Search Results

Jesus helps the Samaritan woman sort out some religious questions and come to faith in him. How do we move from know about God to having faith in him? Previous Next John List John 4:1-42 Jesus helps the Samaritan woman sort out some religious questions and come to faith in him. How do we move from know about God to having faith in him? Circle of Peter Paul Rubens (1577–1640). Christ and the Woman of Samaria at the Well . By 1640. Cropped. Private collection. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Circle_of_Peter_Paul_Rubens_-_Christ_and_the_Woman_of_Samaria_at_the_Well.jpg . Tom Faletti January 13, 2026 Read John 4:1-42 The Samaritan woman at the well Verses 1-4 The first 3 verses tell us that Jesus left Judea, the region in the south that includes Jerusalem, and returned to Galilee, which is in the north. The most direct way to walk from Judea to Galilee was through Samaria. Jews who were particularly scrupulous about ritual purity might take a much longer route around Samaria to the east along the Jordan River, to avoid having to interact with the Samaritans. But the Jewish Roman historian Josephus tells us that “it was the custom of the Galileans, when they came to the holy city [i.e., Jerusalem] at the festivals, to take their journeys through the country of the Samaritans” (Josephus, Book 20, Chapter 6, par. 1 ). Jesus also traveled through Samaria in Luke 9:52-56 and 17:11-19 as well as here in John. Verse 4 says that it was “necessary” for Jesus to pass through Samaria. Perhaps this was “necessary” in the missionary sense that he needed to go there for this event to happen. When the Assyrian Empire conquered the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 or 721 BC, Assyria did what it did routinely in other lands: it took a large portion of the population captive (the wealthy, leaders, etc.), exiled them to other parts of the Empire, and replaced them with people from other lands. The Israelites who remained eventually intermarried with the foreigners who were placed there. Samaria had been the capital of the Northern Kingdom, and these people became known as the Samaritans. The Jewish people who survived the later destruction of the southern kingdom of Judah were not subjected to such an intermingling. They despised the Samaritans and called them “half-Jews.” Jesus comes to Sychar, possibly the Old Testament city of Shechem, near Mt. Gerizim, where Jacob’s well was traditionally believed to have been. Look at verses 5-10. How is Jesus feeling as the story begins? Jesus asks the woman for a drink. Jewish men who were scrupulous about ritual purity would not have wanted something touched by a Samaritan woman. Why do you think Jesus asks her for a drink? In hindsight, we can see that she was the reason he was there. He was not uncomfortable interacting with a foreign woman or a sinner. He was not exclusionary and did not bind himself to Jewish purity laws. The woman knows how extraordinary it is for a Jewish man to be willing to accept water from a Samaritan woman, and she says so in verse 9. How does Jesus respond in verse 10? Jesus gives her only a little bit of information – almost a teaser – and implies that she should seek more knowledge. He is not forcing anything on her; he is inviting her to ask if she wants to know more. How could we use that approach in cross-cultural or interreligious conversations? What does Jesus mean by “living water” in verse 10? The living water that is a “gift from God” could symbolize many things but is in particular the Holy Spirit, who is God’s gift of himself to us. What does the woman think Jesus means by “living water”? Living water would more commonly be associated with flowing water such as from a river, which is better than the stagnant water in a well. Verses 11-15 The woman challenges Jesus: How can you get living water without a bucket? She then makes an interesting shift in the conversation in verse 12, saying, “Are you greater than our father Jacob? She has moved the conversation to a slightly “religious” topic, implying that Jesus can’t be greater than Jacob – the cherished ancestor of the Samaritans. How does Jesus answer in verse 14? John has already implied that Jesus is greater than Jacob back in John 1:51, where Jesus is presented as the ladder by which the angels ascend and descend between heaven and earth as symbolized in a dream Jacob had. How does what Jesus says in verses 13-14 establish unequivocally that he is greater than Jacob? What do you think Jesus means when he says that when people drink the water he gives, they will “never thirst” (verse 14)? I’m a believer and I get thirsty ever hour. What does Jesus mean? What do you think Jesus means when he says that the water he gives will be “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (verse 14)? Until verse 14, the woman has been confrontational, trying to maintain control of the conversation and not be drawn in. But Jesus keeps saying things that put her off-balance. She finally lets down her guard and shows her vulnerability in verse 15. What does she say? We also need to be honest and admit our need as a step in coming close to the Lord and receiving his living water. Why is admitting our need a necessary part of coming to faith? Verses 16-24 Why do you think Jesus now focuses on the woman’s marital situation? People wonder how Jesus knows about her marital status. Is it just his supernatural knowledge? Some commentators