Search Results

God wants Christians to work for justice. Previous Justice Next Justice and the Bible God wants Christians to work for justice. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti February 28, 2024 In the Bible, God repeatedly calls us to work for justice. Here is a short overview of the many Scripture passages where God’s demand that we work for justice is clear : God makes every human person in his image (Genesis 1:27) and tells us to treat all people with respect (1 Peter 2:17). Jesus tells us that he is present in every person in need (Matthew 25:34-40). Repeatedly, throughout the Old Testament, God demands that his people establish justice in their society (Amos 5:15), end the oppression of immigrants and those who are poor (Zechariah 7:8-11), provide for the poor and alien (Leviticus 23:22), and treat the immigrant like a citizen (Leviticus 19:33-34). He tells us to free the oppressed and provide for the needy (Isaiah 58:6-7). He calls us to defend the weak, the poor, and the oppressed (Psalm 82:3-4). He tells businesses to treat their customers fairly (Leviticus 19:35-36; 23:35-36) and to pay just wages to their workers (Deuteronomy 24:14-15; James 5:4). He tells governmental leaders to seek justice, defend the oppressed, and take up the cause of those who are at the bottom of society (Isaiah 1:17; Jeremiah 22:3). He directs those in political authority to act with justice and deliver the needy from those who oppress them (Psalm 72). How can we follow the Lord’s commands to establish justice in our land if we do not work to transform the social and political structures of our society? With so many Scripture passages directing us to take action for justice, how can any preacher suggest that salvation is just between you and God and we don’t need to be involved in transforming our society, our government, our businesses, and our culture? Furthermore, if we live in a democracy, we are responsible for our government’s laws. We cannot claim that God does not care if we allow laws that violate the principles of justice He has established – we are responsible to choose, guide, and influence our lawmakers, who are responsible to work for justice on our behalf. God demands that we get involved. He will hold us accountable for our response to His call to seek justice in our world. May we respond to God’s intense desire for justice and join His work to make it so. Copyright © 2024, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Justice Next

Is your faith built on rock? Is the Sermon on the Mount a central part of your faith? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 7:24-29 Is your faith built on rock? Is the Sermon on the Mount a central part of your faith? Image by Nenad Radojčić, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti June 7, 2024 Matthew 7:24-27 The house built on rock What are the two things Jesus says a person must do to be like the wise man? What does it mean to truly “hear” God’s word? What does it mean to “act on” these words? Jesus uses the metaphor of building a house. What does the “house” stand for in our lives? There are many possible answers, including: your faith, your principles, your worldview, your habits, your character, your life choices, etc. How does a “wise” person built this kind of house? What is the “rock” on which your life stands? And how does it operate as a “rock” for you? What might be some examples of “sand” that are not solid things on which to build your life? What are the rain, floods, and winds that will test the “house” you have built? Why does Jesus contrast “hearing and doing” vs. “hearing and not doing”? What does this tell us about the role of obedience and action in our lives? What is something you might consider doing that might help ground your life more fully on the rock rather than on shifting sands? Matthew 7:28-29 The effect of Jesus’s teaching Matthew ends the Sermon on the Mount by saying of Jesus, “he taught them as one having authority and not as their scribes” (Matthew 7:29, NRSV and NABRE). What does this mean? Among other things, the scribes only explained and interpreted what the Law said; they did not add to it. Jesus is speaking as one who has the authority to create new teachings for people to follow. In what ways do you see the teachings in the Sermon on the Mount as manifesting Jesus’s authority? The fact that Jesus is acting like he has the authority not just to interpret but to re-think and expand upon the law, and to do other things that mere scribes cannot do, will soon get him in trouble with the religious leaders. Stay tuned by continuing the study of Matthew. Conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount Skim back over the Sermon on the Mount (chapters 5-7). Which of Jesus’s teachings strikes you as being most uniquely Christian – that is, which of the teachings of Jesus seems to be most distinct from the teachings of other religions or ethical systems? What does this uniquely Christian message tell you about God or people or God’s desires for us? How important is the Sermon on the Mount in your understanding of your faith? What passage or teaching from the Sermon on the Mount do you think God is calling you to give special attention to right now in your life? What is one concrete step you can take to live out that teaching more faithfully? Take a step back and consider this: We know that Christians are not perfect. We don’t live up to the fullness of the gospel as presented by Jesus. As Peter said to Jesus, “Who then can be saved?” (Matt. 19:25, NABRE). Jesus’s answer – “For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:26, NABRE) – is a comfort to modern Christians, who believe that God will indeed save them. It is sad, however, that many Christians, when they study the Sermon on the Mount as we have, are surprised to learn these details of the kind of life Jesus calls us to live. Perhaps too many people have not been effectively taught the full gospel, or even the full Sermon on the Mount. (And, of course, too often, we hear but don’t act on what we hear.) A detailed study of the Sermon on the Mount prompts many Christians to embrace new habits. That’s a good thing. But there is a danger. It would be easy to turn every teaching in the Sermon on the Mount into a new law. We could add to the Ten Commandments another 10 or 20 laws to follow, just from these three chapters. The risk is that we might turn into modern-day Pharisees, focused on the laws as ends in themselves rather than living in a vital relationship with the God behind the teachings. Without that relationship, the Sermon on the Mount will seem like an impossibly difficult, ever-expanding work list. But with a relationship with God, the Sermon on the Mount is a continual invitation to keep become more like Jesus, to keep being empowered by the Holy Spirit to respond to ever-new opportunities to bring God’s love and grace to the world. How can we encourage ourselves and our fellow believers to embrace the full Sermon on the Mount, but do so in ways that avoid turning it into another soul-deadening Law? How can we find joy in our relationship with God in responding to the dos and don’ts of Jesus’s teachings? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

How does Holy Communion help you to enter into the new covenant that Jesus offers us? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 26:26-35 How does Holy Communion help you to enter into the new covenant that Jesus offers us? Nicolas Poussin (1594-1665). Eucharist . Circa 1637-40. Cropped. The National Gallery, London, UK. Photo by Tom Faletti, 28 May 2025. Tom Faletti September 16, 2025 Matthew 26:26-35 The Passover meal: The first communion/Eucharist The Passover seder involved a variety of steps. Participants drank four cups of wine, spread over the course of a meal that lasted several hours. They ate certain foods that had symbolic meaning. For example, parsley or other greens were dipped in salt water, symbolizing the early hope the Israelites had when they first came to Egypt (the greens) turning to bitter tears (the salt water) in their period of slavery. At one point in the Passover meal, the unleavened bread is called the “bread of affliction.” It is broken by the person leading the seder and passed around. Matthew 26:17 refers to the Feast of Unleavened Bread because in Jesus’s time, the two feasts were celebrated together. What actually happens in this passage? What does Jesus actually do? What is your understanding on the meaning of what happens here? Background regarding communion/the Eucharist The Christian denominations don’t agree on what is happening here. If you are studying this passage in a group, this is not the place to try to convert each other. Listen to others, humbly share what you believe, and leave it to the Holy Spirit to work in everyone’s heart. If we don’t treat each other lovingly, even when we disagree, we haven’t grasped what Jesus is all about. Here is some background for those who have an interest in understanding how different Christian denominations approach the Lord’s Supper: Christians of all denominations look to this meal as the basis of the ritual they celebrate in their worship services or liturgies. Catholics call it the “Eucharist” or “communion” and call the service the “Mass.” Evangelicals and other Protestants usually call it “communion” or “the Lord’s Supper.” Whatever they call it and in whatever way they celebrate it, the roots of their practice are here in Jesus’s final meal before his death. Christians don’t just celebrate it yearly the way the Jews celebrated the Passover – but instead celebrate it weekly, or daily, or monthly – because in Luke 22:19, Jesus said, “Do this in remembrance of me” or “in memory of me.” Christians have different ideas about what happens at their worship services or Masses. Catholics believe that the bread and wine, when consecrated, actually becomes the body and blood of Christ even though they remain under the appearances of bread and wine. Catholics call this “transubstantiation.” Orthodox Christians believe the consecrated bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ, but they do not try to define in dogma the mystery of that transformation and they do not accept the Roman Catholic formulation of “transubstantiation.” Nevertheless, they share a belief in a literal transformation of the bread and wine that traces back to the earliest writings of Christians (going all the way back to Justin Martyr around AD 155). Lutherans believe that the body and blood of Christ are “truly and substantially present” in the consecrated bread and wine but that it is still bread and wine. Episcopalians believe that Christ’s body and blood become “really present,” without any need for the consecrated elements to stop being bread and wine. Most other Christian bodies reject the idea that the bread and wine literally “become” the body and blood of Christ. They generally believe that Christ is present spiritually, but not physically. Another point separates believers: Most Christians believe that the communion service or Eucharist or liturgy is a memorial, or commemoration, or remembrance of the Jesus’s Last Supper, or of Christ’s Passion and Resurrection more broadly. Some denominations believe that it goes further: that what Christ did 2,000 years ago is made truly present to us now. For example, Catholics believe that the Mass is a memorial but also more: They believe that, in the Mass, Christ’s unique, once-and-for-all sacrifice is made present again in our midst. They are not saying that the Eucharist is a new sacrifice each time – there was only one sacrifice made by Christ on the Cross – but they believe that single sacrifice is re-presented to us and that the Mass allows us to enter now into what happened then. We are not going to resolve these issues here. If you are studying in a small group, please accept the fact that Christians disagree, share what this passage of Scripture means to you, listen to others, and avoid arguments, which rarely resolve anything and can undermine the cohesiveness of your group. How important is communion to you, and why? Why do we generally have “communion” as a communal event? We pray individually, but we don’t have our own private moments of partaking of bread and wine. Why is this something meant to be done together? In verse 26, what does Jesus say the bread is? Catholics take Jesus’s words “This is my body” literally, while most Protestants consider it symbolic. What do the words “This is my body” mean to you? Even people from the same denomination can bring a richness of personal perspectives and experiences to this question. As far as doctrine goes, Catholics are the literalists here, whereas sometimes in interpreting other verses of the Bible it is Protestants who insist on more literal interpretations. God keeps loving us despite our disagreements. In the Passover seder, one of the cups of wine that the participants drink is associated with the covenant established by God when he gave the Law to Moses and the Israelites at Mount Sinai. Jesus was incredibly well versed in the Scriptures and may have been thinking about Exodus 24:8, which he referred to “the blood of the covenant” – a sacrifice made by the Israelites as they entered into the covenant with God at Mt. Sinai. (This is different from the sacrifice of the Passover lambs as the Israelites prepared to leave Egypt.) In verse 28, Jesus identifies the cup as being a covenant, but this covenant is different from than the earlier covenants God made with Israel. How does Jesus describe this covenant? If you were expecting the word “new” in this verse, you are thinking of Luke 22:20, where Jesus says, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood.” In Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, Jesus says, “This is my blood of the covenant.” The covenants in the Old Testament are solemn agreements between God and his people. How is Jesus’s blood a