Matthew 15:1-9 -- Jesus Speaking on Tradition

We left Jesus and the disciples at Gennesaret where numerous people were healed.

Matthew 15 begins with Pharisees and scribes who the text says came all the way from Jerusalem (about 60 miles/97 km) to speak with Jesus.  And what was so serious that warranted their traveling this far?  (see map of ancient Israel here; Gennesaret is up near the Sea of Galilee whereas Jerusalem is to the southwest in the region of Judea)

Oh yes, breaking of tradition. 

²"Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"

In his commentary Wiersbe says this tradition, supposedly given to Moses along with the written Law, was passed down from generation to generation orally. Later it was written and became the Mishnah.

Jesus replied to their statement with a question of his own.

 ³Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?

Ouch!

 ⁴For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' ⁵But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' ⁶he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Hmmm, I wonder how often I work around the word of God for the sake of tradition.  Even traditions that seem righteous and good.

Wiersbe explains these verses, "If a Jew wanted to escape some financial responsibilities, he would declare his goods to be 'Corban - a gift to God.' This meant he was free from other obligations, such as caring for his parents.  But in so doing, the person was losing the power of God's Word in his life, and thus hurting his character and missing God's blessing."

Tradition is often more concerned with outward ritual and pleasing men or society. God is more concerned with our hearts and our attitudes toward Him.

How often have you known someone who behaved a certain way not because she was convinced God required it of her, but because society or her parents did? In a sense "tradition" of doing something a certain way has taken precedence over what God wants. How often have I heard this said in relation to certain practices (female circumcision, honor killings, women not able to drive) in North Africa or the Middle East concerning "oh, that's tribal/custom/tradition NOT Islam"? The same can be said for many things, no doubt.


Jesus continued by quoting from the prophet Isaiah.

⁷You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
 ⁸" 'These people honor me with their lips,
      but their hearts are far from me.
 ⁹They worship me in vain;
      their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"

Why does God want our hearts and not just our pleasant words and outward deeds and rituals?

"We believe in the heart (Rom. 10:9-10), love from the heart (Matt. 22:37), sing from the heart (Col. 3:16), obey from the heart (Rom. 6:17; Eph. 6:6), and give from the heart (2 Cor. 9:7).  No wonder David prayed, 'Create in me a clean heart, O God!' (Ps. 51:10)"

How many of us follow teachings that are merely rules taught by men?  God wants our hearts, our devotion, our love.  Not our obedience to the rules humans have created.

Share time. Have you ever caught yourself following traditions when you knew they were not things God required of you?  Did you catch the irony of trying to please men/society when it wasn't something that necessarily pleased God?  Do you think tradition/human rules can go too far or do you think we need more? Do you ever feel they are in place because certain people love to control others and they have power issues?  Or do you rather like tradition because it gives you order and you can mentally check off a list and make sure you are doing things properly?  Any other thoughts, questions or comments?




quotes from pg. 53 of The Bible Exposition Commentary, Volume 1 by Warren Wiersbe

Learning by Listening

"We're so busy arguing with one another that we don't have any energy left to love our neighbors. What would happen if we spent less energy defending ourselves and more energy learning from one another?"  

(Primal by Mark Batterson pg. 105)

 

I love this quote.  It reminds me of the wonderful (and not-so-wonderful) people I've met online the last few years.  I went to school with people very much like myself so it's been nice to meet others from different walks of life.  Of course I find myself in the defensive mode at times. I actually enjoy a bit of debate and sharing views and defending mine (especially as this causes me to know why I believe what I say I do.)  But I also have found what a treasure it is to stop arguing, to stop yakking about my own position on issues and to ask questions, sit back and listen.  What an exciting way to learn!  

To all who have contributed to my learning-by-the-internet adventure, 

 

thank you!

