew are contrasting the foundational rock in the previous section with the stumbling block to Jesus that Peter has become in this section. I guess technically it is Peter's words that are the stumbling block so it could still be Peter's words that are the foundational rock upon which Jesus will build his Church.
The convicting words in this passage are, "you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns." I know that there are so many times when I do not have concerns of God in mind. I know that I too often pursue human concerns. These words of conviction stop me short because it isn't just that I have the wrong concerns in mind but that I am in direct opposition to the concerns and agenda of God which makes me as much a Satan as Peter. Father, forgive me. Let your kingdom and righteousness be my main and only concern.
The key words in this passage are: third day, stumbling block and concerns. Jesus contrasts the concerns of God with the concerns of humans. This follows right on the heels of Peter's confession of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. I think this gives further evidence for Peter being the rock upon which Jesus will build his Church because I think Jesus and Matthew are contrasting the foundational rock in the previous section with the stumbling block to Jesus that Peter has become in this section. I guess technically it is Peter's words that are the stumbling block so it could still be Peter's words that are the foundational rock upon which Jesus will build his Church.
The convicting words in this passage are, "you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns." I know that there are so many times when I do not have concerns of God in mind. I know that I too often pursue human concerns. These words of conviction stop me short because it isn't just that I have the wrong concerns in mind but that I am in direct opposition to the concerns and agenda of God which makes me as much a Satan as Peter. Father, forgive me. Let your kingdom and righteousness be my main and only concern.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
keys to the kingdom
Matthew 16:17-20
This is Jesus' response to Peter saying that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of the Living God. The key words are rock, keys, bind and loose. Jesus draws a direct link between what Peter does on earth and what happens in heaven to indicate the extreme authourity that he is giving Peter. At least I think it is to Peter. My Bible doesn't differentiate between the plural you and the singular you. If it is plural, then this authourity is given to the disciples as a group.
There have been lots of debates as to what Jesus is talking about when he says he will build his church on this rock. The question is, what is the rock. Some people say that the rock is Jesus which is what the writer of Hebrews talks about when he describes Jesus as the rock which the builders rejected becoming the chief cornerstone of the Church. However, in context, to make this work Jesus has to be saying, "You are right Peter. I am the Messiah and on this rock (the Messiah) I will build..." This is a bit awkward and negates the play on words between Peter adn rock (although some would say that Jesus is not comparing Peter and rock but contrasting Peter - stone - and rock).
Some people say that Peter is the rock upon which Jesus will build the Church. This fits well in the context and with the play on words that Jesus uses. There is even evidence for this in Acts - Peter was often, maybe even always, the one who went to the new regions to release the Holy Spirit and welcome the new believers into the Kingdom of God. Protestants are hesitant to emphasize the role of Peter in reaction to the Catholic position on Peter.
The third position is that Jesus is talking about Peter's confession - Jesus will build his Church on the confession that Jesus is the Messiah. To me, this seems like too much of a compromise position: we know it isn't Jesus who is the Rock but we don't want it to be Peter so...
Obviously this is a passage that I need to do some more reading and study on. However, even with my questions, I am encouraged because Jesus will build his church. It belongs to him, he takes responsibility for its growth and he promises that it will be built. I am also challenged by the role that I play in joining Jesus in building his Church. The method he has choses is through the sharing of the gospel with the world and he has annointed me to be a messenger of that gospel. I am his amabassador and I must speak and act in accordance with that office.
This is Jesus' response to Peter saying that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of the Living God. The key words are rock, keys, bind and loose. Jesus draws a direct link between what Peter does on earth and what happens in heaven to indicate the extreme authourity that he is giving Peter. At least I think it is to Peter. My Bible doesn't differentiate between the plural you and the singular you. If it is plural, then this authourity is given to the disciples as a group.
There have been lots of debates as to what Jesus is talking about when he says he will build his church on this rock. The question is, what is the rock. Some people say that the rock is Jesus which is what the writer of Hebrews talks about when he describes Jesus as the rock which the builders rejected becoming the chief cornerstone of the Church. However, in context, to make this work Jesus has to be saying, "You are right Peter. I am the Messiah and on this rock (the Messiah) I will build..." This is a bit awkward and negates the play on words between Peter adn rock (although some would say that Jesus is not comparing Peter and rock but contrasting Peter - stone - and rock).
