Matthew 8:28-34
The sequences indicates that this episode in Jesus' life took place right after he had calmed the storm on the lake. While Matthew indicated that Jesus had freed people from demonization in a previous paragraph, this is a very specific story. I speculate that this was a pretty famous incident in Jesus' ministry and Matthew is reminding his Jewish readers about it and using it to further prove that Jesus truly was the Messiah - he had authourity over the spiritual realm as well as the physical (as seen by his commanding the wind and waves).
I'm sure there is significance in the demons being allowed to go into the herd of pigs. Some have speculated that it has something to do with Jesus making a statement about Jews profiting from the raising of unclean animals. However, that seems unlikely to me since Jesus didn't seem overly concerned with the ceremonial requirements of the Law and in a relatively short time was going to command Peter in a vision to eat so called unclean animals. I wonder if Jesus was making a point that the pig farmer and the people from the village were more concerned with the welfare of livestock than they were with the welfare of these two outcasts. Matthew doesn't say specifically why the townspeople asked Jesus to leave the region but it could very well be that they were worried he would destroy more of their economy.
So, the lesson is this: Jesus is more concerned about humans than he is about pigs. Am I?
Showing posts with label Matthew 8. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Matthew 8. Show all posts
Monday, January 12, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Lord of the Wind
Matthew 8:23-27
The wind and the waves are prominent figures in this account. Also, the word faith is pretty key, in particular the phrase, "you of little faith." Matthew includes this account in order to show his readers that Jesus is not just Lord over illness and the spiritual world but that his authourity extends to the physical world. He can command creation. He is Lord of the wind and the waves. This, for Matthew and his Jewish audience, would have been further proof that Jesus was the Messiah, that he was the rightful King of Israel and the rightful Lord of all Creation.
I've always wondered how Jesus wanted his disciples to respond in this situation. They feel in mortal danger and they wake up Jesus to save them. To me, that demonstrates pretty significant faith: they realize that they are in trouble and that they can do nothing to get themselves out of the situation so they turn to their leader, someone, judging from their words, that they trust to save them. Were they supposed to trust that Jesus was in control even though he was asleep? Were they supposed to have a fatalist attitude that said, "well we can't do anything about this and since God is in control we'll just sit passively in this boat and let him do whatever he wants to do"? Maybe their lack of faith was in that they didn't really believe Jesus could do anything to save them but they wanted him to wake up so he could share in their fear and panic.
I just know that if I face a situation that is beyond my control I hope that I have at least as much faith as the disciples - enough faith to at least go to Jesus, whom I know to be in control and to be King over all, and ask him to save me.
The wind and the waves are prominent figures in this account. Also, the word faith is pretty key, in particular the phrase, "you of little faith." Matthew includes this account in order to show his readers that Jesus is not just Lord over illness and the spiritual world but that his authourity extends to the physical world. He can command creation. He is Lord of the wind and the waves. This, for Matthew and his Jewish audience, would have been further proof that Jesus was the Messiah, that he was the rightful King of Israel and the rightful Lord of all Creation.
I've always wondered how Jesus wanted his disciples to respond in this situation. They feel in mortal danger and they wake up Jesus to save them. To me, that demonstrates pretty significant faith: they realize that they are in trouble and that they can do nothing to get themselves out of the situation so they turn to their leader, someone, judging from their words, that they trust to save them. Were they supposed to trust that Jesus was in control even though he was asleep? Were they supposed to have a fatalist attitude that said, "well we can't do anything about this and since God is in control we'll just sit passively in this boat and let him do whatever he wants to do"? Maybe their lack of faith was in that they didn't really believe Jesus could do anything to save them but they wanted him to wake up so he could share in their fear and panic.
I just know that if I face a situation that is beyond my control I hope that I have at least as much faith as the disciples - enough faith to at least go to Jesus, whom I know to be in control and to be King over all, and ask him to save me.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Homeless for Jesus...
Matthew 8:18-22
The key words in this section are the titles attributed to Jesus. A teacher of the law calls him "Teacher" (which is probably "Rabbi"). Jesus calls himself the "Son of Man". A disciple calls him "Lord". Jesus contrasts foxes who have dens and birds who have nests to himself who has no place to call home. He then compares those who are physically dead to those who are spiritually dead.