think the fact that she is at the well at noon is significant: women would ordinarily go to get water in the morning, not in the heat of the day. Her presence there might be a signal that she is not entirely welcome with the other women in the town, who would have come to the well in the morning. That does not, however, explain how Jesus knew she had had 5 husbands. This appears to be an example of Jesus showing supernatural knowledge. How does Jesus’s reference to the woman’s husbands turn the conversation into a personal, spiritual discussion with him? Jesus appears to be challenging her in an area of her life where she needs to do some self-examination. How does God do that with us: Guide us to move from intellectual talk about religion to our own spiritual situation and our need to examine ourselves? What is the value of that kind of self-examination – an examination of conscience – and how do you do it? Some scholars see symbolism in the reference to the woman’s husbands. In the Old Testament, wells were meeting places where men found wives: for example, Isaac (Gen. 24), Jacob (Gen. 29), and Moses (Ex. 2). John has already referred to Jesus as being the divine bridegroom for his disciples (John 3:29). How is this event symbolically a time where the Samaritans have the opportunity to receive Jesus as their divine bridegroom? Some scholars also see another connection to the 5 husbands. When the northern kingdom was destroyed, the Assyrians moved people from 5 other nations into the land that became known as Samaria, and those people brought their gods with them (2 Kings 17:24, 29). The acceptance of Jesus symbolically severs the ties to those 5 prior “husbands” that Samaria had once lived with. Up until verse 20, the woman has appeared to be understanding Jesus’s words only on a very literal level. How does verse 20 show that she is now ready for a theological conversation? At the time of Jesus, the Samaritans were monotheists (they believed in one God), and their faith went back to Abraham, just as the Jews’ faith did. The believed only in the Torah – the first 5 books of the Old Testament, which was also true of the Jewish faction known as the Sadducees. The key difference is that the Samaritans believed that God was to be worshiped on Mt. Gerizim in Samaria, not at Jerusalem in Judea. They believed that they were the carriers of the true faith while the Jews had gotten off track when they built the Temple for God in Jerusalem. (A small group of Samaritans still exists today – slightly less than 1,000 people in total – who still practice Samaritanism and worship on Mt. Gerizim.) In verse 20, the woman notes that the Samaritans worship at Mt. Gerizim, while the Jews worship at Jerusalem. This was one of the key disagreements between the two religions. Her implied question is: Who is right? How does Jesus respond in verses 21- 24? In verses 23-24, Jesus says that the time is coming when people will no longer be confined to worshiping God in a particular place. How will God be worshiped (verses 23-24)? What does it mean to worship God in Spirit? What does it mean to worship God in truth? If the place isn’t the central criterion for worship, what is? Worshiping in spirit and truth suggests an interior worship of God, within our own hearts and spirits rather than just in some external location. Why is what is going on in our hearts so important for proper worship? If someone asked you if you worship God in Spirit and truth, and if so, how – how would you respond? Verses 25-26 In verse 25, the woman now turns to another key question: the coming of the Messiah. Both the Samaritans and the Jews believed that a messiah or final prophet would come in the last days. How does Jesus respond? Jesus, says, “I am,” which is a form of the name God gives himself in the Old Testament (Yahweh). The translators write “I am he” to fit standard English grammar conventions, but the word “he” isn’t there in the Greek. Christians believe that when Jesus says, “I am,” he is implicitly stating that he is God. So here, he is not only acknowledging his identity as the Messiah but asserting his divinity. What is the significance of the fact that in John’s Gospel, the first person to whom Jesus identifies himself as the Messiah and the “I am” is a woman . . . and that she is a sinner, a foreigner, and a member of an ethnic group hated by the Jews? Something important happens at this moment. The woman moves from a theological discussion to a person, from knowing about God to knowing God. How important is this step of entering into a relationship with God (not just knowledge about God), and how can we help people take this step? We will continue to look at this passage in the next study of this series, so stay tuned. But first: Take a step back and consider this: On the surface, there was no reason that Jesus “had to” (verse 4) pass through Samaria. It was the normal way to get to Galilee. If my normal route to church was via Main Street, I would not say that last week I “had to” take Main Street. Scholars interpret John’s statement of necessity as an indication that in God’s plan there was a divine necessity: Jesus had a missionary reason to be in Samaria at that particular time. As Jesus says in verse 35, this particular field was “ripe for the harvest.” There are times when God prompts us, through a tug in our heart or an inspiration he impresses upon us, to take a step that opens the door to an opportunity. Sometimes, those