Some people say that Peter is the rock upon which Jesus will build the Church. This fits well in the context and with the play on words that Jesus uses. There is even evidence for this in Acts - Peter was often, maybe even always, the one who went to the new regions to release the Holy Spirit and welcome the new believers into the Kingdom of God. Protestants are hesitant to emphasize the role of Peter in reaction to the Catholic position on Peter.
The third position is that Jesus is talking about Peter's confession - Jesus will build his Church on the confession that Jesus is the Messiah. To me, this seems like too much of a compromise position: we know it isn't Jesus who is the Rock but we don't want it to be Peter so...
Obviously this is a passage that I need to do some more reading and study on. However, even with my questions, I am encouraged because Jesus will build his church. It belongs to him, he takes responsibility for its growth and he promises that it will be built. I am also challenged by the role that I play in joining Jesus in building his Church. The method he has choses is through the sharing of the gospel with the world and he has annointed me to be a messenger of that gospel. I am his amabassador and I must speak and act in accordance with that office.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
the most important question
Matthew 16:13-16
I wonder why the region of Caesarea Philippi is significant in this story. It seems somewhat irrelevant except to maybe tie the incident to a location to give it credibility. The key words are: who, Son of Man, Messiah, Son of the Living God. There are to significant questions: Who do people say the Son of Man is? and Who do you say I am? It is interesting to me that the first question is impersonal - Jesus asks who other people say he is but even in asking that, he talks about himself in the third person: the Son of Man. When it gets to the critical question it becomes very personal: but what about you, who do you say I am?
This is the most important question of anyone's life. The eternal destiny of each person depends on their answer to this question. And saying the right answer isn't enough. It's not a test of knowledge but a test of faith. I must not only have the knowledge of who Jesus is I must believe in and live by who I know Jesus to be. Sometimes this scares me because I tend to have a pretty intellectual faith. I get excited by books like The Case for Faith and The Case for Christ. I love listening to preachers who have amazing insights into the Word and carry themes and connections through entire books of the Bible. I enjoy deep Bible studies in small groups where my mind is engaged. I can celebrate that because it is how God has wired me, but I know that I have to have more than an intellectual faith. It must not just make a difference in the way I think but in the way I live: in my actions, my interactions and my attitudes. I know who Jesus is. I could pass a written, multiple choice or true/false exam. But that's not the point.
I wonder why the region of Caesarea Philippi is significant in this story. It seems somewhat irrelevant except to maybe tie the incident to a location to give it credibility. The key words are: who, Son of Man, Messiah, Son of the Living God. There are to significant questions: Who do people say the Son of Man is? and Who do you say I am? It is interesting to me that the first question is impersonal - Jesus asks who other people say he is but even in asking that, he talks about himself in the third person: the Son of Man. When it gets to the critical question it becomes very personal: but what about you, who do you say I am?
This is the most important question of anyone's life. The eternal destiny of each person depends on their answer to this question. And saying the right answer isn't enough. It's not a test of knowledge but a test of faith. I must not only have the knowledge of who Jesus is I must believe in and live by who I know Jesus to be. Sometimes this scares me because I tend to have a pretty intellectual faith. I get excited by books like The Case for Faith and The Case for Christ. I love listening to preachers who have amazing insights into the Word and carry themes and connections through entire books of the Bible. I enjoy deep Bible studies in small groups where my mind is engaged. I can celebrate that because it is how God has wired me, but I know that I have to have more than an intellectual faith. It must not just make a difference in the way I think but in the way I live: in my actions, my interactions and my attitudes. I know who Jesus is. I could pass a written, multiple choice or true/false exam. But that's not the point.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
yeast
Matthew 16:5-12
Jesus speaks in another parable, or cryptic saying in these verses. He warns his disciples of the yeast of the Pharisees. His disciples, again, completely miss the point and think that Jesus is referring to the fact that they forgot to bring bread and, I guess, warning them not to buy bread from the Pharisees. Jesus, of course, is not talking about bread but about the subversive and influential teaching of the Pharisees that permeates and affects the whole culture.