covenant with us? In verse 28, what does Jesus identify as the purpose of the pouring out of his blood? His blood is poured out for the forgiveness of sins. When Jesus says this, Jesus is making a connection with Isaiah 53:12, where Isaiah says of the Suffering Servant that “he poured out himself to death, / and was numbered with the transgressors; / yet he bore the sin of many, / and made intercession for the transgressors” (NRSV). How does this connection of the cup to the forgiveness of sins relate to you? What difference does it make in your life? How is Jesus’s new interpretation of the Jewish Passover an additional demonstration of his authority? At many places in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus has been reinterpreting the Jewish Scriptures: You have heard it said . . . , but I say. . . . Now, he has reinterpreted the foundational feast of Passover. Now he shows that he also has authority over Jewish liturgical practices. How does the new covenant inaugurated here have power that the earlier covenants did not have? How do you think Matthew and the believers of his time felt about the Lord’s Supper described here? What do you think Matthew is trying to tell us? Note: In verse 29, Jesus says he will not drink wine again “until the day I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” This statement is usually interpreted as referring to the heavenly banquet that is envisioned for us in heaven. Notice in verse 29 that even though Jesus knows he is going to die, he knows this is not the end. He is still thinking about his Father’s kingdom and looking forward to the future. How can this attitude be helpful to you in your own life’s journey? In verse 29, Jesus says that he will drink “with you” in the Father’s Kingdom. That assurance extends to us as well. What is your reaction to the idea of that someday you will eat and drink with Jesus in heaven? When you receive communion at church, what is going through your head? In what ways do you see Christ in the Eucharist/communion and/or see it as a means of becoming more fully united with Christ? Augustine gave a homily about the Eucharist for new converts who were baptized at Easter or Pentecost around A.D. 408 in which he took the idea that the consecrated bread is the body of Christ and connected it to the idea presented by Paul that we are the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27). Augustine said: “Be what you see; receive what you are” (Augustine, “Sermon 272”). How do you see the “body of Christ” in communion? How do you make the most of the experience of receiving communion? Focus now on Matthew 26:31-35 , where Jesus predicts Peter’s denial Jesus tells them several important things in verses 31 and 32. What does he tell them (1) about themselves; (2) about himself; and (3) about what will happen afterwards? He says: (1) They will desert him and scatter. (2) He will be stricken, but he will also be raised up and he will go to Galilee. (3) They will meet him in Galilee (going “ahead” of them implies they will go as well). The Old Testament passage Jesus quotes in verse 31 is from Zechariah 13:7. In verse 33, how does Peter respond to the claim that they will desert Jesus? Peter carries forever the stigma of having denied Jesus because we have the full story of his denial. But what does v. 35 tell us about the other disciples? In verse 31, Jesus said, “You will all. . . .” Do you think the other disciples were different from Peter in their denial/desertion? Peter was not a coward. He tried to defend Jesus with his sword when Jesus was arrested, and he followed Jesus right into the courtyard of the high priest’s compound. But in the end, it turned out that he had too much confidence in himself. We sometimes think our faith and loyalty and courage are greater than they are. What caution can we take from Peter’s misplaced confidence? Read Matthew 26:41 and then re-read what Jesus says in verses 31-32. How do you think Jesus feels about the disciples? Is he angry? Embittered? Lovingly aware? How do you think Jesus feels when you turn away from him in big or small ways? How do these verses provide encouragement in difficult times? Notice that even though Jesus has just told them they will desert him, he also says in v. 31 that he expects to see them later in Galilee. Do you find that God is also that way with us: that even though we mess up, he never rejects us – instead he just keeps expecting us to show up the next time? What does this tell you about God? Take a step back and consider this: The Passover feast was a celebration of God’s acts of salvation in the history of the Jewish people. Jesus’s sacrifice of himself ushered in a new covenant that fulfills and transcends the previous covenants God made with his people. We see these previous covenants in the Old Testament: God made a covenant with Noah and his descendants after the flood (Gen. 8:20-9:17); a covenant with Abraham that established a nation that would be God’s special people (Gen. 17:1-14); a covenant with Moses and the Israelites that gave them the Law (Ex. 19-24); and a covenant with David, through whose line the messiah would come (2 Sam. 7:1-17; summarized again in 1 Chron. 17:11-14). Later, God promised that he would establish a new covenant that would be for all people (Jer. 31:31-34). Jesus establishes that new and eternal covenant through his death and resurrection. In fact, Jesus Christ brings all of the covenants to their fulfillment. How is God’s relationship with the Jewish people through many centuries important to Christians? What difference does it make in your life that Jesus has both fulfilled the old covenant and established a new covenant? A covenant is a solemn agreement between humans and God (or between humans with each other ). Do you think of yourself as being in a “covenant” relationship with God? How is it helpful to think about your relationship with God in that way? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Jesus wanted the Temple to be a house of prayer and a place of healing. Can our churches and our lives be that, too? [Matthew 21:12-13; 21:14-17] Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 21:12-17 Jesus wanted the Temple to be a house of prayer and a place of healing. Can our churches and our lives be that, too? August Jernberg (1826–1896). Kristus utdriver växlarna ur templet [Christ Driving the Moneychangers out of the Temple]. 1857. Cropped. Göteborgs konstmuseum (Gothenburg Museum of Art), Gothenburg, Sweden. Public domain. Photo by Hossein Sehatlou, CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christ_Driving_the_Moneychangers_out_of_the_Temple_(August_Jernberg)_-_Gothenburg_Museum_of_Art_-_GKM_0008.tif . Tom Faletti August 4, 2025 Introduction to Matthew 21:12-17, Jesus’s first day in Jerusalem What do you think is the first thing Jesus does after he arrives in Jerusalem and gets off the donkey? Make a courtesy call to the political leaders? Visit the religious leaders and ask for their blessing? Get a permit for a rally where he can preach to the people in the city? Set up a healing tent? As we will see, the first thing he wants to do is heal people, but he needs a quiet place to do it. So the first thing he does is one of the most disruptive and confrontational things he could have done: clear the Temple of the people providing currency exchange services and selling sheep and doves for sacrifice. Matthew 21:12-13 The cleansing of the Temple: Jesus clears the Temple area of commercial business We saw in our study of the previous passage that, in the time of the Maccabees, palm branches were waved as part of the ritual in which the Temple was restored and purified after its defilement by the Greeks. Here, Jesus is addressing what he sees as a new defilement of the Temple. Some scholars see in this passage a reference to Mal. 3:1-3, where the prophet says that the Lord will come suddenly to his temple and “he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the LORD” (Mal. 3:3, NRSV). What does Jesus do in the Temple? Who is the target of his disruption? Why does he do this? Jesus quotes from two places in the Old Testament. Let’s take them in reverse order. A den of robbers When Jesus refers to a “den of robbers,” he is drawing from Jeremiah 7:4-11. In that passage, God tells the people not to boast about the Temple because they are oppressing others and acting unjustly and have turned the Temple into a den of robbers (v. 11) In what ways might the Temple have become a “den of robbers”? The selling and buying took place in the outermost court of the Temple complex – not in the Temple building itself but in the Court of Gentiles. This was the first of several courts Jews had to walk through to reach the Temple itself, which could only be entered by the priests. The Temple tax, which every male Israelite was required to pay yearly, was a half-shekel, which was equivalent to about two days’ wages. However, the Temple authorities would not accept Roman or Greek coins because the emperor’s image was stamped on the coins. They would accept only Tyrian coins (because of their higher silver content) and Jewish coins. The currency exchange fee was about 10% (one gera or ma’a, which was around one-twentieth of a shekel, according to my research). In addition to paying that fee, if you brought a larger coin and needed to have change given back to you, the charge was doubled. So the fee was 10%-20% of two-days’ wages, which was a significant charge for poor people, who didn’t always find enough work to earn a days’ wages every day and who were sacrificing several days of wages to come to the Temple. There was a thriving trade in cattle, sheep, and doves (see John 2:14) for the sacrifices people needed to make at the Temple. For pilgrims, it was hard to bring an animal from far away, so people in Jerusalem sold sheep to them. This could have been seen as a helpful service, unless the prices were set high to take advantage of the pilgrims. Furthermore, you could only sacrifice an animal that was without blemish, and the power to decide if an animal was without blemish was in the hands of the Temple priests. It was easy for the Temple authorities to reject a supposedly “imperfect” animal, so the potential for abuse was high. Doves With regard to doves: Poor people who could not afford a sheep were allowed under the Law to bring turtledoves and pigeons (Lev. 5:7). Also, whereas Israelite men were commanded to offer a lamb, women were directed to offer a dove. Barclay says that price for a dove inside the Temple precincts could be as much as 20 times as high as the price outside the Temple (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , p. 270). Matthew and Mark both specifically mention that Jesus overturned the seats of the people selling doves. In John, he specifically chastises the people selling doves, telling them to stop making his Father’s house a marketplace (John 2:16). Why might Jesus be especially concerned about the selling practices regarding doves? Since doves were the offerings made by poor people, Jesus might have been particularly concerned about how the sellers were taking advantage of poor people. Poor people are easier targets for financial abuse since they have little power to respond, so perhaps the markup was especially large for doves, or perhaps he was concerned more generally about the impact of these practices on the poor. There is one other significant point of background: The high priest Annas had major control over this business and therefore probably took it personally when Jesus drove out the sellers. Are there ways that we can be at risk of turning God’s holy places into places of commercial exploitation? There is a lot of money-making associated with the Christian faith (consider Christian music, Christian books, Bible sales, Christian movies, Christian art, statues, candles, devotional materials, Sunday school materials, etc.). How can we evaluate when it is appropriate, or not, to make money from religious activities? A house of prayer In verse 13, Jesus says that his house should be a “house of prayer.” This phrase comes from Isaiah 56:6-7, where God says that foreigners will come to the Temple and worship there, and it will be a house of prayer for all people. Even if there was no exploitation going on, how might the money-changing and selling and buying have made it hard for this to be a house of prayer? How might this have been particularly problematic for the Gentiles, and why would Jesus care? Jews could go beyond the Court of the Gentiles, to the courts where things were quieter. But Gentiles could not go further and were stuck in the court where the marketing was going on. Do you think that all of the people involved in changing money and buying and selling were evil? Or is it possible that many were devoutly trying to honor God in their lives? Is it possible for Christians today to be faithful believers but not realize that they are caught up in accepted practices that undermine God’s work? What might be some examples? How might we take this message into the business world? What should the Temple have looked like and sounded like and felt like, as a house of prayer? If our churches are to be effective houses of prayer, what do we need to help them look like and sound like and feel like? Matthew 21:14-17 Jesus heals people and responds to the criticisms of the leaders After Jesus has cleared the Temple courts of the sellers, it is presumably a quieter, more prayerful place. What is the first thing Jesus does (verse 14)? Notice that he does this in the Temple – i.e., in the courtyards of the Temple – a place that is crowded with thousands upon thousands of pilgrims. What does this tell you about Jesus? Given that the Jewish leaders have not been friendly to Jesus, what does it tell you about Jesus that he is doing this right in the Temple courtyards? Why do you think the chief priests and scribes are unhappy that children are crying out, “Hosanna