The implication of Jesus' words are that if someone wants to follow him they must be willing to give up their home and any relational connections. Jesus is saying that following him must be the absolute priority and that nothing must compete for allegiance to him. This is pretty radical teaching.
For me, this means that I must love Jesus more than I love his blessings. Lets face, I really like his blessings: a great wife, a great son, a great job, a great house, a great faith community, good friends, good health, good food, etc. Even beyond the physical and emotional blessings of Christ, there are the spiritual blessings of comfort, confidence, direction, purpose, hope, etc. The question I must keep asking myself is, do I love Jesus more than I love his blessings? Would I be willing to give up my job, my faith community, my health, my son for the sake of Christ? I was doing ok up until my son... The point is that nothing must compete for my allegiance to Jesus.
The key words in this section are the titles attributed to Jesus. A teacher of the law calls him "Teacher" (which is probably "Rabbi"). Jesus calls himself the "Son of Man". A disciple calls him "Lord". Jesus contrasts foxes who have dens and birds who have nests to himself who has no place to call home. He then compares those who are physically dead to those who are spiritually dead.
The implication of Jesus' words are that if someone wants to follow him they must be willing to give up their home and any relational connections. Jesus is saying that following him must be the absolute priority and that nothing must compete for allegiance to him. This is pretty radical teaching.
For me, this means that I must love Jesus more than I love his blessings. Lets face, I really like his blessings: a great wife, a great son, a great job, a great house, a great faith community, good friends, good health, good food, etc. Even beyond the physical and emotional blessings of Christ, there are the spiritual blessings of comfort, confidence, direction, purpose, hope, etc. The question I must keep asking myself is, do I love Jesus more than I love his blessings? Would I be willing to give up my job, my faith community, my health, my son for the sake of Christ? I was doing ok up until my son... The point is that nothing must compete for my allegiance to Jesus.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Was OT prophecy really fulfilled?
Matthew 8:14-17
Matthew continues to pile on evidence that Jesus is not just an ordinary rabbi but is the Messiah. He doesn't just teach with authourity, as evidenced in the Sermon on the Mount, but he also acts with authourity over the physical realm, as seen by his healing of diseases, and the spiritual realm, as seen by his casting out demons. I don't know if Matthew meant to emphasize the method of healing or not but it stands out to me: he heals the centurion's servant without even being physically present, he heals Peter's mother-in-law in such close proximity that he touches her and he casts out demons through the power of his word. I think that Matthew is reminding us that it is not a formula that has the power to heal but it is Jesus.
Matthew connects what Jesus does here to Isaiah 53:4, following his usual formula of "this was to fulfill what was written..." He uses this phrase a lot. Keeping in mind that Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience to convince them that Jesus was the Messiah, this constant reference to the prophecies of the OT makes sense. However, as a Gentile living thousands of years later, I'm not sure that they would convince me. It seems like Matthew reads a lot into the text of the OT to make parallels between what it says and what Jesus does. In talking to Pastor Steve about this, he said something that made a lot of sense to me: Matthew and his audience would have been so familiar with the OT that they couldn't help but make comparisons between what Jesus did and what the OT said. The reality is that much of what Matthew says was fulfilled in Jesus was actually fulfilled soon after the prophecies were made (not 100% but a lot). In Bible College I was taught that this was because there were two fufillments of these prophecies: the more immediate fulfillment and then the actual, later fulfillment in Christ. This could be true but it raises the question: are the only prophecies to have double fulfillment the ones that are specifically mentioned in the NT? What is to prevent us from seeing double fulfillment in other OT prophecies?
Pastor Steve wonders if we don't understand how Matthew was using the world "fulfill". We take it to mean that Isaiah had Jesus and/or the Messiah in mind when he spoke these words. Maybe Matthew and his audience understood it as "this is just like what Isaiah talked about...". I need to do more study on that.
So, what do I learn from this? I am reminded that Jesus is King - not just of my heart and not just of the Church but of the whole world. He has authourity over all things physical and spiritual. What do I need to be afraid of? Nothing!
Matthew continues to pile on evidence that Jesus is not just an ordinary rabbi but is the Messiah. He doesn't just teach with authourity, as evidenced in the Sermon on the Mount, but he also acts with authourity over the physical realm, as seen by his healing of diseases, and the spiritual realm, as seen by his casting out demons. I don't know if Matthew meant to emphasize the method of healing or not but it stands out to me: he heals the centurion's servant without even being physically present, he heals Peter's mother-in-law in such close proximity that he touches her and he casts out demons through the power of his word. I think that Matthew is reminding us that it is not a formula that has the power to heal but it is Jesus.