nudges push us outside of our normal routines. But: Many times, those divine appointments are right there on the path we would have taken anyway , and the only difference is that this time, God is asking us to be sensitive to how the Holy Spirit wants to use us to make a difference in someone else’s life . God does not force those divine opportunities on us. If we are too distracted by our focus on ourselves and the little challenges of life, and we don’t even sense God’s nudge, life goes on, and we don’t even realize that an opportunity to participate in the work of God was lost. Sometimes, we sense the nudge from God, second-guess ourselves, and miss our chance. But perhaps we can learn from that experience how to be more trusting of God the next time. Sometimes, we seize the opportunity but then botch it by trying to force things to go our way instead of God’s way. Again, those can become opportunities to learn how to be more continuously in tune with the movement of God’s Spirit in us. And sometimes, we respond, allow the Spirit to guide us, and see God do good things through us that we could not have imagined. Those little victories of the spiritual life are transformative and can bring us great joy. What seemed like just a time of living our ordinary lives turns into a graced and awe-inspiring experience of participating in the work of our God, who loves us and is intimately, though often subtly, involved in our lives. To become more aware of those divine opportunities, as Jesus recognized the opportunity in a simple stop by a well, we need to cultivate our relationship with God and nurture our sensitivity to the promptings of his Spirit. How can you grow in your sensitivity to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, so that you can recognize when God is trying to turn an everyday action into a graced moment where he can bless someone through you? May you grow more and more attuned to the Holy Spirit, so that you can let God speak through you when someone is ready to hear a word about God! Bibliography See John - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/john/bibliography . Copyright © 2026, 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 John List Next

Prologue to Luke's Gospel: Why is he writing and for whom? Previous Next Luke List Luke 1:1-4 Prologue to Luke's Gospel: Why is he writing and for whom? Tom Faletti Luke 1:1-4 What does Luke say that others have done before him? What does Luke say that he has done? What do you think an "orderly account" means? He refers to events that have been "fulfilled among us." Who is "us"? What do you think it means to say that these events have been "fulfilled" among us? What does Luke want Theophilus to know? Who do you think Theophilus is? "Theophilus" means "friend of God. The style of Luke's writing at this point, with his reference to the "most excellent" Theophilus, is the way one would refer to an official or other prominent member of the community. However, the meaning of the name is convenient for indicating that anyone who is a friend of God would welcome this account. It is therefore possible that "Theophilus" is not a specific person and that Luke sees himself writing for all the Theophiluses of the world -- all the friends of who want to know the truth about what they have been taught. (to be continued) Bibliography See Luke - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/luke/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 Next Luke List

Matthew shows the universal relevance of Jesus – to all people of all nations. Jesus cared about all people and offered a gospel for all people, while demonstrating His authority over all nations. Previous Matthew List Next Introduction to Matthew Matthew shows the universal relevance of Jesus – to all people of all nations. Jesus cared about all people and offered a gospel for all people, while demonstrating His authority over all nations. Image by Brett Jordan, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Introduction to the Gospel of Matthew This study is designed for anyone who is willing to approach the Bible with an open heart, including: Catholics, Protestants, evangelicals, and Orthodox. People who are active in their church, who have stepped away from a local church or the Church as a whole, or who have never found a church home. People who are familiar with the Bible and people who are just starting out. Seekers, doubters, agnostics, explorers, and the curious. Everyone is welcome to join us as we explore what the Bible says, what it means, and how we can apply it in our lives today. A NOTE FOR SMALL GROUPS This study material can be very enriching for personal study and growth, and it can be even more powerful and life-changing when it is used by a small group of people who explore God’s Word together. We will occasionally offer instructions, indented like this, that may be useful for a small-group study. Small-group leaders can find leadership training material and practical suggestions at Leading a Small-Group Bible Study . Leaders can see Preparing to Lead a Small-Group Bible Study Meeting for suggestions on how to prepare for a small group Bible Study. I encourage you to begin and end each meeting with a time of prayer, and to go through each passage in detail, often verse by verse. As you do so, try to explore what the passage says, what it means, and how we can apply it in our lives. Personal Introductions Before you