to the Son of David”? How does Jesus respond (verse 16)? Jesus quotes from Psalm 8:2. This is the psalm that begins, “O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth.” The verse Jesus quotes is the very next verse, which says, roughly: out of the mouths of babes and infants, you have [done something – scholars aren’t sure what the words mean here] to silence your enemies. Jesus chooses not to quote the words calling them “enemies” – he is an eternal optimist, hoping people will respond to his teaching. What is Jesus implying, by using this quote? What kind of link is he implying between himself and God? Notice that Jesus defends himself by quoting God’s Word to the religious leaders. How important is it to know the Bible? It is telling that the chief priests had no problem with the hubbub of the animals and the buying and selling and money changing in the Temple precincts, but now they are indignant about the noise of the children’s praise of Jesus. They see (verse 15) the miracles of healing that Jesus is performing. Yet they are indignant about the children, rather than moved by the healings. The chief priests may be unhappy that Jesus is healing people in the Temple precincts. Leviticus 21:16-23 said that people with a “blemish” – i.e., a physical deformity or deficiency – were not supposed to approach the altar. But Jesus is welcoming them right there in the Temple precincts, not far from the altar. The chief priests and scribes are more focused on their ideas about what the Temple should look like than on the good that Jesus is doing. Are we sometimes like that too, focused on our rules and preconceptions and missing the good that God is doing? Do any examples come to mind? If so, how might you do things differently? Jesus spends the night in Bethany, presumably with his friends Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. Martha and Mary are mentioned in the Gospel of Luke, and all three of them are mentioned in the Gospel of John. Take a step back and consider this: Jesus had had a special fondness for the Temple at least since he was 12 years old, when he first called it “my Father’s house” (Luke 2:49). He clearly believed that this was a special place – a place where heaven and earth meet and people have a special opportunity to commune with God. He is now making it not only a place where prayer can happen, but also a place where healings happen. Are there places that you think of as specially graced for prayer, healing, and communion with God? If so, how do you nurture the prayerfulness of those spaces? We are not bound to a Temple as the unique place where God resides, but rather have come to understand that every Christian is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who resides in us. What are some things we might consider doing to make our hearts, our souls, our very selves more fitting places of prayer, and healing, and communion with God? What can you do to nurture a spirit of prayer and healing in your own life? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

When Jesus calls us to serve, he doesn’t just mean servant leadership; he means servant “helpership” that puts others’ needs first [Matthew 20:17-19; 20:20-23; 20:24-28] Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 20:17-28 When Jesus calls us to serve, he doesn’t just mean servant leadership; he means servant “helpership” that puts others’ needs first. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti July 5, 2025 Matthew 20:17-19 Jesus plainly foretells his crucifixion This is Jesus’s third prophecy of his Passion. He reveals more each time. In chapter 16, he said he would suffer and die and be raised. In chapter 17, he added that he would be betrayed. Now, he fills in more details. Jesus’s first prophecy of his Passion (Matt. 16:21) had already mentioned Jerusalem. What are the various things Jesus now says will happen to him in Jerusalem? He will be handed over to the Jewish leaders; they will condemn him to death; they will hand him over to the Gentiles; the Gentiles will (a) mock him, (b) flog him, and (c) crucify him; and he will be raised on the third day. Why do you think Jesus takes the Twelve aside to tell them this, and why do you think he keeps telling it to them repeatedly? The crucifixion was so horrible that he wants them to be prepared – especially the leaders of his group. This is the first time he indicates the manner of his death: crucifixion. How might the disciples have reacted to that? Crucifixion was a horrific, excruciating form of execution that was assigned to serious criminals, rebels, and slaves in slave rebellions. It was designed to totally subjugate the person and cause them great and lengthy suffering. It was also designed to humiliate them. So the disciples would have been horrified. In Matthew’s Gospel, we have seen Jesus minister to Jews and Gentiles, so it is ironic that both Jews and Gentiles will be involved in his execution. This is the first time Jesus says explicitly that Gentiles (i.e., the Romans) will execute him. Throughout European history, Jews have suffered discrimination and maltreatment at the hands of Christians, with major pogroms attacking whole populations of Jews in 1096, 1189, 1254, 1348, 1492, 1881, 1938-1945, and many other times. People who lived 1,000 years or more after Christ were absurdly charged with somehow being responsible for his death. In light of that history, why is it so significant that, while Jesus said that the Jewish leaders would condemn him, he made it clear that it would be non-Jewish people who would mock and scourge and crucify him? The crucifixion is so much a part of our telling and retelling of our faith that we have probably lost the horror of it. Is there something in this prophecy that you think you should take less casually or take less for granted? Explain. Matthew 20:20-23 Special honor for James and John? Who makes this request? Note: This is not some random, foolish woman. The mother of Zebedee’s children was one of the women who fearlessly stood by the cross as Jesus was crucified (Matthew 27:56). She was also possibly the sister of Jesus’s mother Mary (looking at the information in John 19:25 and comparing the lists of the women at the foot of the cross in the various Gospel accounts leads to this possible conclusion). James and his brother John, along with Peter, hold a special place among the apostles. They are the ones who are invited to accompany Jesus when he is transfigured. But it might be helpful to sort out the men names James. There are three Jameses in the New Testament: James, the brother of John, was an apostle. James and John are known as the sons of Zebedee and, in Mark 3:17 as the “sons of thunder.” They are the ones who in this passage ask to sit at Jesus’s right and left hand when he comes into his kingdom. This James is sometimes called James the Great. He was martyred around A.D. 44, executed by Herod in In Acts 12:2. He may have been the second Christian martyr, after Stephen. James the son of Alphaeus was also an apostle. He is sometimes called James the Less (perhaps because he was shorter, or just because he was less prominent). James the brother of Jesus becomes the leader of the Christian community in Jerusalem, as seen in Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18 and Galatians 1:18-19. He is sometimes called James the Just. Several ancient sources suggest that he was martyred in Jerusalem before the destruction of the Temple, perhaps in A.D. 62. What does the mother of James and John ask for? In the Gospel of Mark, James and John make the request directly. Some scholars have observed that Matthew rarely writes anything that makes any disciple look bad. Here, the way he tells the story, it is their mother who makes the request. Considering that they accompany her and readily answer Jesus’s first question, do you think they agree with their mother’s request or are embarrassed by it? Explain. When they ask to sit at his right and left hand in his kingdom, what do you think they think they are asking for? What does this tell you about them? They were ambitious, but also zealously loyal to Jesus and wanted to be as close as possible to him. Jesus tells them they don’t understand what they are asking for. Why? What is the “cup” (verse 22) that he asks them if they are ready to drink? Why do you think they are so sure they are ready for it? Jesus says they will drink his cup. What do you think that means? James was an early martyr (Acts 12:2), but John lived a long life ending in a natural death in Ephesus. So what is the “cup” for them? Why is Jesus unable to grant their request? If there are these right and left seats in heaven, and given Jesus’s upside-down approach to humanity, is it possible that the people who will sit on his right and left are people at the bottom of the social scale? Would that surprise you? Explain. Note that, although Jesus corrects James and John’s thinking in the next passage, he does not rebuke them for their request. What is your best guess as to why not? We will look at the other disciples’ reaction in a moment, but let’s think about how this passage might speak to us in our lives. When or how might we have inappropriate or misguided ideas about what God should do for us? In what ways might we get caught up in the glory of believing in Jesus and lose sight of the fact that we are called to take up our crosses? Matthew 20:24-28 The one who wants to be great must be a servant How did the other apostles feel when they heard about James and John’s request? How does Jesus describe the way the rulers of the Gentiles treat other people? In our day, what does it look like when people in authority “lord it over” others? In Jesus’s kingdom, if you want to be great or first, how must you treat others? What does it mean to be a servant (Greek diakonos ) of others? To serve means to work for or minister to others, to attend to the needs of others or wait on them (as Martha did, when she pointed out to Jesus that she was “serving” while Mary sat at Jesus’s feet). What does it look like when we are doing that? When we are serving, we are trying to help others achieve their goals or are trying to meet their needs, not our own. How can we, in practical terms, follow this teaching? How can we be a servant of others? My father was the one who, at every church event, always stayed after to put the chairs away and sweep the floors. That might be one example. What is the attitude of a servant toward those he or she is serving? In typical Jewish rhetorical fashion, Jesus makes his point in two different ways. First, he contrasts “great” with “servant”: if you want to be great, you must choose to be a servant. He then sharpens the point by taking those concepts to their extreme: if you want to be “first,” you must be a “slave” (Greek doulos ) – i.e., if you want to be at the absolute top, you must choose to be at the absolute bottom. Jesus is not endorsing slavery – he is making a point about God’s upside-down view of the world: If you want to be at the absolute top, then in God’s kingdom you must be willing to be at the absolute bottom of the ladder of social status. What does this say to you about the Christian life? What does this say to you about your life? Look at verse 28. How is Jesus as a model of servanthood? People who are placed in positions of leadership are called to serve even while filling those positions. What does verse tell them about what “servant leadership”? If you had to capture in a word or phrase the concept of what it means to serve others, without using the word “servant” or the word “slave,” how would you describe what it looks like to serve others, from Jesus’s perspective? One possible answer, among many, is: Work for the good that others seek, not just the good you seek, and put what is good for them first. (How would you answer?) In verse 28, Jesus says he is giving his life as a “ransom for many.” The word “ransom” usually means a price paid to free a person, but when the Hebrew Old Testament was translated into the Greek Septuagint, the word “ransom” was used in places where the Hebrew communicates the ideas of God’s liberation without implying that any payment has been made – for example, in Exodus 6:6; Psalm 77:16 in the NABRE, which is 77:15 in the NRSV and most other translations; and Isaiah 43:1 and 44:22. The idea is probably the same here: that Jesus will give up his life to liberate or free others ( New American Bible, revised edition , Matt. 20:28 fn. ). In verse 28, the word “many” is not signaling that some people are specifically excluded ( New American Bible, revised edition , Matt. 20:28 fn. ); it is merely explaining the difference between “the one” (the servant who brings freedom) and the “the many” (who are freed and also called to be servants). In verse 28, Jesus says he came to give up his life to free many people. In what ways does Jesus’s act of giving up his life free us? In what ways can we help free others by being a servant to them? Take a step back and consider this: Women have faced a long history of being stereotyped and confined to subservient roles. This can complicate their effort to respond to Jesus’s call to service. Is Jesus calling them to be a “doormat”? No. Does Jesus support discrimination and inequality? No. Women have a right to speak up for themselves when they do not receive respect and to seek equal treatment. They can do that and still respond to Jesus’s call to be a servant. Throughout history, men have been primed to think of themselves as leaders and to seek positions where they can direct others. They may sometimes unconsciously assume that women will take greater responsibility for the service work – food preparation, childcare, etc. When they hear the word “service,” they may tend to think mainly of ways they might “serve” others by being leaders in the positions at the top. But sometimes, we are called to servant “helpership,” not servant leadership. The challenge for many men is to get past the historical and cultural assumptions that expect them to serve at the top, so that they can also embrace opportunities to serve others from below, in the supporting roles that help others thrive and lead. How can we transcend cultural stereotypes and assumptions, and embrace the heart of a servant who is willing to be “last” in the eyes of the world, imitating Jesus’s self-giving service? How might God like to see you respond to this call to service today? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Divorce: What does it mean for two to become one? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 19:1-12 Divorce: What does it mean for two to become one? Image by Engin Akyurt, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Matthew 19 Introduction before reading the passage Matthew 19:1 tells us that Jesus now moves into Judea, for the first time in his public ministry in Matthew’s Gospel – a step closer to the most vigorous opposition he faces, in the spiritual and secular power center of Jerusalem. This step sets him on the path to Jerusalem and the Cross. The particular route he is taking involves going out of the way, crossing over to the east side of the Jordan River. Jews often did this to avoid going through Samaria. (Jews detested the Samaritans because the Samaritans were in their mind only semi-Jews, since they did not engage in the Temple worship in Jerusalem.) This route allows him to avoid any distractions caused by the disagreements between Jews and Samaritans, and it puts him back in the territory where John the Baptist preached. Read 19:1-12 Marriage and divorce Notice the contrast in verses 2 and 3. There are 3 kinds of people identified here. What are 3 different reasons people come to Jesus here? Some people follow him. They think he is teaching something valuable. Some people want him to cure them. They think he is doing something valuable. But some people want to catch him in error . They think he is misleading people. What is the Pharisees’ question? The Pharisees are thinking about Deut. 24:1-4, where the Law of Moses appears to allow men to divorce their wives for any reason. Different schools of thought in Jesus’s time interpreted this differently – the Hillel school took the words at face value to produce a policy that made it easy for men to divorce their wives for any reason, while the school of Shammai took a strict approach that only allowed a man to divorce his wife if she committed adultery. What is Jesus’s answer? What is Jesus’s scriptural justification for his answer? Gen. 1:27 and 2:24. Marriage is a human institution in every culture, even where it is not considered a divine institution. Jesus interprets the Old Testament to emphasize that God had an original plan for marriage, from the beginning of human history. What do these passages he quotes from Genesis tell us about the meaning of marriage? What is the point of his referring to what was “from the beginning”? Why is that important? Jesus says that “what God has joined together” (19:6, NRSV and NABRE) must not be separated by humans. How can the statement “what God has joined together” guide our thinking about marriage? Members of my Bible Study group offered answers such as: Marriage involves commitment, cohesiveness, a spiritual bond, being a complete unit, sticking to or clinging to each other, following the original template from before the Fall. The Pharisees move right past his explanation and ask why Moses allowed divorce if God doesn’t actually permit it. What is Jesus’s explanation for why Moses had a more lax standard? Their hard-heartedness. What does hard-heartedness mean? What does it look like? Whose perspective is foremost in mind for the Pharisees: the man (husband), the woman (wife), or the couple together? Whose experience do you think God is concerned about? In ancient times, and not only among the Jews, adultery was considered to be an offense against the husband – an offense against men. (See New Oxford Annotated Bible , footnote to Mark 10:1-16, p. 1810.) In reaching back beyond Moses to the “beginning,” Jesus points to a part of the Old Testament that is not so male-centric. In human terms, the Book of Deuteronomy has the flavor of having been codified by men who were writing to men, for men. What difference does Jesus’s teaching make for women? Notice that all the language is egalitarian – the words are identical for the man and the woman. Marriage, in God’s view, is a union of equality and oneness. Does this surprise you? What do you think of this? Now focus on the statement, “the two shall become one flesh” (19:5, NRSV and NABRE). In the context of Genesis, this is often taken almost as though it is primarily about biology: here’s a man, there’s a woman, the man leaves his family, the woman leaves her family, they get married, they have sex, and that’s how the species propagates. In sex, the oneness is physical and temporary. But Jesus says something more profound when he adds, “So they are no longer two” (Matthew 19:6, NRSV and NABRE). He’s not just talking about sex. In Jesus’s profound “before Moses” vision of what marriage is supposed to be, in marriage a husband and wife are “no longer two.” What does it mean for the two to become one? In what ways are they meant to be one? Members of my Bible Study group offered answers such as: They are of one mind. They exercise joint decision making. They give and take, with a commitment to reconciliation when they get it wrong. They act like what happens to you is as important as what happens to me. They are like conjoined twins in the sense that what I do affects you. William Barclay offers several beautiful thoughts here: being one means not just doing one thing (sex) together, but doing all things together; being completed by your partner; sharing all the circumstances of life; knowing each other well; with consideration thinking more of the other than of oneself (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew Volume 2 , pp. 223-226). People often want to marry for love. In Jesus’s time, most marriages were probably arranged and not decided based on love, yet God wanted the two to become one. Love is an act of the will, not a feeling. Now let’s look at the rule for divorce that he lays down in verse 9. What is the standard he establishes? Note that the Catholic Church has chosen to follow Mark’s version, which does not have the exception for unchastity (Mark 10:1-12). Mark’s Gospel was written earlier, so Matthew’s exception clause is often assumed to have been added later. Also, Luke follows Mark’s absolute standard. Why do you think Jesus lands there as the answer to when divorce is allowed? How does this view honor the idea that marriage is a covenant that is supposed to be a true union? It should be like God’s covenant with us. This is the first of several teachings of Jesus that even his own disciples aren’t sure they can live up to – they think it is a hard teaching. How do you interpret Jesus’s answer in verse 11? One way to think about this is that marriage is not for everyone. Some are called to be married and some are called to be celibate. Does that make sense to you? Another way to think about this is that Jesus may be saying that not everyone will be capable of living up to this teaching. It is a teaching given to Christians. Why would Christians be especially enabled, and especially expected, to live up to this teaching? Believers in God have received the empowerment of the Holy Spirit to live out the teachings of Jesus. We are not going to dwell on v. 12, which has challenged scholars throughout the Church’s history. The point of verse 12 may be that, when the disciples say maybe it is better not to get married, Jesus says that some people do choose not to be married – for a variety of reasons. Some men (whether from birth or injury) do not have the sexual equipment to have intercourse and cannot fulfill the Jewish expectation that they get married and have children. Some men were castrated, a practice at that time for some jobs in royal palaces and Greek temples but thankfully not practiced now. And some have chosen to be “eunuchs” – probably meant figuratively for those who have chosen a life of celibacy and not meant to be taken literally. Unfortunately, the early church historian Eusebius tells us that Origen, the early Christian scholar who lived from c. 185 AD to 253 or 254 AD, castrated himself, thinking he was making himself a eunuch for the kingdom of God in accordance with Matthew 19:12. This is not what Jesus was saying. What do you think is most insightful in Jesus’s teaching about divorce? What do you find problematic here, if anything, and how do you think Jesus would respond to your concern? What should we do to promote a healthy view of marriage in our society? Take a step back and consider this: Paul had the great insight that the marriage of a man and a woman was an image of the relationship between God and the church (Eph. 5:25-32). Spouses should love each other and lay down their lives for each other as Jesus loved and laid down his life for the church. The husband and wife are not just two separate beings; they are a unity. That is why I should care as much about what happens to my wife as I care about what happens to me, and vice versa. When we live out that calling, we are acting as people made to reflect the image of God to the world around us. When we live out that calling, we are truly being all that God wants us to be. If you are married, how can you lay down your life for your spouse? How can you make sure that your spouse doesn’t feel like she/he is doing all the laying down of their life while you’re not? How can you show that this is a mutual thing where you are a team, together in all things? The relationship between a husband and wife is far more important than just its effect on each other. It also affects their children. Children are the subject of the next passage. Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Can you embrace a king who comes in peace? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 21:1-11 Can you embrace a king who comes in peace? Aelbert Cuyp (1620–1691) (school of). Christ Riding into Jerusalem. Circa 1640–1700. Glasgow Museums Resource Centre (GMRC), Glasgow Life Museums, Glasgow, Scotland. Image provided by Art UK, CC BY-NC-ND, https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/christ-riding-into-jerusalem-83691 . Tom Faletti August 3, 2025 Matthew 21:1-11 The crowds rejoice as Jesus enters Jerusalem riding on a donkey Jerusalem was the capital of Judea. Bethphage (pronounced Beth'-fuh-dzhee) was a village on the Mount of Olives, just outside the city of Jerusalem, around one mile from the Temple. The “village opposite you” was probably the nearby village of Bethany, where Jesus will go that evening (see Matt. 21:17) – Mark names Bethphage and Bethany in Mark 11:1. Jesus is arriving just as Passover is beginning. Barclay says that 30 years later, a Roman governor said that around a quarter of a million lambs were sacrificed in Jerusalem at the Passover, and the Jews had a regulation that there should be at least 10 people for every lamb. That would suggest that there could have been 2.5 million people crammed into Jerusalem – a huge crowd far beyond its usual population (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , p. 262). Jesus has chosen to come to Jerusalem at the moment when his arrival may have maximum impact. How does Jesus get a donkey? There is no way to know whether Jesus arranged this in advance or used supernatural power to make it possible; but either way, what does it tell you about how much Jesus has been thinking about how to approach the final week of his life? Jews who were expecting a messiah to come soon had interpreted Zechariah 14:4 in a way that suggested that the messiah would approach Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives on the “day of the Lord.” That is what Jesus does. How does Jesus enter into Jerusalem (verse 7)? Riding on a donkey Matthew 21:5 quotes from Zechariah 9:9-10. Read Zechariah 9:9-10 The daughter Zion or daughter of Zion mentioned here and also in Isaiah 62:11 is Jerusalem and its inhabitants. There is only one donkey in Zechariah, it is referred to twice in the typical Hebrew way for poetic effect. Why would Matthew say that there was a donkey and her colt, and that Jesus sat on “them”? Scholars have a variety of ideas: Perhaps he was interpreting the Zechariah passage overly literally; perhaps the “them” refers to the cloaks he sat on; or perhaps he rode on one and then the other. Why would the disciples have brought two donkeys to Jesus? Perhaps a young donkey – one that hasn’t been ridden on yet – would not be eager to be led away from its mother but follow her if she was led to Jesus. These details don’t really matter. What matters is this: What is the significance of riding into a capital city on a donkey? A conquering king would ride in on a horse. Jesus comes in peace, not as a conquering king. How does the rest of these two verses from Zechariah suggest to us about Jesus? He has not come as a worldly, conquering king. What is the nature of his coming? Now return to Matthew 21:1-11 What do the people do? Spreading cloaks Spreading cloaks on the road was a way to acknowledge the reign of a new king. This had been done for Jehu in 2 Kings 9:13 when he became king of Israel. Matthew says just refers generically to branches from the trees, but John specifically identifies them as palm branches. In around 142 BC, when the Maccabees overthrew the Seleucid (Greek) empire and gained independence, 1 Maccabees 13:51 tells us that in celebration of that great victory, the people waved palm branches as the miliary leader Simon and his troops entered the citadel at Jerusalem. This was the end of the fight for liberation from the Greeks that put an end to the defilement of the Temple, which Antiochus Epiphanous had ordered. 