Matthew 14 -- John's Death, Feeding the Crowd, Walking on Water

Matthew 14  begins with an account of John the Baptist's death.  John was bold enough to speak out about Herod's (the ruler) unlawful union with his brother's exwife and got put into prison because of this.  Herod did not have John killed since the people thought John was a prophet.  However when Herodias' (the ruler's wife) daughter danced at Herod's birthday party and pleased him so much, he declared that he would give her anything she desired! Her mom instructed her to ask for John the Baptist's head so thus ended the prophet's life.

Jesus heard of John's death and "withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place."  Yet the crowds followed on foot and when Jesus landed they were waiting.  And Jesus didn't say, "Go away, please!  My friend just died and I need to grieve alone for a while."  Nope.

¹⁴When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

When the disciples noticed it was getting late, they suggested Jesus send them away to buy food in the village.  Jesus told his disciples that the people need not leave, but for them to feed the group.

Did I mention there were about five thousand men along with women and children?

 ¹⁷"We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish," they answered.

No problem.  Jesus had been healing the sick already.  What's the big deal about feeding a group of thousands from so meager a supply?

 ¹⁸"Bring them here to me," he said. ¹⁹And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. ²⁰They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over.

 After this Jesus sent the disciples away on the boat while he went alone to pray on a mountainside.  If Jesus needed to pray, this should tell us how important our own prayers are.  I guess this begs the question for those of us who believe Jesus is God...ummm, why does Jesus need to pray to himself? 

My Quest Study Bible offers this answer:

Jesus himself is God, but he is not the Father or the Holy Spirit.  Because he lived in constant communication with the heavenly Father, Jesus' consistent prayer life provided a living example for his disciples and enabled him to identify with our humanity (Heb. 4:14). He demonstrated what it means to live in complete harmony with the Father's will and to pray continually (I Thess. 5:17).

Remember the disciples had gone on ahead so Jesus wanted to catch up to the boat. 

No problem. He just started walking on the lake.

The disciples were frightened thinking they were seeing a ghost! 

Jesus assured them it was him and they didn't need to be afraid.

Peter wanted to walk on the water too.  Jesus said "Come."  Peter walked on the water and started towards Jesus. 

But then he got caught up in watching the wind stir up the sea, became scared and started sinking!


"Lord, save me!"

³¹Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. "You of little faith," he said, "why did you doubt?"

 ³²And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down. ³³Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God."

 ³⁴When they had crossed over, they landed at Gennesaret. ³⁵And when the men of that place recognized Jesus, they sent word to all the surrounding country. People brought all their sick to him ³⁶and begged him to let the sick just touch the edge of his cloak, and all who touched him were healed.

Any questions or comments?

The Bible and those bats-as birds-things

Guess what, y'all!  I'm reading a new book! Surprising, I know.  :)

I finally finished the 500+ page A Survey of Old Testament Introduction by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. that I've discussed in recent days. It inspired posts on these topics.

Moses being the author of the Torah  
The reinterpretation of Jephthah's daughter being sacrificed for his rash vow
Why suffering though doing good
Does God allow Himself to look weak
King David and Jesus on the topic of enemies

(those are clickable links if you want to read them and add your own thoughts)

Thanks to all who left feedback on those posts!  Enjoyed it all as usual!

Now I'm reading another of my dad's books, An Historical Survey of the Old Testament by Eugene H. Merrill.  In the introductory chapter I found three statements that I wanted to record and discuss. 

Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible.

Jesus and the Apostles mention Mosaic authorship many times.  If one argued Jesus erroneously attributed Moses to the Pentateuch, this "is a reflection of His Divine omniscience" (not there) "or that He 'accommodated Himself to the ignorance of the people of His time,' which constitutes an assault upon His integrity."  -- pg.18

I just thought this was interesting as I posted about this Mosaic authorship not long ago.  If you don't believe Moses wrote the Torah, how do you explain Jesus and the apostles and their "error" in attributing the Torah to Moses?

On the inspiration of the Bible.