begin a small-group Bible Study, you should take some time to build community, beginning with introducing yourselves and making sure that everyone has a chance to know everyone else’s name. Here are some questions you could ask everyone in the group to answer: What is your name? What is your connection to this church/parish/group? Why is the Bible important to you? Why are you interested in studying it? If the group is reconvening after a summer break , you could renew the introductions with questions such as these: Could everyone remind us of your name, and tell us why you decided to return to this group? (Or if you are new, why did you decide to join us?) What is one insight about faith or life that you gained this summer or were reminded of? Overview of the Gospel of Matthew Matthew seeks to show the universal relevance of Jesus – to all people of all nations. As a man, Jesus interacted with people of many nations, cared about all people, and offered a gospel for all people. As the Son of David, Son of Man, and Son of God, Jesus demonstrated that his authority extends over all nations. Who is the author? The author of the Gospel of Matthew is unknown. From early on, the name Matthew was added to the top of it (“according to Matthew”), but there is no information about the author in the text and the text does not say that it comes from the tax collector named Matthew. However, there is good reason to believe that the Gospel of Matthew draws on material from the original Matthew, and therefore we might think of it as being at least partly “according to” Matthew, even though it was probably not “written by” Matthew. What do we know that leads us to this conclusion? Eusebius was a bishop who wrote the first history of Christianity around 324. Eusebius attributes Matthew’s Gospel to the disciple Matthew named in the Gospels (Eusebius, ch. 24, par. 5) and says that Matthew wrote his Gospel “in his native tongue” (ch. 24, par. 6), which would have been Aramaic, the language related to Hebrew that Jews were speaking in Jesus’s time. Eusebius quotes a document we no longer have that was written by Papias, probably in the first part of the second century (perhaps around 125, plus or minus 20 years). In that document, Papias says that he learned from the “presbyter” or “elder” that (1) “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ” (ch. 39, par. 15), and (2) Matthew wrote “oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able” (ch. 39, par. 16). The Greek word that in this sentence was translated as “oracles” is the Greek word logia , which means “sayings." The document Papias is referring to cannot be the Gospel of Matthew in the form it was handed down to us through the centuries, for 2 major reasons: While the Gospel of Matthew as we have it includes many “sayings,” it is not a book of sayings: it has extensive narrative that tells the stories of what Jesus did, not just what he said. The Gospel of Matthew that we have was written in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic, and there is no evidence that it ever appeared in another language before it was provided to us in Greek. So whatever Papias was referring to is not what we have today. After looking at all the evidence, most scholars across all Christian traditions have concluded that (1) the Gospel of Matthew in the final form we have it was written by an anonymous writer, not the Matthew mentioned in Papias; (2) this unknown writer drew from those “oracles” provided by Matthew, from Mark, and from other material; and (3) this Gospel acquired the name “Matthew” because it included some material from the document Papias mentioned that was from Matthew. Additional facts guide us to this conclusion: If the author of the Gospel of Matthew had been the apostle Matthew, who was an eyewitness to Jesus’s ministry, he would not have drawn so much of his material from Mark, who mostly was not an eyewitness. Yet we see Matthew condensing and reshaping what Mark wrote. If the Gospel of Matthew was written in the 80s, as most scholars believe it was, the apostle Matthew probably would have been dead before this Gospel reached its final form 50 years after Jesus died. It is important to note, however, that the Gospel of Matthew clearly was written by someone who compiled stories and teachings handed down from eyewitnesses. It is not a fabrication. It is a compilation that draws on the stories told by Matthew and other eyewitnesses, and it is a trustworthy part of the inspired Word of God. Christians who are not familiar with how the Bible came together might react: What? Are you saying Matthew didn’t write Matthew? This reflects a gap in knowledge about how the Gospels came into being. The stories of Jesus first circulated orally. And in those days, people didn’t necessarily sign their names on their books the way people do today. The Gospels were compiled through a process by which people, years later, gathered together and sifted the stories of Jesus that were being passed around orally. God inspired someone to bring together in one book what was available in a variety of sources, and the result is a masterpiece presentation of the life and teachings of Jesus. It doesn’t matter whether we know the name of the final author; God does. We will call the author “Matthew,” because Matthew is part of its history and the tradition leads us to no other name. (Further information about these conclusions can be found in a variety