Matthew connects what Jesus does here to Isaiah 53:4, following his usual formula of "this was to fulfill what was written..." He uses this phrase a lot. Keeping in mind that Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience to convince them that Jesus was the Messiah, this constant reference to the prophecies of the OT makes sense. However, as a Gentile living thousands of years later, I'm not sure that they would convince me. It seems like Matthew reads a lot into the text of the OT to make parallels between what it says and what Jesus does. In talking to Pastor Steve about this, he said something that made a lot of sense to me: Matthew and his audience would have been so familiar with the OT that they couldn't help but make comparisons between what Jesus did and what the OT said. The reality is that much of what Matthew says was fulfilled in Jesus was actually fulfilled soon after the prophecies were made (not 100% but a lot). In Bible College I was taught that this was because there were two fufillments of these prophecies: the more immediate fulfillment and then the actual, later fulfillment in Christ. This could be true but it raises the question: are the only prophecies to have double fulfillment the ones that are specifically mentioned in the NT? What is to prevent us from seeing double fulfillment in other OT prophecies?
Pastor Steve wonders if we don't understand how Matthew was using the world "fulfill". We take it to mean that Isaiah had Jesus and/or the Messiah in mind when he spoke these words. Maybe Matthew and his audience understood it as "this is just like what Isaiah talked about...". I need to do more study on that.
So, what do I learn from this? I am reminded that Jesus is King - not just of my heart and not just of the Church but of the whole world. He has authourity over all things physical and spiritual. What do I need to be afraid of? Nothing!
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
a long distance miracle
Matthew 8:5-13
This would have been so confusing for the crowds that were following Jesus. Matthew makes it clear that crowds from all the regions of Israel were following Jesus, that the crowds were large and that they were very impressed with Jesus' ministry so far: he spoke with authourity and he was healing the sick. It reminds me a bit of the hysteria surrounding Barack Obama during his run for presidency: he is an amazing speaker which set him above his competitors and people were flocking to him.
Then, probably very shortly after his amazing speech on the mountain, Jesus encounters a Roman centurion. I think to understand the full impact of this story, I would have to understand the hatred that the Jews had for the Romans. The only thing that I think would come close is the hatred between Jews and Arabs today. If Jesus was hoping to remain popular with the crowds, he would let this man have it. He wasn't only a soldier who followed orders but a commander who gave orders that involved the occupation and subugation of the Jews. The crowd was probably hoping for a brilliant, cutting reply from Jesus, along the lines of, "Well that would be one less Roman to worry about."
There are a few things that stand out to me in this encounter. One is that the Centurion is one of the few, maybe even only, who asked Jesus to heal someone else who wasn't related to him. Most of the others pleaded for their own healing or the healing of an immediate family member. This certainly sets the Roman Centurion apart.
The other thing is this whole exchange about authourity and faith. It's been a bit of a puzzle for me to try to figure out how Jesus saw such faith in the centurion's response. Here's what I think: First, the centurion demonstrated humility in coming to Jesus and not sending a servant and in admitting that he was not worthy (as a Gentile) to have Jesus (a Jew) come to his house. I think this demonstrated a lot of faith: "I know you can't come because I am a Gentile but maybe you can do something."
Second, the centurion demonstrated faith in that he recognized the authourity of Jesus. What I think the centurion is saying is, "I know you, having authourity over all things, can heal my servant without being physically present because even I, a mere man and one who only has limited authourity over other men, expect my orders to be carried out immediately and fully. How much more could you, having complete authourity, just give the word and have my servant healed?"
Here's what I learn from this passage: I trust God way too little. My faith is so small! He is God and my finances, my health, my safety, my family, my future, my ministry is all under his authourity. All he has to do is say the word and it will be obeyed. I really have nothing to stress over or fear. Also, I have often put myself in the place of the Jews. I feel a sense of entitlement because I am a Christian. My sense of fairness states that I, as a follower of Jesus, should receive more blessing and honour than someone who doesn't follow Christ. This is bull-oney! Every blessing and honour that has come my way is a result of God's grace and I deserve it no more than anyone else. This is easy for me to say but hard for me to really believe. God, make me humble like the centurion. Give me faith like the centurion had. I know that you are good and all powerful. All things are under your authourity. I know that you are gracious. I see that in my life. Please take away my sense of entitlement and let me truly celebrate the blessings you pour out to me and to others as evidence of your extreme grace!
