"Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed."

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Matthew 12:15-50 -- Titles, Divided Kingdoms, Words, Sign Of Jonah

Continuing on in Matthew 12...let's see.  Jesus has just violated Sabbath Tradition according to the Pharisees, declared himself "Lord of the Sabbath," the Pharisees are plotting his demise and he is back to quietly healing the sick around him.  Matthew mentions Jesus fulfilling a prophecy from Isaiah 42:1-4.

18"Here is my servant whom I have chosen,
      the one I love, in whom I delight;
   I will put my Spirit on him,
      and he will proclaim justice to the nations.
 19He will not quarrel or cry out;
      no one will hear his voice in the streets.
 20A bruised reed he will not break,
      and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out,
   till he leads justice to victory.
    21In his name the nations will put their hope."

I noticed in verse 23 how Jesus did some miracles

23All the people were astonished and said, "Could this be the Son of David?"

So I got to thinking what being "the Son of David" meant to them.  Messianic thoughts, I'm thinking.

Thankfully the Pharisees were there to assure the people that this wasn't the Messiah! Nope, Jesus was doing these miracles in the power of Beelzebub, "the prince of demons," especially when Jesus was casting out evil spirits.

To which Jesus replied,  "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. 26If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand?"

These legalists were so adamant that Jesus was not the Messiah, was not sent from God that they would rather attribute his miracles to the prince of demons!  As if Satan would want the blind seeing, the deaf hearing, the shriveled hand catching baseballs and demon-possessed people praising God!  'Cause he's all kinds of sweet like that, right? 

Jesus said,  30"He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."

I thought about the gathering and scattering and it demonstrates unity and divisiveness, doesn't it?  One who gathers people together under a common cause (like Jesus) is unifying whereas one driving people away scattering them seems quite divisive. And Jesus just told us a "city or household divided against itself will not stand."

Jesus continues with this:

31"And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

Questions/Thoughts.

*** So there is an unpardonable sin?

*** And it's against the Spirit?  Why? 

*** What is blasphemy against the Spirit? Why is that unpardonable?


*** Why does Jesus often refer to himself as "the Son of Man"?  Why is it OK to speak against him if his message was God's message?  When I read the Quran I remember accepting Muhammad's message - and thus accepting Muhammad - was necessary for a chance at salvation.  Why is Jesus' teaching different?

Tell me what you think about these questions!

He continues:

 33"Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. 34You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. 35The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. 36But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken."

Whoa! These were religious guys and Jesus called them a "brood of vipers" and declared them evil!!  No wonder they wanted to kill Jesus!   It seems Jesus was very interested in people's words, huh?  Remember he wasn't so "tore up" about the disciples eating with unwashed hands. He said it wasn't what goes inside the body that made a person unclean, but what proceeded out of the body. 

Our words reveal our hearts. They are the fruit of what is growing inside. Do you think our "words" can also be our "words in action" since we all know actions speak louder than words?  Or do you suppose Jesus only meant what we say with our lips?  Jesus concluded this "word" discussion with


37"For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned."

Has your heart been changed by God so it will bring forth good words?

The rest of the chapter highlights:

1. The Pharisees asked for a "miraculous sign." I guess the miracles they'd seen already were not enough.

2.  Jesus said the only sign for them was "the sign of the prophet Jonah" whom Jesus used as a metaphor for himself. 

40For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

3.  Also Jesus declared that whoever does the will of his Father is his brothers and sisters and mother (vs. 46-50).


I've love to hear your thoughts now.

9 comments:

Amber said...

'He who is not with me is against me'

Isn't that another denunciation of 'lukewarmness'? There's not middle ground in that statement. If you're not *with* Christ, you're against Him. It doesn't even take you taking an active role against Christ and the Gospel. You can't sit on the sidelines because it's not your fight. By choosing to not be with Him, whatever form that takes, you've chosen for the other side.

'*** What is blasphemy against the Spirit? Why is that unpardonable? *** Why does Jesus often refer to himself as "the Son of Man"? Why is it OK to speak against him if his message was God's message? When I read the Quran I remember accepting Muhammad's message - and thus accepting Muhammad - was necessary for a chance at salvation. Why is Jesus' teaching different?'

I was always taught that the unforgivable sin was suicide. That it was a murder, so a sin against the spirit of God that lives within you, and unforgivable because you couldn't repent after you were dead. However, I looked in my Bible and I thought the explanation in the notes was interesting:

'Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is blasphemy against the divine activity of the Spirit, blasphemy against pure goodness. A sin against the Son of Man is more easily forgiven because the Jews did not know much about Christ. But blasphemy against the Spirit, whose divine activity they knew from the OT, will not be forgiven because it comes from a willful hardness of heart and a refusal to accept God's mercy.