2 Maccabees 10:1-8 describes the steps that were taken to purify the Temple, which included the waving of palm branches. So when the people spread palm branches before Jesus, they are invoking a history of liberation. What do the people say? Hosanna In Matthew 21:9, the people cry out, “Hosanna,” which is literally a cry in Hebrew to “save, I pray/beseech.” We see this word in Psalm 118:25, where the psalmist calls on God to “save us,” followed in the next verse (118:26) by the statement, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.” They appear to be clearly invoking Psalm 118:25-26. What is the significance of the people identifying Jesus as one who can save them? The Son of David What is the significance of the people calling Jesus the “son of David”? An interesting footnote is that when David declared that the king who would follow him would be his son Solomon – the first person who was the “son of David” – Solomon rode into Jerusalem on David’s mule (1 Kings 1: 32-40) – again, not the horse of a warrior. People might also have recalled this as they proclaimed Jesus to be the “Son of David.” What is the significance of the people proclaiming that Jesus comes in the name of the Lord? In what ways can we embrace the words of the crowd when they identify Jesus as the Son of David, proclaim him to be the one who comes in the name of the Lord, and ask him to save them? What do you think they people are thinking about Jesus? The Jews at that time had a strong expectation that their Roman oppressors would be thrown off by a descendant of David and that the kingdom of David would be re-established as an earthly kingdom. Calling Jesus the Son of David and spreading cloaks and palm branches were ways of signaling that they thought he was the one who would come and establish a new earthly kingdom. When God does something in our lives, how do we express our joy at what God has done? Can we learn something from the people of Jerusalem? Notice that Jesus does not correct their thinking about what kind of messiah he is. The time will come for people to understand better who Jesus is, but for now he responds to their faith, not their understanding of doctrinal facts. We see this in our day as well. Christians don’t agree about major points of doctrine, which means somebody is wrong. Jesus makes it clear in other parts of the Gospels that it is important to know the truth, but God still works in the lives of believing Christians who have conflicting views, some of which must be wrong. Why do you think God still works in the life of people who don’t have all their doctrinal facts sorted out perfectly, and what does that tell you about God’s relationship with us? Verses 10-11 have an interesting juxtaposition. The “whole city” is in turmoil and asking who is the person people are making such a fuss big deal about, and the “crowd” explains. The “whole city” would be the people who were already there and mostly knew little about Jesus, and the “crowd” would mainly be the people who had come with Jesus all the way from Galilee or had joined him on the way to Jerusalem as he traveled through Judea (see Matt. 19:2 and 20:29). The people in Jerusalem want to know why people are so excited about this person they don’t know about. Where do you see yourself in this story? Would you have been with Jesus from the beginning, accompanying him from all the way back in Galilee? Would you have been so moved by him when he came through your little town in Judea that you left town to follow him? Would you have already been a devout person intending to go to Jerusalem for the feast, and you decided to go with Jesus when you learned that he would be walking to Jerusalem for the Passover too? Would you have been part of that crowd waiving branches and spreading your cloak on the road? Would you have been among the people asking, “Who is this?” Would you have been one of the people answering the question, explaining who Jesus is? Would you have been watching skeptically? Would you have missed it entirely? Where do you see yourself in this story? What does this story of Jesus’s entrance into Jerusalem say to you today? Take a step back and consider this: We have seen a number of instances in Matthew’s Gospel where Matthew shows us a Jesus who cares especially about the people at the bottom of the social spectrum – what we have called God’s downside-up view of the world. Jesus’s entry into Jerusalem shows the contrast again, where Jesus’s approach is the opposite of what the world expects. They expect a king who will establish dominion under the mantle of power; they get a servant who will establish his kingship under a mantle of peace. John Fischer, a Christian friend of mine who was a popular musician in the Christian contemporary music scene in the 1970s and now runs an online ministry to try to extend the grace of God to people who feel left out of traditional churches, wrote an online post in which he says that the “strong, biblically-based evangelical church” he grew up in always seemed to skip over the Sermon on the Mount and the Beatitudes (Matt. 5-7). That is where we first see clearly Jesus’s downside-up view: Blessed are the poor; turn the other cheek; love your enemy; etc. John wrote: [W]e should stick out like a sore thumb in our culture right now. The acceptable cultural milieu is currently one of separation, isolation, fear, bullying, show no mercy, take no prisoners, no sympathy, no empathy, foster hate, and a rejection of that which is different. It is the culture of the strong man more in keeping with John Wayne than Jesus. In fact, our culture right now is dominated by everything that is the exact opposite of the Beatitudes. So if you want to be different, now is the time to follow Jesus, and steer clear of any movement of Christianity that borrows from the strong man tactics that are prevalent today. That’s not Jesus; it’s John Wayne. (“ John Wayne and the Sermon on the Mount ”) Jesus challenges us to turn the world’s view upside-down – to see differently, to think differently, to act differently. He did not come with horse and chariot to force our submission to him. He came on a donkey of peace. We are called to follow his example. What does Jesus’s refusal to accept the trapping of power say to leaders in our day? How might Christians in our time be overly eager to embrace the exercise of military power? In what ways does Jesus’s refusal to exercise worldly power challenge us? What might we need to do differently to point the leaders of our time to the Jesus who enters Jerusalem on a donkey? How can we join the One on the donkey who comes in the name of the Lord, and follow his way? How can we also point the powerless of our time to the Jesus who rides on a donkey? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

Two reactions to Jesus: disingenuous skepticism and genuine commitment. Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 12:38-50 Two reactions to Jesus: disingenuous skepticism and genuine commitment. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti September 11, 2024 Matthew 12:38-42 The scribes and Pharisees ask for a sign The scribes and Pharisees request a “sign” from Jesus. What do they mean by a “sign”? They are looking for something dramatic. What do you think of their request for a sign. Was that a reasonable request? After he had done so much, it is hard to understand how they possibly could have needed something that they didn’t already have. Compare Matthew 11:2-6 to this passage. What kinds of “signs” has Jesus already done? What does the desire of these scribes and Pharisees to see a “sign” tell you about them? Jesus describes the people of his time as an “evil and adulterous generation.” He is using “adulterous” as a spiritual metaphor. The Old Testament uses that metaphor – see, for example, Jer. 3:6-11 and Hosea 3:1-5. When Jesus uses the metaphor of adultery, what is he saying about the scribes and Pharisees and those who share their skepticism about him? When Jesus says he will be in the earth for 3 days and 3 nights, what is he hinting at as the sign he will give? What is the story of Jonah? To whom was Jonah supposed to be speaking the word of the Lord when he ended up instead in the belly of the whale? What is the “sign of Jonah”? How does Jonah’s story prefigure Jesus? Jonah’s survival after three days in the whale prefigures Jesus’s resurrection. Also, Jonah’s calling to preach to the Gentiles (Ninevah) prefigures Jesus’s ministry to Gentiles, which we already saw in Matthew 8:5-13 and will see again in Matthew 15:21-38. In what way was Jonah’s ministry a sign of love for the Ninevites, and how is that also a prefiguring of Jesus? God loves those who are spiritually distant from him. He cared enough about the Ninevites to send Jonah to them and Jesus cares enough about the scribes and Pharisees to continue to engage them and call them to repentance. That the message conveys both God’s love and his call to repentance is a sign that the message is true. Why will the people of Nineveh condemn Jesus’s generation? The story of Solomon and the queen of Sheba appears in 1 Kings 10:1-13. She comes to Solomon with questions. She wants to find out if he is as wise as he is reputed to be. When she sees him in action, she recognizes his great wisdom and is deeply impressed by him. Why will the queen of Sheba condemn Jesus’s generation? Nineveh and Sheba were Gentile lands, not Jewish territory. Jesus says these non-Jews will judge the Jews of Jesus’s time. How does that add additional nuance and effect to Jesus’s denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees? Sometimes, skeptics in our time seem to have “signs” they want from God before they might be ready to believe. What might be some of those kinds of “signs” skeptics want in our society today? Sometimes even people in the church seem to be skeptical about God’s role in their lives, always wanting more proof that God is really present and at work. What kinds of “signs” do Christians sometimes want from Jesus in our time, before they commit more fully to him? How can you try to gauge whether skepticism is genuine or disingenuous? In what ways does our generation have advantages that might make us particularly worthy of judgment when we do not respond appropriately to Jesus? Luke tells the story slightly differently (Luke 11:29-30). He leaves out the 3 days and 3 nights part and says that Jonah (himself) was a sign to the people of Nineveh and Jesus (himself) is a sign to this generation. If Jesus is the sign, what is he a sign of? How is our generation missing that Jesus is the sign we seek? Matthew 12:43-45 An empty house This passage should not be analyzed primarily as a literal description of literal evil spirits. It is a metaphor. Recall that Matthew brings together related things Jesus said that he might not have said all at the same time. Matthew is telling us about discussing involving evil spirits, so he places these words here. Jesus referred to the scribes and Pharisees as an “evil generation” in verse 39 and he repeats that phrase here. The focus is on the scribes and Pharisees, not on some unidentified evil spirits; the evil spirits are a metaphor. In Luke, shortly after the discussion of Jonah (Luke 11:29-32), Jesus tells a Pharisee, “Now you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness” (Luke 11:39 NRSV). That is another metaphor to get to the same point, which is about the things the scribes and Pharisees are focused on. In what ways is the “house” of the Pharisees “empty, swept, and put in order” (Matthew 12:44)? In what ways is the life of the Pharisees “clean” and yet still evil? In what ways are we at risk of “cleaning” our “house” yet leaving it empty and exposed to bad influences instead of filling it with Jesus? Does modern Christianity focus more on sweeping out sins than on what should take the place of those sins? Explain. Matthew 12:46-50 “Who are my mother and brothers?” Matthew has been leading us through a long segment of his Gospel that has focused on opposition to Jesus and the fundamental choice that each person must make. Now he brings it home. Where are Jesus’s family – his mother and brothers – as he has been contending with the Pharisees? Protestants take the word “brothers” literally. The Catholic Church has always maintained that Jesus’s mother Mary was a virgin throughout her life and that “brothers” here is to be interpreted as “relatives”. There is one theory that would make them step-brothers – sons of Joseph from a prior marriage; but there are also arguments for considering them to be his cousins. No one other than Jesus is ever referred to in the Gospels as a child of Mary. Two of the men referred to as “brothers” of Jesus in the Gospels have the same names as the sons of another “Mary” named in Matthew 27:56, whom John 19:25 suggests might be the sister of Jesus’s mother. Catholics also argue that when Jesus was hanging on the cross, he would not have entrusted Mary to John if she had other sons. And in both the Old and New Testaments, “brother” is used for a variety of relationships, figurative and literal, especially because the Hebrew did not have a word for “cousin” ( Ignatius Catholic Study Bible , Matthew 12:46 fn., pp. 29-30). This is not a question that can be resolved in a small-group Bible Study. If different members of the group disagree, it is best to note that the Body of Christ is divided on this question and that we should not let it divide us from learning together from the Word of God. We don’t need to resolve that issue to gain important lessons from what Jesus says here. What question does Jesus ask, and how does he answer the question? According to Jesus, who are his mother and brothers? What do they do that makes them his mother and brother (or sister)? Whoever does the will of my Father in heaven – i.e., whoever does the will of God – is a brother or sister of Jesus. What opportunity does this present to us? What does this tell us about the family