This would have been so confusing for the crowds that were following Jesus. Matthew makes it clear that crowds from all the regions of Israel were following Jesus, that the crowds were large and that they were very impressed with Jesus' ministry so far: he spoke with authourity and he was healing the sick. It reminds me a bit of the hysteria surrounding Barack Obama during his run for presidency: he is an amazing speaker which set him above his competitors and people were flocking to him.
Then, probably very shortly after his amazing speech on the mountain, Jesus encounters a Roman centurion. I think to understand the full impact of this story, I would have to understand the hatred that the Jews had for the Romans. The only thing that I think would come close is the hatred between Jews and Arabs today. If Jesus was hoping to remain popular with the crowds, he would let this man have it. He wasn't only a soldier who followed orders but a commander who gave orders that involved the occupation and subugation of the Jews. The crowd was probably hoping for a brilliant, cutting reply from Jesus, along the lines of, "Well that would be one less Roman to worry about."
There are a few things that stand out to me in this encounter. One is that the Centurion is one of the few, maybe even only, who asked Jesus to heal someone else who wasn't related to him. Most of the others pleaded for their own healing or the healing of an immediate family member. This certainly sets the Roman Centurion apart.
The other thing is this whole exchange about authourity and faith. It's been a bit of a puzzle for me to try to figure out how Jesus saw such faith in the centurion's response. Here's what I think: First, the centurion demonstrated humility in coming to Jesus and not sending a servant and in admitting that he was not worthy (as a Gentile) to have Jesus (a Jew) come to his house. I think this demonstrated a lot of faith: "I know you can't come because I am a Gentile but maybe you can do something."
Second, the centurion demonstrated faith in that he recognized the authourity of Jesus. What I think the centurion is saying is, "I know you, having authourity over all things, can heal my servant without being physically present because even I, a mere man and one who only has limited authourity over other men, expect my orders to be carried out immediately and fully. How much more could you, having complete authourity, just give the word and have my servant healed?"
Here's what I learn from this passage: I trust God way too little. My faith is so small! He is God and my finances, my health, my safety, my family, my future, my ministry is all under his authourity. All he has to do is say the word and it will be obeyed. I really have nothing to stress over or fear. Also, I have often put myself in the place of the Jews. I feel a sense of entitlement because I am a Christian. My sense of fairness states that I, as a follower of Jesus, should receive more blessing and honour than someone who doesn't follow Christ. This is bull-oney! Every blessing and honour that has come my way is a result of God's grace and I deserve it no more than anyone else. This is easy for me to say but hard for me to really believe. God, make me humble like the centurion. Give me faith like the centurion had. I know that you are good and all powerful. All things are under your authourity. I know that you are gracious. I see that in my life. Please take away my sense of entitlement and let me truly celebrate the blessings you pour out to me and to others as evidence of your extreme grace!
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Jesus - undercover agent?
Matthew 8:1-4
I have no idea in which region Jesus preaches his sermon from the mountain. The verses just before that say that large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed Jesus. Where ever the sermon takes place, Jesus comes down from the mountain and begins to heal people.
There are two things that I don't understand:
1) Why did Jesus tell people that he healed not to tell other people what happened? I mean, there were large crowds following him anyway so it isn't like this healing was going to be kept secret. Also, most of the people he healed didn't obey this command anyway and went around spreading the news about what happened to them. Finally, doesn't Jesus want people to know that he has authourity over disease, demons and death, proving that he is the Messiah? Was Jesus just using reverse psychology, recognizing that human nature loves to know something others don't and to be the one that tells others? If that is the case, then it seems a bit manipulative of Jesus.
It could relate to his temptations. Jesus was tempted to use his power to survive a jump off the temple which would certainly draw people to him and make a name for himself. Jesus would realize that his healings, while necessary to demonstrate his authourity, would also be seen to be spectacular and that people would come to see him as simply a miracle worker, as cheap entertainment. They would be drawn to him because of his tricks and as long as he kept doing tricks for them, they would be loyal to him. Related to that, he may have wanted people to truly come to discover who he was for themselves, not based on a rumour of a healing that was done. This would allow people to discover that he was more than just a "one trick pony" - that his main agenda was compassion, grace, love and sacrifice.