of sources. Here are some examples of scholars from a variety of positions on the theological spectrum who have reached the same conclusion: H. L. Ellison, “Matthew,” in The International Bible Commentary , edited by F. F. Bruce, p. 1121; Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament , pp. 158, 208-211; William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , pp. xx-xxi; Myron Augsberger, Matthew , volume 1 of The Communicator’s Commentary (Mastering the New Testament) , Lloyd J. Ogilvie, general editor, pp. 14-15; and Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: The New Testament, Revised Standard Edition, Second Catholic Edition . Ignatius Press, 2010, p. 3.) What were his sources? Where did he get his material from? The author of the Gospel of Matthew appears to have gotten his material from several sources. Half of the verses in this Gospel have parallel verses in the Gospel of Mark, which is believed to have been written earlier (the evidence suggests Mark was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70). (References to the number of verses in this and the next paragraph are calculated based on information in Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament , p. 111). Perhaps one-fifth of the verses in Matthew appear in Luke but not in Mark. Scholars have proposed the existence of an earlier source that both Matthew and Luke had access to and drew from as they wrote their Gospels. That source is usually called Q – short for the German Quelle , meaning “source.” There is no manuscript available today that contains the material from Q, so it would be unwise to make many claims about it, even though it is reasonable that Luke and Matthew, with so many verses in common, both had access to such a document. Matthew has a significant amount of material comprised of sayings or teachings by Jesus that does not appear in the other Gospels. This material could have come from the source Papias identifies as “Matthew,” which would have been written in Aramaic/Hebrew and might have come from the apostle Matthew. Note, though, that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew, so the author of this Gospel or someone else would have had to translate that original “Matthew” material into Greek. Matthew also has other material unique to his Gospel that he might have written himself or gathered from other sources. Matthew, like any good writer, also frames and explains material in the context of his readers’ own situations, so we see some things in Matthew that appear to be commentary from the perspective of the mid-80s, when Jewish Christians were being forced out of Jewish synagogues, Christian churches were developing more of a structure, and these churches were a multifaceted mix of Gentiles, Jews who still tried to maintain Jewish practices, and Jews who had given up practicing Judaism. When and where was the Gospel written? The best thinking is that the Gospel of Matthew was written perhaps between 80 and 90, give or take 5 or 10 years. I will often shorthand that to “around 85,” but 85 is not a precise date. Some scholars propose a date as early as before 70 or after 100. If it came after Mark as the majority of scholars think, it would have to have been written after 70 since Mark is thought to have been written around 70. Furthermore, Matthew seems to show great awareness that Jerusalem has been destroyed, which happened in 70. The ways he hints at tensions between Jews and Christians at the time it was written suggests that it might have been written between 80 and 90, when Christians were being pushed out of synagogues. And it was written before 110, because Ignatius, a bishop from Antioch, quotes phrases from it in a letter dated around 110. Scholars do not know where Matthew wrote this Gospel. Proposals range from Judea to Syria to Antioch to Phoenicia. There may be vague hints in the text that Matthew might have been based in a large city in Syria. For example, in Matt. 4:24, he adds Syria to Mark’s description; he uses the word “city” far more than the word “village”; and Ignatius, who was aware of his Gospel by 110 was from Antioch (Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament , p. 212). This leads a majority of scholars to lean toward Antioch in Syria as the locale. Antioch had a large Gentile Christian population and also a large Jewish population, some of whom embraced Christianity while others did not; and tensions had grown high by the time Matthew was writing. So Antioch fits the evidence. But it is a conjecture, not a fact. What community or audience was Matthew writing to? For centuries, the assumption was that since Matthew quotes so frequently from the Old Testament, he must be writing to a community of Jewish Christians. In the past century, this has given way to a more nuanced interpretation that pictures him writing to a community that is a mixture of Jewish and Gentile Christians. What do scholars think were Matthew’s main purposes? Scholars differ on what Matthew’s purposes were. Was he providing a handbook for local church leaders? Was he trying to teach his community and stir up their commitment? Was he trying to make the case for Jesus to people who were open to the message? Was he responding to attacks from Jews who were opposed to Christianity? Was he trying to clarify who Jesus really is – including his roles as Messiah, Son of David, etc.? We can see all these things in Matthew’s work, so perhaps