Jesus uses a phrase that he has used often: you of little faith. This seems to be his favourite commendation (you have much faith) and his favourite rebuke (you of little faith). In this case he rebukes the disciples' lack of faith in his ability to provide for their needs. It shouldn't have taken much faith because they had seen him provide for the needs of huge crowds with very little food. I'm going to have to keep my eyes open but I think Jesus mainly rebukes his disciples for their lack of faith and mainly commends the ordinary citizen, and maybe even most often the outcast, for their extraodinary faith.
There are three things I get from this passage: 1) I need to be on my guard against the subversive, damaging, pervasive affect of false teaching in my life, in my ministry and in my church. I can't allow it. I must speak against it and counter it with truth where ever I see it. If I don't, it will spread and affect everything. 2) I am at least as thick as the disciples were. I can't condemn them for not getting the things Jesus was teaching. At least they had left everything to follow him. I might understand what Jesus is teaching and it might be easy for me to look down my nose on the disciples fo not understanding but they obviously believed and acted on what Jesus was teaching. 3) I desperately want Jesus to commend me for my faith/faithfulness. I, like the disciples, am too quick to forget his miraculous provision and presence in the past and too prone to doubt and self-sufficiency.
Jesus speaks in another parable, or cryptic saying in these verses. He warns his disciples of the yeast of the Pharisees. His disciples, again, completely miss the point and think that Jesus is referring to the fact that they forgot to bring bread and, I guess, warning them not to buy bread from the Pharisees. Jesus, of course, is not talking about bread but about the subversive and influential teaching of the Pharisees that permeates and affects the whole culture.
Jesus uses a phrase that he has used often: you of little faith. This seems to be his favourite commendation (you have much faith) and his favourite rebuke (you of little faith). In this case he rebukes the disciples' lack of faith in his ability to provide for their needs. It shouldn't have taken much faith because they had seen him provide for the needs of huge crowds with very little food. I'm going to have to keep my eyes open but I think Jesus mainly rebukes his disciples for their lack of faith and mainly commends the ordinary citizen, and maybe even most often the outcast, for their extraodinary faith.
There are three things I get from this passage: 1) I need to be on my guard against the subversive, damaging, pervasive affect of false teaching in my life, in my ministry and in my church. I can't allow it. I must speak against it and counter it with truth where ever I see it. If I don't, it will spread and affect everything. 2) I am at least as thick as the disciples were. I can't condemn them for not getting the things Jesus was teaching. At least they had left everything to follow him. I might understand what Jesus is teaching and it might be easy for me to look down my nose on the disciples fo not understanding but they obviously believed and acted on what Jesus was teaching. 3) I desperately want Jesus to commend me for my faith/faithfulness. I, like the disciples, am too quick to forget his miraculous provision and presence in the past and too prone to doubt and self-sufficiency.
Monday, May 11, 2009
red sky at night, sailors delight...
Matthew 16:1-4
The key words in this passage are sign, wicked and adulterous. I think it is significant that the Pharisees and Sadducees have made an alliance to confront Jesus; apparently both recognized that Jesus was beginning to threaten their positions. The Pharisees likely threatened by the authourity and popularity of Jesus and the Sadducees recognizing that the movement Jesus was starting was going to upset the tenuous peace that they had worked so hard to establish with the Roman authourities (and the power they achieved through that agreement).
In response to their request for a sign, Jesus responds with a well-known proverb. In elementary I heard a similar one: red sky at night, sailors delight; red sky in the morning, sailors take warning. Jesus' point is that they can read the signs in the sky but they can't read the even more obvious signs that point to Jesus being the Messiah.
Jesus leaves them with the sign of Jonah. I'm not sure if the sign of Jonah was a well known prophecy or sign in Jesus' culture or if it had ever been connected to the Messiah. I'm not sure if the Pharisees and Sadducees would have understood what Jesus was talking about, even if they carefully studied the book of Jonah. The sign is pretty obscure - or at least would have been at the time: I'm pretty sure that Jesus was referring to his being in the belly of the earth for three days, just as Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days. But that hadn't happened yet and could only be seen as a sign in retrospect. Perhaps Jesus was warning them that because they had missed, or failed to acknowledge, the signs of his authourity already (ie his healings, miracles, etc.) that they would likely even miss, or fail to acknowledge, the most obvious sign of his identity; his resurrection.