of God? What does genuine commitment to Jesus look like in our day? What challenge does this passage present to you? What might God be asking you to do that you are currently not doing? Let’s look back over this entire chapter. There is a progression in the Pharisees’ opposition to Jesus. They move from: watching him with suspicion (12:1-8, where they object to the disciples plucking grain on the Sabbath), to trying to entrap him (12:9-14, where they ask him if a cure at that moment would be permissible), to plotting to kill him (12:14), to impugning his character so that there would be a pretext for eliminating him (12:22-32, when they accuse him of acting by the power of Satan), to demanding a sign to discredit him (12:38), as though he hasn’t already provided a multitude of signs. Looking over the whole chapter, how does Jesus respond to the growing opposition to him? My Bible Study group saw all of the following: confidence, determination, preparedness, explanation, refutation, defiance, warning, and invitation. You may see other things. Take a step back and consider this: St. Francis of Assisi had an interesting perspective on Jesus’s statement on his mother and brothers, and he connected it to Matthew 5:16, where Jesus tells us to let our light shine. Francis said that “we are brothers, when we do the will of His Father, who is in heaven (cf. Mt 12:50); mothers when we bear Him in our heart and body (1 Cor 6:20) by love and by a pure and sincere conscience; we give birth to Him through holy work, which should shine upon others as an example (cf. Mt 5:16)” (Francis of Assisi, “Letter to the Faithful II,” . The Writings of St. Francis of Assisi, Parts I & II , translated from the Latin Critical Edition by Fr. K. Esser, O.F.M., http://www.liturgies.net/saints/francis/writings.htm ). The first part of this quote is a restatement of what Jesus said in Matthew 12:50: we are brothers of Jesus when we do the Father’s will. But in what sense might we also be Jesus’s mother? Francis offers a beautiful, poetic insight: First, like a mother , we bear (i.e., carry) Jesus in our heart and body, like a pregnant woman carries her child, with love and a pure heart. Second, we figuratively give birth to Jesus when we do the “holy work” that shines the light of Christ to others. When we give a tangible embodiment of Christ to others when we let Christ show forth in our actions. Jesus is very clear that it is our doing the will of God that makes us his mother and brothers, and Francis sees us doing that not just as an act of obedience but as an expression of love that gives of ourselves to bring the work of God to life – to give birth to God’s work in our world. How might your perspective and attitude change if you saw your willingness to do the will of God, your willingness to do the work God calls you to, as being an opportunity to give life to God’s work, to give birth to something new by your work? Is there somewhere right now where you need to make a decision to do the will or work of God in some way? In what way might God be calling you to give birth to some new action on that will allow God’s light to shine through you? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

You provide the salt and light of Jesus to the world. Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 5:13-16 You provide the salt and light of Jesus to the world. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti April 21, 2024 Matthew 5:13-16 You are the salt and light of the world Salt has many useful properties. What is salt good for? In this passage, what good property of salt is Jesus focusing on (verse 13)? The Greek word for “earth” in verse 13 is the same as the word for “earth” in verse 5. It can mean soil, or a particular territory on the Earth, or the physical realm of existence (as in references to “heaven and earth”). In this case, it can’t mean “soil” since salt is not generally a good thing for soil. When Jesus says we are the salt of the “earth,” what do you think he means by “earth”? Metaphorically speaking, in what ways can Christians be the kind of good “salt” that flavors the world around us or improves the taste of life? Jesus says that salt that has lost its flavor is thrown out because it is not good for anything. Since he is talking metaphorically about Christians, what is he saying about such Christians? What do you need to do to keep being good salt in the world around you? What adjustments in your Christian life might help you be the kind of person who is the kind of “salt” the world needs? In verse 14, Jesus shifts to a different metaphor: light. What does he say that we are? In what ways are we meant to be like the light of a city that is built on a hill? In this metaphor about light, what kind of light are we supposed to be shining? According to Jesus in verse 16, what will people see in us when our light is shining properly? What do you think he means when he says that when our light is shining, people will see our “good works”? What do you think he means by “good works”? What are some ways that Christians might put their light under a bushel? What are some ways that we might put our light on a lampstand? According to verse 16, why will people give glory to God when our light is shining properly? Jesus says that when our light is shining properly, they will see our good works. In our world today, many people who do not believe in Jesus do not think Christians are a light and don't see a reason to give glory to God. It would be easy to blame this entirely on them. Turn your focus toward ourselves for a minute. How might Christians be interacting with the world in ways that do not shine a light – that are not seen as good works? What can we do to be better lights in the world? Take a step back and consider this: Sometimes we assume that if non-Christians fail to see the light of Christ, it is because of their own obstinacy. But we know that we are not perfect, so surely there are also times when the fault lies with how we are living out our faith or how we are representing Jesus to the world. There is no light where there is no truth. But sometimes we obscure the truth by pretending that things are simpler than they are. When Christians claim that following Jesus is simple – “all you have to do is have faith” – people think we are saying that if they just believe, all their problems will go away. They know that is not true, since Christians also have problems, so that message obscures the light. Many young people find it hard to see the light of Christ in us because of the inadequate attention many of our churches give to the injustices that weigh heavily on the hearts of young people (and people of every age who hear the cry of oppressed peoples for justice). When Christians uncritically support one political approach even though every political organization focuses on only some of God’s concerns for justice, or fail to address flaws in the churches themselves, people whose hearts cry for justice find it hard to see us as salt or light. Our light can also be obscured by our lack of holiness. If we only honor some of God’s commands, if we look like we mainly care about ourselves and people like us, if we fail to be engaged consistently in good works as our Lord told us to, then we should not be surprised that the world does not see us as salt and light. Think about a time when you were not the kind of salt or light that effectively represented Jesus to the world. What went wrong? Think about a time when you were particularly effective at being the kind of salt or light that Jesus calls us to be. What happened that allowed you to be salt or light? How can you build habits that will allow the salt and light of Jesus to be communicated to the world around you more consistently? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

If we try to make sense of God based on our human limitations, we will misunderstand the Scriptures and the power of God. How can the Scriptures guide us to a bigger picture? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 22:23-33 If we try to make sense of God based on our human limitations, we will misunderstand the Scriptures and the power of God. How can the Scriptures guide us to a bigger picture? Image by Frank McKenna, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti August 18, 2025 Matthew 22:23-33 The Sadducees and whether there is a resurrection This is the second in a series of 3 challenges Jesus faces when he arrives in Jerusalem – this time from the Sadducees. The Sadducees believed only in the Torah – the first 5 books of the Old Testament, which Christians sometimes refer to as the Pentateuch, which is Greek for “five books.” The Sadducees did not consider the books of the prophets authoritative, nor did they accept the wide body of oral tradition that the Pharisees adhered to. Since the Torah does not suggest that there is a resurrection or an afterlife, the Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection. The Sadducees tended to be wealthy. They made up a major portion of the political leadership among the Jews and tended to be collaborators with the Roman occupation. But those characteristics do not seem to be relevant here, where the question revolves around their religious beliefs. The Pharisees believed in a resurrection and an afterlife. They not only believed in an afterlife of the soul (as, for example, the Greeks believed); they also believed that our bodies are raised. They pointed to passages later in the Old Testament that provided varying degrees of support for such a position. Here are some of those passages: Isaiah 26:19 says, “Your dead shall live, their corpses shall rise.” Ezekiel 37:1-14 describes a vision of a valley of dry bones. The bones come back together and regain flesh and skin, breath enters them, and they come to life. Although in the passage itself the image is of a new Israel being restored after the exile to Babylon, Jews (and later, Christian commentators) saw it as a sign or foreshadowing of individual resurrection. Daniel 12:2 says that after a time of terrible persecution, “many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” Psalm 73:24-25 says, “You guide me with your counsel, and afterward [or, in the end] receive me with honor [or, into glory].” This could merely mean that the psalmist will be restored, in this life, after when the difficulties he faces are over, but some saw it as a description of entering into God’s realm like Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11-12), both of whom are described as being taken up to God without dying first. The Sadducees, who don’t believe in an afterlife, approach Jesus with a puzzle that they think shows the foolishness of believing in a resurrection. What is the problem the Sadducees pose? There is a commandment in the Old Testament, in Deuteronomy 25:5-10, that directs a man to marry his brother’s wife if his brother dies childless, so that through the first child of that union the brother will have a legal heir. Genesis 38:7-11 gives an example of a refusal to follow this command. Both of these books are part of the Torah, the limited part of the Hebrew Scriptures that the Sadducees acknowledged. The Sadducees imagine a series of brothers marrying the same woman, each dying before any offspring is produced, and they ask: Whose wife is she in heaven? In verse 29, Jesus tells them they are wrong (misled, led astray) for two reasons they don’t know the Scriptures and they don’t know the power of God. How is knowing both of those critical to the spiritual life? In verse 30, what does Jesus say about how they are thinking incorrectly? Jesus says there is no marriage in heaven, because in heaven people are like angels. It is important not to misinterpret the statement that humans are “like angels.” Humans in heaven are “like angels” in the sense that, like angels, they live forever and don’t need to engage in sexual reproduction in order to produce offspring and keep the family line alive (see New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV , Matthew 22:30 fn., p. 1780). This does not mean we are like angels in other ways; for example, unlike angels, we will have a body in heaven. Angels are a different kind of creature than humans. They only have a spiritual nature and don’t have a body or a material nature. Although Jesus frames his answer in terms of the Sadducees’ underlying assumption, common at the time, that the point of marriage is to carry forward the family line. This should not be misinterpreted to mean that that is the only purpose of marriage. St. Paul, and theologians and everyday believers throughout the centuries, have seen much more in marriage, in addition to its function of continuing an individual’s family line and ultimately propagating the species as a whole. In verses 31-32, Jesus turns specifically to the Scriptures. We might expect Jesus to focus on how they are wrong in not accepting the parts of the Old Testament that the Pharisees accept. Instead, in verse 32, Jesus quotes from Exodus 3:6, which is in the Torah, the part of the Old Testament that the Sadducees do accept. What does God say in Exodus 3:6, and why does Jesus argue that this indicates people do live on after death? In Exodus 3:6, God says, “I am” the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They must be alive, because otherwise God would have said, “I was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob before they died. The fact that he is still their God indicates that they are still alive. God is the God of the living, not the dead. The Sadducees are wrong about the Scriptures partly because of their crimped reading of the Torah. They think marriage works the same way in heaven as on earth, which shows that they think that heaven isn’t all that different from earth. Why is thinking that heaven is like earth such a big error, not just with regard to the question they asked but in our understanding of heaven more generally? Jesus also says the Sadducees are wrong about the Scriptures because they have not noticed a key statement by God in their Scriptures that presupposes that people do live on after death. What does this tell you about Scripture study? Now let’s come back to the fact that Jesus says in verse 29 that the Sadducees are also wrong because they do not know the power of God. What is it that they are missing about God’s power? They think that God is limited by what we understand from our human perspective. They think he is only powerful enough to create physical lives, which come and go. They don’t think that God has power over death and can extend life beyond death. At a fundamental level, they don’t understand how powerful God is. They underestimate God. In what ways do we tend to act like God is bound by human limitations or underestimate God’s ability to transcend problems that stump us? There are a lot of different threads in this exchange between Jesus and the Sadducees. What insights does this passage give you about God, or heaven, or the resurrection, or the Scriptures, or yourself? Take a step back and consider this: It is possible that the Sadducees didn’t really want to think of God as having a power and perspective that transcended theirs and could cut through their conundrums. They were very invested in their own power and comfortable with their own ways of seeing things. Accepting a God who transcends their power might have forced them to rethink some of the ways they were using their own power. How does our own desire for power affect our responsiveness to the power of God? How does our belief that we have power, at least in some areas of our lives, sometimes make it harder to appreciate the Scriptures and the power of God? Where, in your own life, do you need to let go of your preconceived notions about God and his ways? And replace them with what? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next