The Fathers are clear that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is not an "unforgivable sin"; nor does Jesus ever call this sin "unforgivable". St. John Chrysostom teaches that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit would be forgiveable if a person were to repent of it. Jesus makes this declaration knowing that those who blaspheme the Spirit are calling pure, divine goodnes "evil", and are beyond repentance by their own choice.'

So, it seems Fr. Farley is saying that this 'unforgivable' sin is only unforgivable because those who have committed it refuse to turn back and repent.

Lat said...

I really like the verse about good and bad trees.In fact there's a Quranic verse on that too about bearing good fruits.

What one preaches he must practice.Otherwise he's a liar,a hypocrite.Both must go hand in hand.But as humans we may not be able to see any good in an evil person.Or see bad in a good person.But prophets,masters etc can.

In surah heights,a group of people are made to stand in the middle between heaven and hell,imploring God for forgiveness and wanting to be sent to heaven.I read this when reading the tafsir.And it seems the verses were referring to religious people like scholars who will be made to stand on the fence.The 'brood of vipers' comment reminded me of this.

"When I read the Quran I remember accepting Muhammad's message - and thus accepting Muhammad - was necessary for a chance at salvation"

How can one accept a message without accepting it's teacher?
For me I accept all because the message is the same.And furthermore prophets are sent to people living in different time zones.So people who know them will accept them and their message.So it's the same with Muhd.

Lat said...

"32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven"

I think only think :) that perhaps he's referring to his self,his human side not the spiritual side of him.And according to Quran,blasphemy against God is an unpardonable sin.

Btw the verses of goodly/evil fruits is found at Q14:24,25,26.

Love this post! Thanks for sharing!

sarah said...

@Susanne,

Interesting point on unpardonable sin. The Quran says that the only unforgivable sin is 'shirk' associating god's with God. So from my perspective if the holy spirit were to represent God and Jesus is a messanger, the same thin applies here. I appreciate that that is not how you view it.

It is also interesting what is said about words whereas the Quran teaches that you will not be held to account for oaths which are made in vain but he will call you to account for what your hearts have earned.

As for calling the pharasees vipers, I think that when a prophet comes it is impossible not to condem wrong practices and behaviour. If you want to reform people you have to point out their errors otherwise they can't reform. So these words are to reform people not to antagonise. Do you know if any clerics did accept Jesus?

I don't think Islam teaches you must accept Muhammad to go to heaven - actually quite the opposite. It says every person's actions will be
accounted for.

Susanne said...

Amber, thanks for sharing what your Bible notes said. I think it agrees mostly with what I shared today (new post) from my own Bible.

Do you agree that it is this instead of suicide that is "unforgivable" or both or what?

Good point about lukewarmness. I enjoyed your comment. Thanks much!

Susanne said...

Wow, Lat, you were so theological! Loved it! :D Thanks for sharing the Islamic point of view on many of the points I made. It's good to read the similarities. I appreciate what you wrote! :)

Susanne said...

Sarah, I think the point of words is that they reveal what is in your heart. You can't bury what you believe in your heart...your attitudes will be expressed through words or actions. And therefore you will be acquitted or condemned by what fruit (words/deeds) your life produces. Does this make better sense?

"I don't think Islam teaches you must accept Muhammad to go to heaven - actually quite the opposite. It says every person's actions will be
accounted for."

Well, when I read the Quran I got a VERY different opinion from it and was told by other Muslims that this was correct. By accepting Muhammad's teachings, you were accepting God. Remember all those admonitions to obey God and the Prophet and accept God and the Prophet? I remember asking why the Quran could not just say God and argued that putting "The Prophet" there was associating partners with God and I had Muslims say by accepting Muhammad, you were accepting God. So I got this impression from that. I know you believe a bit differently though. :)

As for clerics who accepted Jesus, yes, John 3 tells of Nicodemus who came to Jesus at night and later it seems he was a follower of Christ. It basically boiled down to whether or not the religious teachers realized they were sinners in need of a Savior or if they failed to see this and thought they could do enough good deeds to save themselves.

Thanks for your great thoughts!


Enjoyed them all, Ladies!

Amber said...

'Do you agree that it is this instead of suicide that is "unforgivable" or both or what?'

Both, theoretically? The suicide thing is a bit more complicated than I was ever taught growing up. If one is in ones right mind, then it's murder, and a sin. And it's unforgivable because you're dead, and can't repent and ask God for forgiveness. However, if one is not in ones right mind, then it's not a sin, because there's the element of will and comprehension in sin that would be missing. So I just assume that anyone who commits suicide is mentally unbalanced. Because I can't imagine a perfectly sane person wanting to kill themselves.

Susanne said...

Amber, I agree. The ways we go to great lengths to preserve ourselves and look out for ourselves, it seems one must be off mentally to commit suicide.