Again, this forces me to ask myself if I am missing the work of Christ in this world? Have I become so comfortable in my religion that I fail to acknowledge the work and authourity of Christ in anything outside of my box? I don't think I have got to the same place as the Pharisees and Sadducees yet but I can see those tendencies in myself and I pray desperately that I would not become so rigid and hard as they have become. I pray that God would continue to keep my sensitive to his work and the authourity of Christ and I would not let structure or tradition dictate what God can or cannot do.
The key words in this passage are sign, wicked and adulterous. I think it is significant that the Pharisees and Sadducees have made an alliance to confront Jesus; apparently both recognized that Jesus was beginning to threaten their positions. The Pharisees likely threatened by the authourity and popularity of Jesus and the Sadducees recognizing that the movement Jesus was starting was going to upset the tenuous peace that they had worked so hard to establish with the Roman authourities (and the power they achieved through that agreement).
In response to their request for a sign, Jesus responds with a well-known proverb. In elementary I heard a similar one: red sky at night, sailors delight; red sky in the morning, sailors take warning. Jesus' point is that they can read the signs in the sky but they can't read the even more obvious signs that point to Jesus being the Messiah.
Jesus leaves them with the sign of Jonah. I'm not sure if the sign of Jonah was a well known prophecy or sign in Jesus' culture or if it had ever been connected to the Messiah. I'm not sure if the Pharisees and Sadducees would have understood what Jesus was talking about, even if they carefully studied the book of Jonah. The sign is pretty obscure - or at least would have been at the time: I'm pretty sure that Jesus was referring to his being in the belly of the earth for three days, just as Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days. But that hadn't happened yet and could only be seen as a sign in retrospect. Perhaps Jesus was warning them that because they had missed, or failed to acknowledge, the signs of his authourity already (ie his healings, miracles, etc.) that they would likely even miss, or fail to acknowledge, the most obvious sign of his identity; his resurrection.
Again, this forces me to ask myself if I am missing the work of Christ in this world? Have I become so comfortable in my religion that I fail to acknowledge the work and authourity of Christ in anything outside of my box? I don't think I have got to the same place as the Pharisees and Sadducees yet but I can see those tendencies in myself and I pray desperately that I would not become so rigid and hard as they have become. I pray that God would continue to keep my sensitive to his work and the authourity of Christ and I would not let structure or tradition dictate what God can or cannot do.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
bread and fish again?
Matthew 15:29-39
The key words are: amazed, compassion, satisfied. I'm sure there is something significant about the disciples having seven loaves, as opposed to the five loaves in the previous miraculous feeding, and there being seven baskets of left overs, as opposed to the twelve in the previous feeding.
I wonder if this ever got old for the disciples. I wonder is they stopped being amazed by what Jesus was doing because they had seen it so many times. I can almost pick it up in their response to Jesus; "Hmmm, I wonder where we could ever find enough bread to feed this many people... Jesus? Here's seven loaves. Do your thing." I prefer to see it that way because otherwise the disciples are just thick. Can't they remember the time that Jesus fed 5000 with a boy's lunch?
Before I am too quick to judge, I must examine my own life. There have been countless times where I have seen the work of God and yet, in a similar circumstance, I stress, worry, plan, etc. and forget to simply have faith in the work of Jesus. How difficult is it to admit that I'm in over my head, there's nothing I can do and I am trusting fully in Jesus to do something? My track record says it is pretty difficult.
The key words are: amazed, compassion, satisfied. I'm sure there is something significant about the disciples having seven loaves, as opposed to the five loaves in the previous miraculous feeding, and there being seven baskets of left overs, as opposed to the twelve in the previous feeding.
I wonder if this ever got old for the disciples. I wonder is they stopped being amazed by what Jesus was doing because they had seen it so many times. I can almost pick it up in their response to Jesus; "Hmmm, I wonder where we could ever find enough bread to feed this many people... Jesus? Here's seven loaves. Do your thing." I prefer to see it that way because otherwise the disciples are just thick. Can't they remember the time that Jesus fed 5000 with a boy's lunch?