The world and the Church will face difficult times, marked by lawlessness and apostasy, but in the end the Lord will be victorious. Previous 2 Thess. Index Next 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 The world and the Church will face difficult times, marked by lawlessness and apostasy, but in the end the Lord will be victorious. Image by Zac Durant provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti March 10, 2025 2 Thess. 2:1-12 What to expect before the end, including the appearance of the lawless one In verses 1-2, what has upset the Thessalonians? They think they have received information, either through a prophetic word from the Spirit or by a letter supposedly from Paul, saying that the Second Coming is already here or has already begun (see the Introduction ). In verse 1, Paul describes the Second Coming as our “assembling with” the Lord (NABRE) or being “gathered together to him” (NRSV) – it is when we will rejoin him and live with him forever. In verses 3-4, what two things does Paul say must happen before the Second Coming of Christ? There will be an apostasy – a time in which many people renounce the faith – and the lawless one will be revealed. In verses 3-4, how does Paul describe the lawless one (or man of lawlessness, or man of sin)? In verse 4, Paul describes this anti-Christ as seated in the temple of God. This image has been interpreted in a variety of ways ( Ignatius Catholic Study Bible , fn. to 2 Thess. 2:4, p. 382): Some church fathers saw this as referring to a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem. I don’t think Paul would have seen it that way. The Temple was still standing in Jerusalem when he wrote this. The Jews had suffered the ignominy of having Antiochus IV sack Jerusalem and set up a statue of the Greek god Zeus in the Temple, but to Paul, the Temple in Jerusalem was no longer a focal point of God’s activity. God now resided in his people, not in a building (see next bullet). So Paul is not likely to have had the physical Temple in Jerusalem in mind. Some church fathers believed Paul was talking about the Church. This fits well with Paul’s other letters. To Paul, Christians individually (1 Cor. 3:16-17) and collectively (2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21) were and are the temple of God. Some scholars read the passage more metaphorically, seeing the Antichrist as placing himself symbolically in the place of God, in our hearts, in our nations, in our world. In verses 9-10, how does Paul describe the lawless one? Based on verses 10 and 11, what is the lawless one’s primary tool for doing his evil work? Deceit. In verse 7, Paul says that lawlessness is already at work in the world. What are some ways that you see lawlessness at work in your world? Lawlessness shows up in big ways (murder) and small ways (excessive speeding). It shows up in family abuse and neglect, in the sale of unsafe products by corporations and the failure to give workers their rights to overtime pay, in the “anything goes” attitude that infects many corners of the Internet, in athletes who break the rules in order to win, and the list goes on. If you look behind the surface manifestations of lawlessness, what would you say is the root cause behind the many different kinds of lawlessness in our world? There are many possible answers to this question. It could be the attitude that the law does not apply to me, that I decide what is right and wrong, that I’m more important than anyone else and my welfare and goals matter most. That could be described as selfishness. Another possible answer is that in our world there is an underlying disregard for human life or a dehumanization of others that desensitizes us to the ways we are out of control. The fact that a society allows these things to happen can lead to a resignation to the idea that there is no other way to live. Paul suggests that the lawlessness is not yet at flood level – it is restrained right now. Specifically, in verse 6 he tells the Thessalonians that they know what is restraining lawlessness right now, because he told them. We do not know what he told them and cannot be sure what he has in mind. Scholars disagree among themselves about what the restraining power is (verse 6) and who the one who restrains is (verse 7). Here are some of the explanations they offer (the following points are drawn from NABRE, fn. to 2 Thess. 2:6-7; and Ignatius Catholic Study Bible , “Word Study: Restraining (2 Thess.2:6),” p. 382): Some say the Roman Empire or the Roman emperor is the restraining force because they establish order. They point to Paul’s view of government in Romans 13:1-7 as support for this position. (Others argue against this view, pointing to the rampant abuses perpetrated by the Romans in their dealings with every nation they sought to conquer, control, and exploit, which Paul would have known well.) Some draw on Revelations 12:7-9 and 20:1-3 to suggest that angelic powers such as Michael the Archangel hold Satan back (2 Thess. 2:9). (Verse 7’s statement that the one who restrains the evil will be removed poses a problem for this interpretation.) Some say that God himself is the restrainer: that the Holy Spirit is the restraining power in verse 6 and God the Father is the one who restrains in verse 7. Some say that the preaching of the gospel holds lawlessness back, or that the need to allow time for the spread of the gospel to all nations holds off the end (Mark 13:10). Some argue that “restraining” is the wrong translation of the Greek word and that “seizing” is a more accurate translation. In this view, Paul is saying that an evil prophetic spirit like those seen in the worship of the Greek god Dionysius is seizing people in the Thessalonian Christian community and shaking them out of their wits (verse 2). Paul has warned them about it so that they can avoid it, but they have given in to deceit. But this is just a foretaste of the threat posed by the lawless one in the full power of his deceit. Given the wide range of guesses as to who or what Paul thinks is restraining lawlessness, it is not fruitful to spend too much time speculating about it. But 2 Peter 3:9 tells us that the Lord is patient and delays his coming so that all may come to repentance, and Revelation 20:2-3 tells us that we are living in the figurative “one-thousand-year” period between Jesus’s victory over sin and his final return, during which Satan is being restrained. In one way or another, God is restraining evil or allowing it to be restrained. In what ways do you see God restraining evil in our day and giving people time to repent and turn to him? In verse 8, Paul says that the Lord kills the lawless one by the breath of his mouth. This is a reference to Isaiah 11:4. In Isaiah 11:1-9, Isaiah issued a prophecy describing an ideal king from the line of David, the one who would come and set all things right. In verse 4 of that passage, he says that this shoot from the stump of Jesse, on whom the spirit of the Lord rests, would judge the poor with justice and slay the wicked with his breath. When Paul invokes the prophecy about Jesus in Isaiah 11:4 to say that the Lord slays the lawless one with the breath of his mouth, that prophecy says that the future Son of David will defend the poor and slay the wicked. How is the mistreatment of the poor a manifestation of the lawlessness in the world? How can we stand up for the poor against the lawless powers that mistreat them? In verses 10-12, Paul says that the lawless one, who is aligned with the power of Satan, deceives those who do not believe the truth. How can you know when you are being spiritually deceived? In verse 11, where Paul says God sends upon them a deceiving power or delusion (NABRE/NRSV), this is typical Jewish language of Paul’s time, where everything was attributed to God because nothing can happen unless God allows it. Since God does not tempt anyone to do evil (James 1:13), it is wisest to interpret this passage as talking about God’s permissive will, not his direct action – i.e., that God allows it, not that he causes it. God does not tempt us to do evil, but he does not shield us from being deceived when we have refused to accept the truth. The hinge or linchpin around which this whole passage revolves is verse 8. What does it say the Lord will do? If the Lord will destroy this evil one when he comes in his Second Coming, with what attitude can we approach the future? In verse 8, the Lord gains victory over the lawless one by a simple word – the breath of his mouth. God speaks a word in Genesis 1 and Creation comes into being. Jesus speaks a word in Mark 4:39 and the roaring storm is stilled. There is no battle between God and the lawless one; God merely issue a word and the opposition is gone. What does this ability of God to issue a word say to you in your life? Notice that this passage began by saying that these things must happen before the Second Coming of the Lord. Therefore, he is telling them that “the day of the Lord” is not at hand; it is not almost about to happen. A lot of other things must happen first. What they should worry about is not the timing of the Lord’s return but the risk of being deceived and losing their faith. What are the things in your life today that might pose a risk that you might lose your faith? What can you do about it? What message in this passage is important to you? Take a step back and consider this: Paul is trying to walk a fine line: telling the Thessalonians about the future and the Second Coming of Christ but not having them become overly preoccupied by it. That is probably a wise approach for us as well. Why is a basic understanding of the Second Coming of Christ an important element of our faith? Why is it more important to focus on what is going on in the here-and-now and not get too worked up (as the Thessalonians had) about possible signs of the future “end times”? How can you strike this balance? In particular, what is one thing (or more) that you should hang onto about Christ’s Second Coming and one thing (or more) that you should focus on as more important right now than the timing of the end times? Bibliography See 2 Thessalonians - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/2-thessalonians/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous 2 Thess. Index Next