"[The biblical authors] were not permitted to invent their message, but they were permitted to express it within the bounds of their own intellectual and cultural resources, at the same time being divinely shielded from error of message content.  An uneducated, roughhewn Amos was given a divine message, but he was not expected to express it in a style and with words which were beyond his experience.  On the other hand a refined, cultured, poetic Isaiah was entrusted with revelation and permitted to express it in the inimical manner so much admired in his writings." -- pg. 9

I really liked this because it doesn't mean God dictated word for word what each person would say as if each author were a robot. If that were the case, you may not find the variety of styles presented in the Old Testament. And it would be hard to explain why a bat was considered a bird!  However, the message was not invented.  The divine message. Which doesn't rely on whether or not a bat can be scientifically categorized as a bird.  Compare this to the Quran which supposedly is word-for-word revelation from God. Does this leave any room for bats-as-birds scenarios? I'm not saying they are there, but what if those scrutinizing the Quran found such things?  Can they attribute it to a human messenger expressing himself within the bounds of his own intellect and cultural resources or do they explain it as God speaking in what was known by the humans at the time or something else entirely?

Historical and scientific matters.

"We certainly should expect the Old Testament, if it be the inspired Word of God, to be accurate in all historical and scientific matters with which it deals. Yet, and this is vitally important, we must always bear in mind the fact that the Old Testament does not always profess to speak in twentieth century scientific terms, but often employs the prescientific language of the day in which it was written." -- pg. 18

Maybe this is a bit contradictory from the above quote, but I still found it of interest for some reason. And now I found this when I googled "bat as bird in Old Testament." 

Question

When is a bat a bird? (Leviticus 11:13-19)
Leviticus 11:13-19 states that bats are birds. How can this be?

---

Answer

The Bible did not look forward and use modern biological categories, just like we in this century do not look 8000 years into the future and use names they will use then. In 8000 more years a bird may be called a ‘flycat,’ or some other unusual name, but for the time being we still call them birds. The Bible is using a rather generic category in which to group bats, as modern science uses a different classification system than the Ancient Near East. To the ancients, creatures such as a bat were considered birds since they categorized all flying animals as birds (and bats were a similar size, etc.).

We must to read the Bible from the view of its original audience (exegesis) and not bring modern categories, etc and read them upon it (isogesis). This is a common error made by many. Once, at a funeral, a person told me that baptism had to be done by dunking someone all the way under the water – as Jesus was buried 6’ under the ground. While this question is not meant to answer this specific question, what the person was doing was reading an American custom upon something that happened 2000 years ago – besides Jesus was not buried 6’ under – but sideways in a tomb! I then asked him if he baptized people sideways in a tomb, etc. … which laid his argument to rest.

The Ancient Near East categorized bats as birds in that time.


Source

Do you have any thoughts on any of this?

Attitude, High View of God, Learning & Questioning

I love people who have a good attitude about nearly everything. Whether they are going through wonderful times or dealing with annoying situations (such as car trouble or the phone company getting the bill all wrong) or going through times of heartache, they just seem able to take to heart Paul's instruction to give thanks in everything.   I get the impression Paul just had a high view of God and to him our earthly problems paled in comparison.  

I suppose this quote goes along with that:

"A low view of God is the cause of a hundred lesser evils.  A high view of God is the solution to ten thousand temporal problems."    -- A.W. Tozer

If only I could remember these problems are temporary. But don't they seem overwhelming when we are going through them? Don't they just gnaw at our souls and make us feel uneasy?

Recently I read Primal and author Mark Batterson told of this positive outlook on life.  I really liked it and wanted to make it my own.  Attitude greatly influences how we go through life, doesn't it?  We choose to allow hard times to make us bitter or unthankful or blue.  But can't we also choose a grateful attitude? One that guards against resentment, bitterness and even crippling sadness? 