Before I am too quick to judge, I must examine my own life. There have been countless times where I have seen the work of God and yet, in a similar circumstance, I stress, worry, plan, etc. and forget to simply have faith in the work of Jesus. How difficult is it to admit that I'm in over my head, there's nothing I can do and I am trusting fully in Jesus to do something? My track record says it is pretty difficult.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Was Jesus Racist?
Matthew 15:21-28
This is an odd encounter. First, Jesus does not respond at all to the pleas of this Canaanite woman and then, at his disciples' urging, he tries to send her away. He even compares her and her people to dogs. This doesn't seem like the Jesus we know and love. This doesn't seem like the Jesus we like to portray. In the end he heals the woman's daughter and commends her faith but he certainly made her work pretty hard to get there and seemed to feed, or at least reflect, the racist attitudes of the day in the process.
Perhaps Jesus was holding a mirror up for his disciples and the rest of Jewish society to see. Perhaps he was trying to get them to realize how abhorrent their attitude toward the outsider was. I'd like to think that's what Jesus was doing but I don't see him driving that point home through any kind of teaching coming out of this encounter.
It also raises the question of why Matthew would include this story in his book. I think it's probably to show that Jesus was not just the King of the Jews but that his message of the kingdom was going to spread to people of all races and nations.
Personally, this story makes me evaluate my own attitude toward the outsider. I certainly hold some prejudices about certain races and classes of people. I wonder what I would see if Jesus were to reflect back to me my own prejudices. This has been my prayer for a long time: Lord, help me to see people through your eyes and to love them with your love.
This is an odd encounter. First, Jesus does not respond at all to the pleas of this Canaanite woman and then, at his disciples' urging, he tries to send her away. He even compares her and her people to dogs. This doesn't seem like the Jesus we know and love. This doesn't seem like the Jesus we like to portray. In the end he heals the woman's daughter and commends her faith but he certainly made her work pretty hard to get there and seemed to feed, or at least reflect, the racist attitudes of the day in the process.
Perhaps Jesus was holding a mirror up for his disciples and the rest of Jewish society to see. Perhaps he was trying to get them to realize how abhorrent their attitude toward the outsider was. I'd like to think that's what Jesus was doing but I don't see him driving that point home through any kind of teaching coming out of this encounter.
It also raises the question of why Matthew would include this story in his book. I think it's probably to show that Jesus was not just the King of the Jews but that his message of the kingdom was going to spread to people of all races and nations.
Personally, this story makes me evaluate my own attitude toward the outsider. I certainly hold some prejudices about certain races and classes of people. I wonder what I would see if Jesus were to reflect back to me my own prejudices. This has been my prayer for a long time: Lord, help me to see people through your eyes and to love them with your love.
Monday, May 4, 2009
corrupt heart = corrupt actions
Matthew 15:10-20
The key words in this passage are: mouth, defile, plant, blind. This section is the continuation of the dispute that started by the Pharisees asking Jesus why his disciples did not wash their hands before eating. This had nothing to do with hygiene and everything to do with religious ritual. In fact, the extremely pious would wash their hands after each course of the meal. Jesus' main point is that it is not eating with unclean hands that defiles a person but what comes out through words or actions is an indication of the corruption that is in a person's heart.
So lately I've noticed that I've been swearing a lot - mostly in private and mostly under my breath but it's been coming out. Now I know that I should do some behaviour modification in that I should stop swearing. Jesus would agree that I should stop swearing but I think he would point to something deeper than the words coming out of my mouth. This passage tells me that the words coming out of my mouth are an indication of the condition of my heart. So, I need to ask myself, what is going on inside of me that would cause the increase in swearing? In the meantime, I need to exercise some discipline and gain control of my tongue but I also need to realize that my tongue speaks from the overflow of my heart.