Secondly, I wonder why Jesus supported the tradition of the Law when it came to this healing. He told the leper to follow the ceremonial requirements for being made clean: go and show himself to the priest and make the necessary sacrifices. This is a puzzle to me because a main part of Jesus' message was the end of these religious practices. It would seem like a good opportunity to tell the people that they don't need to observe the burdensome practices of ceremonial law in order to be reconciled to God.
I wonder if something else was at stake here though. I wonder if Jesus told this man to observe the ceremonial requirements in order to be accepted back into community. As a leper, this man was untouchable and was an outcast from society. I wonder if Jesus recognized that for this man to be re-integrated back into society that he needed the official declaration from the priest that he was now clean. This would make sense, especially in light of Jesus' message in his just preached sermon: to treat everyone with the dignity, honour and respect they deserve as a person created in the image of God. Jesus was showing great respect to this man in, first of all, touching the man and then providing a way for him to be embraced again by his family and friends.
What's the lesson for me? I think that first of all I must be willing to be seen as unclean because of the people that I associate with and embrace. I must be willing to take the same risks socially that Jesus took. Who are the untouchables in our society and who is showing them the compassion, dignity, honour and respect that God wants to communicate to them. Second, I think I need discernment to know when to buck the system and when to work with in it. When the system provides a mechanism for helping someone regain their dignity, then I must be willing to at least consider working with in it. Even if it is the same system that stripped the person of their dignity in the first place.
I have no idea in which region Jesus preaches his sermon from the mountain. The verses just before that say that large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed Jesus. Where ever the sermon takes place, Jesus comes down from the mountain and begins to heal people.
There are two things that I don't understand:
1) Why did Jesus tell people that he healed not to tell other people what happened? I mean, there were large crowds following him anyway so it isn't like this healing was going to be kept secret. Also, most of the people he healed didn't obey this command anyway and went around spreading the news about what happened to them. Finally, doesn't Jesus want people to know that he has authourity over disease, demons and death, proving that he is the Messiah? Was Jesus just using reverse psychology, recognizing that human nature loves to know something others don't and to be the one that tells others? If that is the case, then it seems a bit manipulative of Jesus.
It could relate to his temptations. Jesus was tempted to use his power to survive a jump off the temple which would certainly draw people to him and make a name for himself. Jesus would realize that his healings, while necessary to demonstrate his authourity, would also be seen to be spectacular and that people would come to see him as simply a miracle worker, as cheap entertainment. They would be drawn to him because of his tricks and as long as he kept doing tricks for them, they would be loyal to him. Related to that, he may have wanted people to truly come to discover who he was for themselves, not based on a rumour of a healing that was done. This would allow people to discover that he was more than just a "one trick pony" - that his main agenda was compassion, grace, love and sacrifice.
Secondly, I wonder why Jesus supported the tradition of the Law when it came to this healing. He told the leper to follow the ceremonial requirements for being made clean: go and show himself to the priest and make the necessary sacrifices. This is a puzzle to me because a main part of Jesus' message was the end of these religious practices. It would seem like a good opportunity to tell the people that they don't need to observe the burdensome practices of ceremonial law in order to be reconciled to God.
I wonder if something else was at stake here though. I wonder if Jesus told this man to observe the ceremonial requirements in order to be accepted back into community. As a leper, this man was untouchable and was an outcast from society. I wonder if Jesus recognized that for this man to be re-integrated back into society that he needed the official declaration from the priest that he was now clean. This would make sense, especially in light of Jesus' message in his just preached sermon: to treat everyone with the dignity, honour and respect they deserve as a person created in the image of God. Jesus was showing great respect to this man in, first of all, touching the man and then providing a way for him to be embraced again by his family and friends.
What's the lesson for me? I think that first of all I must be willing to be seen as unclean because of the people that I associate with and embrace. I must be willing to take the same risks socially that Jesus took. Who are the untouchables in our society and who is showing them the compassion, dignity, honour and respect that God wants to communicate to them. Second, I think I need discernment to know when to buck the system and when to work with in it. When the system provides a mechanism for helping someone regain their dignity, then I must be willing to at least consider working with in it. Even if it is the same system that stripped the person of their dignity in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