Hey, you don't have to tell me that that's not so easy.  I am an emotional person.  Quite melancholic, in fact.  So I recognize the struggle with choosing the thankful, joyful outlook in life.  I don't get a flat tire on the car and start shouting hallelujah.  My family can attest to how irritated, bitter and sad I can get.  But why choose to live this way when I don't have to?  

I liked this.

If you approach every person, every challenge, every situation with humble curiosity, it transforms each of them into a learning opportunity.  The outcome is no longer seen as success or failure, good or bad, positive or negative. The only measuring stick is this:  what did you learn from it? ...  I'm less afraid of failing, because I know it's the best form of education.  I'm less focused on getting out of situations and more focused on what I can get out of those situations. I'm less concerned with what I'm experiencing and more concerned with what I'm learning. Everyone and everything becomes part of my education.  God redeems them and uses them to shape me into the person He wants me to become.  And the learning process never ends.  (pg. 107)

Mark also wrote this which reminded me of some of you, my lovely questioning-and-learning friends.   :)

"The New Testament Greek word translated as 'disciple' comes from a root that means 'learner.'  By definition, a disciple is someone who never stops learning.  A true disciple makes the most of the hundred billion brain cells God has put on loan to him. A true disciple loves more because she knows more.  A true disciple is consumed with holy curiosity that doesn't take yes for an answer. The disciple keeps asking and seeking and knocking. And the quest is never over because the questions never end."  (pg. 107)

What are you currently questioning, seeking to learn, learning?  What things do you question most? What subjects do you enjoy learning about the most?  Do you tend to have a "what can I learn from this?" attitude when facing hard times?  How important is attitude in facing challenges in life?  Do you agree that a high view of God should help us during hard times?  Do you let it or do you tend to forget how big He is because your problems loom large? Do you agree with Tozer about a low view of God causing hundreds of lesser evils?

And in case you've not noticed, I do, in fact, enjoy learning from you.  And asking questions is often how I do that.   :-)

King David vs. Jesus on the Topic of Enemies

Psalm 9

 ¹⁹ Arise, O LORD, let not man triumph;
       let the nations be judged in your presence.

 ²⁰ Strike them with terror, O LORD;
       let the nations know they are but men.

Psalm 52

¹ Why do you boast of evil, you mighty man?
       Why do you boast all day long,
       you who are a disgrace in the eyes of God?

 ² Your tongue plots destruction;
       it is like a sharpened razor,
       you who practice deceit.

 ³ You love evil rather than good,
       falsehood rather than speaking the truth.
       Selah

 ⁴ You love every harmful word,
       O you deceitful tongue!

 ⁵ Surely God will bring you down to everlasting ruin:
       He will snatch you up and tear you from your tent;
       he will uproot you from the land of the living.
       Selah

Various psalms contain appeals to God to pour out His wrath upon the psalmist's enemies. These seem to contradict the Christian stance of love towards one's enemies. Nevertheless, it is a mistake to explain away these expressions as degenerate and sub-Christian sentiments which have been permitted in the sacred canon by the principle of "progressive revelations."  Progressive revelation is not to be thought of as a progress from error to truth, but rather as a progress from the partial and obscure to the complete and clear.  A consistent Evangelical must hold that all portions of the Word of God are true in the sense intended by the original author under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, even though couched in terms which may perhaps have been more comprehensible and relevant to God's people at the time of composition than in later ages.

This last line explains to me why certain Old Testament practices which a 21st century reader would find backward at the least were not out-and-out condemned as I believe they were more cultural than mandated or approved by God.  This also states why certain things that were understandable or normal back then don't have to carried on today.  I think we can move past some of the ancient mindsets such as slavery being permitted, women being property and polygyny a cultural norm.  Cultures do evolve over time. Technology changes.  It's not innovation to live in the century in which you were born.  The Taliban doesn't have to ban toothpaste so everyone can use the miswak as the Islamic prophet did.