he was trying to do all these things, not just one thing. The theme that perhaps is woven most consistently through Matthew’s Gospel is the theme of the “kingdom of heaven” – what is it; how things work there; what demands it places on us; and what will happen when it reaches its fulfillment. Matthew also makes considerable effort to point to Old Testament passages that are fulfilled by Jesus, which is one of the factors that led scholars from the beginning to assume that Matthew’s audience was Jewish. Matthew works hard to establish that Jesus is the Son of David, a term linked in Jewish minds to a hoped-for Messiah, but he later demonstrates that the Messiah must be more than just the Son of David. He presents Jesus identifying himself as the Son of Man, a term from Daniel associated with a decisive, final act in which God saves the Jewish people. He ends with material where Jesus takes the role of king, but scholars who try to make out this Gospel as being primarily about Jesus as King are overemphasizing one facet of Matthew’s multifaceted presentation. Unlike in the other Gospels, we see some discussion of “church” in Matthew, though it is very brief and embryonic. What is the structure of Matthew’s Gospel? When scholars try to write an outline of Matthew to show the organization of the story (since the original did not have sections, chapters, or even verse markings), they find a clear structure that most scholars accept. Matthew presents his story of Jesus in 6 narrative sections, interspersed with five teaching sections. The five teaching sections are collections of teachings by Jesus, gathered together in clumps (for example, the Sermon on the Mount). Matthew is not trying to tell the life story of Jesus in order; he is trying to help us understand what Jesus is about and what he has taught us by organizing material for throughout Jesus ministry. One key element of Matthew’s structure has not been mentioned in any of the commentaries I have consulted, so I will lay it out here in some detail. Matthew seeks to show the universal relevance of Jesus – to all people of all nations. At the beginning of the Gospel, there are Gentiles in Jesus’s family tree in Matthew’s version of Jesus’s genealogy. At the end of the Gospel, Jesus tells the disciples to take the gospel to all nations. In between, the itinerary of Jesus’s geographical movements shows his relevance to people of all nations: Jesus is born in Bethlehem in Judea , in the south near Jerusalem; lives for a time as a refugee in Egypt ; and then grows up in Nazareth in Galilee , in the north of Palestine. He goes to the eastern side of Judea to John at the Jordan River to be baptized, and then returns to Galilee. In Matthew 4:12-13, Jesus leaves Nazareth in Galilee and moves to Capernaum, by the Sea of Galilee , and begins to gather disciples. In Matthew 4:24-25, Matthew tells us that Jesus’s healings are attracting attention in Syria (Gentile territory to the northwest of Galilee), the Decapolis (largely Gentile Greek cities east and southeast of the Sea of Galilee), Jerusalem and Judea (Jewish territory to the south), and beyond the Jordan (Jewish territory east of the Jordan River, south of the Decapolis, east of Samaria and running south to the area across the river east of Jerusalem and Judea). Jesus will eventually visit all of these territories. In Matthew 8:28, Jesus crosses over to Gadara, in the territory of the Decapolis , southeast of the Sea of Galilee, and then returns “home” in Matthew 9:1, presumably to Capernaum. He travels to all the towns and villages of Galilee (9:35). He sends out the Twelve to preach and heal (10:1) but restricts them (for the time being) to Jewish territory (10:5). In Matthew 15:21, Jesus goes to Tyre and Sidon in the province of Syria, Gentile territory northwest of Galilee and performs healings and miracles before returning briefly to Galilee in Matthew 15:39. In Matthew 16:13, Jesus goes to Caesarea Philippi, Gentile territory northeast of Galilee for some key incidents with his disciples as well as a healing. By Matthew 17:22, he is back in Galilee. In Matthew 19:1, Jesus goes to the Jewish territory of Judea across the Jordan , at the beginning of his journey to Jerusalem. By Matthew 20:29, Jesus has reached Jericho, in Judea , less than 20 miles from Jerusalem. In Matthew 21:1-11, Jesus enters Jerusalem . Some key themes What this itinerary shows us is that Jesus had an extensive ministry in both Jewish and Gentile territories. Matthew wants us to understand that: As a man, Jesus had an international background and cared about all people. He was a man for all people. As the Son of David, Son of Man, and Son of God, Jesus’s authority extends over all nations. His gospel is for all people. The gospel is for all nations and needs to be preached to all nations. Jesus tells us what the kingdom of heaven is like and how to live the kind of life that is appropriate for those who wish to be part of his kingdom. These are key themes that Matthew focuses on, every step of the way through his Gospel. Look for these themes, and explore how you can apply them to yourself and to how you interact with the people and world around you. Which of these themes of Matthew’s Gospel intrigue you the most, and why? What do you hope to learn by studying Matthew’s Gospel? What questions do you hope to have answered as you study? If you could ask Matthew one question, what would you ask, and why? How do you think he would respond? 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 List Next