The point, I think, is that none of us can change our own hearts. Jesus is making it clear that observing religious ritual is not enough. It doesn't deal with the heart issue. Self-discipline is very good but it is not enough because it doesn't deal with the heart issue. The question that the disciples should be asking Jesus at this point is: if we can't change our heart by observing the religious rituals or by self-discipline, how can we change our hearts? Jesus' reply would probably be something like: "You can't. That's why I am here because only God (Father, Son and Spirit) can change your heart." Prone to wander, Lord I feel it. Prone to leave the God I love. Here's my heart, O, take and seal it...
The key words in this passage are: mouth, defile, plant, blind. This section is the continuation of the dispute that started by the Pharisees asking Jesus why his disciples did not wash their hands before eating. This had nothing to do with hygiene and everything to do with religious ritual. In fact, the extremely pious would wash their hands after each course of the meal. Jesus' main point is that it is not eating with unclean hands that defiles a person but what comes out through words or actions is an indication of the corruption that is in a person's heart.
So lately I've noticed that I've been swearing a lot - mostly in private and mostly under my breath but it's been coming out. Now I know that I should do some behaviour modification in that I should stop swearing. Jesus would agree that I should stop swearing but I think he would point to something deeper than the words coming out of my mouth. This passage tells me that the words coming out of my mouth are an indication of the condition of my heart. So, I need to ask myself, what is going on inside of me that would cause the increase in swearing? In the meantime, I need to exercise some discipline and gain control of my tongue but I also need to realize that my tongue speaks from the overflow of my heart.
The point, I think, is that none of us can change our own hearts. Jesus is making it clear that observing religious ritual is not enough. It doesn't deal with the heart issue. Self-discipline is very good but it is not enough because it doesn't deal with the heart issue. The question that the disciples should be asking Jesus at this point is: if we can't change our heart by observing the religious rituals or by self-discipline, how can we change our hearts? Jesus' reply would probably be something like: "You can't. That's why I am here because only God (Father, Son and Spirit) can change your heart." Prone to wander, Lord I feel it. Prone to leave the God I love. Here's my heart, O, take and seal it...
Sunday, May 3, 2009
splitting hairs
Matthew 15:1-9
I just published this post and it disappeared. Crazy!! I guess I'll try again:
Jesus contrasts the "tradition of the elders" to the "command of God" and exposes the fact that the Pharisees give more weight to their tradition than to the word of God. He reveals that by creating these traditions, they have created loopholes by which they can escape obeying the law. The specific example he gives is that some people were not providing the help to their parents that they were commanded to give because the tradition of the elders allowed them to devote some of their money (that would have otherwise gone to helping their parents) to God. Matthew (and Jesus) are again making the point that in the kingdom, people are more important than traditions and obedience is more important than ritual. The law really can be summed up as "love God with all you have and are" and "love your neighbour as yourself".
Jesus uses this occassion to remind the Pharisees of the prophesy of Isaiah and to see themselves as the fulfillment of that prophesy: they are the people who practice the rituals and traditions of religion but remain far from the heart of God. I know that I've been in the same boat. It's not that I've done it on purpose for the most part. It's just that the rituals and traditions become so common for me that I sometimes go through the motions without realizing it. Father, forgive me. May I never find more comfort in rituals than I do in you and may I never put tradition above people or obedience.
I just published this post and it disappeared. Crazy!! I guess I'll try again:
Jesus contrasts the "tradition of the elders" to the "command of God" and exposes the fact that the Pharisees give more weight to their tradition than to the word of God. He reveals that by creating these traditions, they have created loopholes by which they can escape obeying the law. The specific example he gives is that some people were not providing the help to their parents that they were commanded to give because the tradition of the elders allowed them to devote some of their money (that would have otherwise gone to helping their parents) to God. Matthew (and Jesus) are again making the point that in the kingdom, people are more important than traditions and obedience is more important than ritual. The law really can be summed up as "love God with all you have and are" and "love your neighbour as yourself".
Jesus uses this occassion to remind the Pharisees of the prophesy of Isaiah and to see themselves as the fulfillment of that prophesy: they are the people who practice the rituals and traditions of religion but remain far from the heart of God. I know that I've been in the same boat. It's not that I've done it on purpose for the most part. It's just that the rituals and traditions become so common for me that I sometimes go through the motions without realizing it. Father, forgive me. May I never find more comfort in rituals than I do in you and may I never put tradition above people or obedience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