It is important to realize that prior to the first advent of Christ, the only tangible way in which the truth of the Scripture could be demonstrated to human observers was by the pragmatic test of disaster befalling those who were in error and deliverance being granted to those who held to the truth.  As long as the wicked continued to triumph, their prosperity seemed to refute the holiness and sovereignty of the God of Israel.  A Hebrew believer in the Old Testament age could only chafe in deep affliction of soul as long as such a state of affairs continued. 

Do you ever think the same way when you see evil people triumphing while seemingly good people are suffering?

Identifying himself completely with God's cause, he could only regard God's enemies as his own, and implore God to uphold His own honor and justify His own righteousness by inflicting a crushing destruction upon those who either in theory or in practice denied His sovereignty and His law.  Not until the supreme exhibition of God's displeasure at sin, demonstrated by the death of His Son upon the cross, was it possible for the believer to wait patiently while God's longsuffering permitted the wicked to enjoy his temporary success. Nor was the longsuffering of God properly understood until Jesus came to earth to teach His love to men.

Here is a bit of Jesus' teachings as recorded in the fifth chapter of Matthew.

You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Do we tend to revert back to centuries past in how we deal with enemies, live our lives today, justify what we do? Or do you think we have successfully "evolved" into better people?  Why do you think the way that you do?  What do you think about what Archer said regarding progressive revelation?  Did his commentary on this matter make sense?  Had you also noticed and been bothered at David's attitude towards his enemies when comparing them to Jesus' teaching about loving our enemies? How had you reconciled the two?

except for Bible verses, all quotes in blue are from pg. 452-453 
A Survey of Old Testament Introduction by Gleason L. Archer, Jr.

Why suffering though doing good?

Remember the story in John 9 when Jesus and his disciples were walking along and they saw a blind man?  The disciples asked who had sinned -- this man or his parents. To them it was logical that someone had sinned; otherwise, this man would not be blind since birth.

Tangent Time

First off this wasn't what I was planning to blog about, but two things struck me from just this short remembrance.

1.  If this man was born blind, what sin could he have done in utero?
2.  Do we pay for others' sins?

Back to the Post

Jesus assured his disciples that the blindness wasn't the result of this man or his parents' sin, but that the glory of God might be displayed. Jesus then went on to heal him, the Pharisees investigated and so forth.  Good story.

But my point is do you get the impression that some people - back then, even now perhaps - believe good, moral, upright living should equal a blessed life whereas sinful lifestyles equal bad things such as blindness and sickness? 

I think most people realize bad things do happen to good people. You think of yourself or your grandma as good, right? Yet at times bad things do happen. Even to grandma. It's part of life.

We all recall Job who was a man stripped of his children, wealth, servants and cattle within a few hours.  He was a moral, upright man yet disaster of the worst kind hit seemingly out of nowhere!   Not only did he lose so much, he was stricken with painful boils.  What had he done?  In A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, author Gleason L. Archer, Jr. speaks of Job's friends, Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar who seemed to have this very question in mind.   

What in the world had Job done 
to warrant God's outpouring of wrath? 

Have you ever wondered this about anyone?  Archer says Job's "catastrophic disaster had placed them" in a "dilemma."  If these awful things could happen to a man of such high reputation, what would happen to them?   Archer claims these men were seeking assurance, security. 

"Job, admit to us that you sinned greatly so we will know that this is why God has dealt so harshly with you. Tell us!  Admit your wrong deeds!" 

If Job admitted to some secret sin these men could go home "relieved and reassured that calamity would be kept from their door if they only 'lived a good life.'"  (pg. 455)

Are you ever tempted to think the same?  As long as I'm good, my life will be OK.  As long as I'm moral and pious, God will reward me.

It's true that God taught that when the Israelites obeyed Him, they would be blessed and favored. And that seemed to happen in the Old Testament record.  It's when the people strayed and worshipped false gods that disaster happened.

So how do you reconcile the two? And while you're at it, what do you think of my tangent questions above?