What do we owe to governments and leaders? What do we owe to God? How can we honor God and obey the laws of our leaders? Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 22:15-22 What do we owe to governments and leaders? What do we owe to God? How can we honor God and obey the laws of our leaders? Jacob Adriaensz Backer (1608-1651). Skattepenningen [The Tribute Money] . 1630s. Cropped. Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, Sweden. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Tribute_Money_(Jacob_Adriaensz._Backer)_-_Nationalmuseum_-_17634.tif . Tom Faletti August 17, 2025 Matthew 22:15-22 The tax trap Recall that in Matthew 21:23 Jesus is challenged for the first time after his arrival in Jerusalem, when the leaders ask him by what authority he is doing what he is doing. After he establishes that they are not being genuine with him, he tells 3 parables that all drive home the point that the leaders (and everyone else) face a choice: to accept Jesus, because he is indeed from the Father, or to reject him. Now, Matthew turns to a series of additional challenges that are thrown at Jesus. This time, Jesus is approached by Pharisees and Herodians. The Pharisees we have seen before. The Herodians are supporters of Herod, the tetrarch (ruler, but under the Roman emperor) of Galilee (in the north, where Jesus came from) and Perea (the land east of the Jordan River across from Judea and Samaria). These 2 groups made odd bedfellows: The Pharisees were strict followers of every detail of the Law. They hated the taxes they had to pay to Caesar. The Herodians were political collaborators who had received power from Rome and tried not to do anything that would upset Rome, so they supported the paying of the tax. They benefited from the status quo and some Herodians were probably among the tax collectors. That these two groups would join together to ask this question shows how desperate they were to get rid of Jesus. They didn’t even agree about the question they were asking, but both groups recognized that it was political dynamite. What do they ask Jesus? What is the danger for Jesus if he tries to answer the question? If Jesus says no, it is not lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, they can have him arrested immediately and turned over to the Romans. If Jesus says yes, it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, he will disappoint the deeply faithful Pharisees and anger the more zealous Jews who oppose Roman oppression. Jesus asks them to show him the coin used to pay the tax – a denarius, which was roughly equivalent to a day’s wage. He then asks a question, which is his frequent tactic for dealing with opposition. What question does Jesus ask? Why does it matter whose image is on the coin? Kings and other rulers always issued coins with their image on it, and the coins they issued were considered to belong to the king. Group 4 Denarius (18 AD – 35 AD) of Tiberius ( Roman emperor (Emperor 14 AD – 37 AD), also sometimes referred to as a Tribute Penny . Obverse: TI[berivs] CAESAR DIVI AVG[vsti] F[ilivs] AVGVSTS (Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus). Reverse: PONTIF[ex] MAXIM[us] (The greatest bridge-builder) - Livia seated holding inverted spear and olive branch. Catalogue: Sear (1964) - 467. Image by DrusMAX, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Emperor_Tiberius_Denarius_-_Tribute_Penny.jpg . The denarius in Jesus’s time had the emperor Tiberius’s image and an inscription that read: Tiberius Caesar Augustus, Son of the Divine Augustus . Julius Caesar died in 44 BC approximately 40 years before Jesus was born. After a period of uncertainty while they sorted things out, his successor, Augustus (Octavian), ruled as the first Roman emperor from 27 BC to AD 14. Julius Caesar was sometimes treated as a god during his lifetime and was formally deified after his death. Augustus was worshipped as a god during his lifetime and was formally declared to be a god after his death. The denarius asserted Augustus’s divinity. When they acknowledge in verse 21 that Caesar’s image is on the coin, what is Jesus’s response? The best translation of what Jesus says is to “give back” to Caesar the things of Caesar – i.e., it’s already his, it has his name and picture on it, so give it back to him – “and” to God the things of God. What does it mean to give back to Caesar the things that belong to Caesar? Did this answer their question about paying taxes? What does it mean to give back to God the things that belong to God? What are the things that belong to God? Everything. If all things really belong to God, what does this say to us about how we should live our lives? What does this tell you about your salary or other income? Does it really belong to you? It’s not my salary. It’s not my bank account. It’s not my inheritance. It all belongs to God. I am a steward of it on God’s behalf. What does this tell you about tithing? Are you free to do whatever you want with your money as long as you give 10% to God? What would it look like to live the kind of life where we recognize and act on the understanding that everything we have belongs to God? If we took this seriously, would we ever spend anything more than the bare minimum on ourselves? Would we take vacations, by fancy coffees, etc.? Is there room for occasional luxuries in a life that recognizes