Jesus offers the same salvation to all – high or low, early or late – and asks us to adopt his attitude, which is that many who are last will be first. Can we embrace his approach? Previous Matthew Index Next Matthew 20:1-16 Jesus offers the same salvation to all – high or low, early or late – and asks us to adopt his attitude, which is that many who are last will be first. Can we embrace his approach? Lawrence W. Ladd (fl. 1865–1895). Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard . Circa 1880. Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, DC. Public domain, via SAAM , https://americanart.si.edu/artwork/parable-laborers-vineyard-14162 . Tom Faletti July 4, 2025 Matthew 20:1-16 The parable of the vineyard owner and the laborers; the last shall be first This parable can be interpreted on many different levels, which we will explore; but first, we need to understand what actually happens in the story. Jesus tells a story about a landowner and laborers, but according to the first few words of verse 1, what is this parable really about? The kingdom of heaven. What does the landowner do early in the morning and what does he do at various times later in the day? How much does he agree to pay the first group of workers? A denarius was the standard daily wage. It was enough for a man to feed his family the next day. If he didn’t get a daily wage, his children very possibly might go hungry. Do the laborers agree to receive that wage? The landowner’s actions and the laborers’ actions were perfectly normal for that time. Workers who did not have a steady job would go to the marketplace and hope to be hired for a day’s work. When the harvest was ready, landowners needed a large number of people to bring in the crop quickly. Rain or other weather problems could ruin the crop, and it could go bad if it is left in the field too long. So the landowner needed everyone he could get. At the same time, the economic lives of common laborers were very precarious: they never knew from day to day whether they would be able to eat the next day – it all depended on whether they found work that day. We see this day-labor economy in many places. Where I live in the nation’s capital, I have often seen groups of day laborers in the Home Depot parking lot hoping they can get some work for the day. When the landowner goes back to the marketplace later in the day, he finds more workers. What wage do they agree to? They agree to his offer to be paid whatever is right, or righteous, or just. The Greek word here is díkaios , which is often used to distinguish a “righteous” person from a sinner. He’s saying to them, I’ll do the right thing; I’ll treat you right. Why do you think the laborers accept that vague statement? By the time he is hiring more workers at the end of the day, he doesn’t even talk about money. He just tells them to go work and they do. Why do you think they go work without any agreement about money? They are just grateful to no longer be standing around. A little pay would be better than no pay at all. When it is time to pay the workers, the landowner starts with the workers he hired last. Jesus tells the story this way to make a point. He is not saying this is how a boss would act or should act. It is a device he is using to make his point. How did the workers hired first react when everyone had been paid? Did the landowner cheat the workers who were hired first? Now let’s dig deeper. Level #1 Remember that this is a story about what (verse 1): the kingdom of heaven. So who in the parable stands for what in the kingdom of heaven? The landowner represents who? The workers hired first represent who? The workers hired last represent who? The landowner is God. The first group of workers is probably the devout Jews who keep challenging Jesus, people who have been devoting their lives to God from their childhood. The workers who come later are perhaps the “tax collectors and sinners” that Jesus has been welcoming into his kingdom, or perhaps Gentiles. What is the point Jesus is making about the kingdom of heaven? As we connect the story to the kingdom of heaven, what is the “pay” the workers receive? We are saved by grace, not be our works, so what is the “pay”? If the answer is “salvation,” what does that mean? Now, Matthew might have included this story to make a point about devout Jews and “sinners,” or about Jews and Gentiles. What would the point be? Different people say this in different ways, for example: All people receive the same salvation; all people receive eternal life; all people receive access to God. In verse 13, when the first group complains, what does the landowner call the one he responds to? Jesus calls him “Friend.” What does Jesus’s use of the word “friend” in verse 13 tell us about his attitude toward those who challenge him because they don’t like his egalitarianism? The workers who started in the morning could be interpreted as those who developed a commitment to Jesus from their childhood, in contrast to those who came to faith in adulthood or even at the very end of their lives. For that interpretation, what would the point be? Do people receive a greater reward from God if they come to faith earlier in life? They get to live more of their life in communion with God while they are still alive, but do they receive a greater salvation? Can the point of the parable be applied to other comparisons people might make? For example, is the reward of salvation greater for the speaker at a church event, compared to the person who provides the refreshments, the person who puts away the chairs afterwards, or the person who just comes in, listens, and goes home? In what ways do those things matter and in what ways do they not? Conclusion #1 : All who work for God will receive the same salvation: forgiveness of their sins and life forever with God – regardless of whether they came to God early in life or later. God saves all who work in his kingdom and loves all of them. Level #2 The reaction of the laborers who started first, when they see what the other workers are paid, is why Jesus told the story in the order he did. If he had said that the landowner paid the early workers first, those workers would never have found out that the workers who came last were paid the same amount, and we would not have been able to see their attitude toward the other workers. What is their attitude toward the workers who came later? The landowner implies that they do not have the right attitude. Why is it that attitude a problem? A BIG NOTE OF CAUTION: Some people are bothered by this story because they think that paying the workers who come late the same wage as the workers who start early will encourage laziness . They are bringing their own biases to the story. The story does not say that the workers who were hired later were lazy people who slept late and only came to the marketplace at the end of the day. The story says they were “idle,” but it does not use that word pejoratively. It doesn’t say it was their fault that they hadn’t found a job. It doesn’t even say they showed up late. They could have been waiting all day for someone to hire them. The story doesn’t say the landowner hired all of the people who were looking for work early in the morning. Perhaps the landowner originally thought 20 workers would be enough to bring in the harvest, but as the day progressed, it became clear that he needed more, so he went back to the marketplace. They might have been there from the beginning. Or perhaps some workers were taking care of a sick member of the family in the morning, or were themselves sick, or were testifying in court that morning, or were burying a loved one. If we choose to see them as lazy, we are injecting our own biases into the story. Jesus does not say they were lazy or at fault in any way. This leads us to consider the attitudes of the various groups of workers. At the beginning of the day for the first group of laborers, when they first encounter the landowner and their relationship begins, what do you think is the attitude of the first group of workers toward the landowner and the work they are getting from him? It's a contract – you pay me the normal wage, and I will work for you. Notice that when they challenge the landowner, they inject a sour note into their relationship with the landowner. When the second group of workers first encounter the landowner and their relationship begins, what is their attitude toward the landowner and the pay he is offering? They choose to trust him that he will be fair. When the later groups first encounter the landowner and their relationship begins, what do you think their attitude is toward the landowner and the pay they are likely to get? They also trust him. They don’t know what they will get, but they trust that the landowner will pay them something reasonable. Which attitude better reflects what God hopes to see in his followers? Why? What does this tell us about how we should feel about having the privilege of working in God’s vineyard, of being a member of God’s kingdom? It calls us to humility. If you’ve decided to work for God, trust him and don’t second-guess what he is doing with other workers in his kingdom. Conclusion #2 : Our attitude towards other people and their access to salvation can sour our relationship with God and with each other, and can even taint our thinking about the privilege of being in a relationship with God. There are two more levels of application to look at: This landowner recognizes that all people should have what they need for their daily bread. The last shall be first. God actually seems to care more about those who the world cares less about, because the world cares less about them. Level #3 The Catholic Church has a long history of concern for economic relationships in society and has developed an extensive body of teaching, often called “Catholic social teaching,” regarding how to apply Christian principles to social issues, especially issues related to God’s desire for justice. (And many other denominations have similar teachings.) One of the core principles in Catholic social teaching involves the dignity of work and the rights of workers. Two of the ways that Catholic social teaching develops that principle are relevant to this passage: (1) That everyone has a right to work, and (2) that everyone has a right to a living wage for their work. How do you see those principles affirmed in this passage? How might these principles be put into practice in our society? Ever since Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum in 1891, the Catholic Church has called for a minimum wage that is high enough to allow a worker to cover the basic needs of the worker and his or her family. Some people call that a “living wage” to distinguish it from a bare minimum wage that is not high enough to support a family. Ensuring a right to work – that everyone who desires to work can find a job – is a more difficult policy challenge, but some governments do more than others to try to ensure that everyone seeking work can find a job. Do you see ways that we are falling short of these goals for work, and what can we do about it? Conclusion #3 : We pray, “Give us this day our daily bread,” but God also asks us to try construct our societies so that people can work for their daily bread and other basic needs. Workers have a right to work and a right to be paid enough to cover the basic needs of themselves and their families. Level #4 Now let’s look at a final point here that is often given little attention. Jesus says almost the same thing right before and right after he tells this story. In Matthew 19:30, he says, “But many of the first will be last, and the last, first,” and Matthew 20:16 is similar, without the “many”. This is a different point than the point about salvation being given also to those who come late. What is added by making this declaration about the last and the first? What does “first” mean? First in what? The only way to make sense of this is to interpret the “first” to mean those who are first in the eyes of the world – highest in status, wealth, sex appeal, fame, applause, followers on social media, etc. What does “last” mean? Last in what? In what ways are we – you and I – last? In what ways are we first? Notice that in Matthew 19:30, Jesus says, “ Many of the first will be last, and the last, first.” Why do think he qualifies it with “many,” as though it will not be true of everyone? What kind of person who is “first” in the eyes of the world might not be “last” in the kingdom of heaven? And what kind of person who is “last” in the eyes of the world might not be “first” in the kingdom of heaven? If everyone receives the same salvation by grace as a gift from God, does it make sense to talk about first and last? What is Jesus trying to tell us when he says, “The last shall be first”? What does it tell us about how God thinks? Notice that Jesus doesn’t say, “The first will end up even with those who were last, and the last will finally catch up.” What does this tell us about God’s perspective? God sees things differently than we do, in his downside-up view (see God’s Downside-Up View of the World , with additional Scripture passages in God Takes a Downside-Up View of the World ). As God sees it, those who are seen as less important or further behind in this life are all the more of concern to him. If you ever find yourself thinking that you have more of a right to God’s favor than someone else, he might tell you that you’re missing something and someone else has moved ahead. Conclusion #4 : If you want to know what God is thinking about, what perspective God is looking from, look from the bottom up, because God is noticing what things look like from the bottom, from the people who are “last” in the world’s eyes. He wants all of us to see the world from his upside-down view – to understand that many of the last will be first. Looking over the whole parable and Jesus’s closing comment, what does this passage tell us about God? What does it tell us about God’s attitude toward us? What does it tell us about how we should live? Are you a Christian because of the reward you will get – the “pay” that comes when you die or at some other point in your life? Or are you a Christian because of the relationship and the privilege and the joy of participating in God’s work? Explain. Take a step back and consider this: It can be very hard for us to think as God thinks. We get too focused on ourselves. This parable reminds me of a poem by Shel Silverstein: God’s Wheel by Shel Silverstein God says to me with kind of a smile, “Hey how would you like to be God awhile And steer the world?” “Okay,” says I, “I’ll give it a try. Where do I set? How much do I get? What time is lunch? When can I quit?” “Gimme back that wheel,” says God, “I don’t think you’re quite ready yet.” (Source: Shel Silverstein, A Light in the Attic , HarperCollins, 1981, p. 152.) What are some ways that we tend to think we know better than God what he should do in our world? It is hard to see our own blind spots. Do you have any idea where you tend to think you know better than God? What can you do to more fully take on God’s perspective on our world? Bibliography See Matthew - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/matthew/bibliography . Copyright © 2025, Tom Faletti (Faith Explored, www.faithexplored.com ). This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without alteration, for nonprofit use, provided such reproductions are not sold and include this copyright notice or a similar acknowledgement that includes a reference to Faith Explored and www.faithexplored.com. See www.faithexplored.com for more materials like this. Previous Matthew Index Next