that everything belongs to God? If we don’t take this seriously, if instead we think it all belongs to us, what’s wrong with that? What do we miss out on? Is there anything you think you should be doing differently, based on what Jesus teaches here? Now, let’s look a bit more at what it means to give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s. Jesus draws a contrast between Caesar and God. What does Jesus’s answer tell us about emperors, kings, and all authorities? It tells us that they are not gods and are not to be treated as though they were. But more than that, it tells us that they have limited authority. Having governments and leaders with political authority is necessary, but they are limited and finite. Since everything belongs to God, but only some things belong to Caesar, what does Jesus’s answer tell political leaders about what they should do with the taxes they collect? They, too, are answerable to God and must give back to God what is God’s. This means they must use taxes in ways that honor God – for example, by serving the common good. What do you think this story tells us about whether we should pay our taxes even though we may not agree with everything the government does with our taxes? What do we owe to our governments? How can we both honor God and obey the laws of our leaders? Most of the time, we can be citizens of our own country without violating our obligations as citizens of the kingdom of God. If Christians ever reach the difficult conclusion that they can’t in good conscience meet their earthly citizenship responsibilities because of their duty to God, what should they do? There is an additional subtle point that can be seen here. Jesus is telling them to give that which is stamped with Caesar’s image back to Caesar. But we are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27), so we are called to give our very selves back to God. What would it look like in your life to give yourself back to God? Take a step back and consider this: Verse 22 tells us that the Pharisees and Herodians went away “amazed.” Were they amazed because he had wiggled out of their clutches by his crafty answer? Were they amazed by the wisdom of his answer? Were they amazed by the depths of the commitment he is asking of us? As we have seen repeatedly in Matthew, Jesus is trying to help us see life in entirely new ways. How is the idea that we should give everything to God a revolutionary idea? Can we apply the same principle to other aspects of our life besides “things”? Does the same principle apply to our time, our work effort, etc.? The implication is that we can live a life that is so united with God that we are living entirely for God. How can we learn to think about everything we do as being part of a life that, even though it might see ordinary, is actually an extraordinary life lived entirely for God? What is your next step in this marvelous journey toward being fully united with Christ? 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 List Next

God loves us with an incomprehensibly immense love. But he doesn’t force us to accept it. People can choose to live in the darkness without him. Previous Next John List John 3:16-21 God loves us with an incomprehensibly immense love. But he doesn’t force us to accept it. People can choose to live in the darkness without him. Statue of Jesus Christ, in the chapel at the Jesuit residence at Georgetown University, Washington, DC. Photo by Tom Faletti, 13 Apr. 2024. Tom Faletti December 30, 2025 Read John 3:16 God so loved the world that he sent his only Son In Jesus’s time, Greek writing did not use quotation marks. Therefore, translators must make a judgment about whether verses 16-21 are quoting Jesus or are John’s commentary on what Jesus said in the previous verses. Modern Bibles are divided on the matter. In the following questions, I will refer to those words as coming from John (i.e., no quotation marks), because it sounds like what the early Christians might have said in interpreting what Jesus did for them. If Jesus spoke the words in John 3:16-21, his listeners would have had little understanding of what he was saying. However, if you think these are Jesus’s words, please substitute “Jesus” for “John” in the following questions. In your own words, what does verse 16 say? The word “love” appears more than 50 times in John’s Gospel. The first instance is here in verse 16. Why is love a particularly important part of the message of John 3:16? What does it mean to say that God “loved” the world? John sometimes uses the word “world” to mean people who reject Jesus, but here he means all of creation and all of the human beings God created. If God loves the whole world, how should that effect how we treat others? What does “believe in him” mean? What does “eternal life” mean to you? How is eternal life “eternal” both in the type of life it is and in how long it lasts? Which word or phrase in verse 16 is especially meaningful to you, and why? Many Christians use John 3:16 as a shorthand summary of the entire gospel or good news of Jesus. If you were going to summarize the gospel – the central message of your faith – in a sentence or two, how would you say it? If you are in a small group, write out your answers and then share them with each other. If meeting online, paste your answer in the chat. In what ways is this verse an encouragement to you? Read John 3:17-21 God did not send Jesus to condemn the world, but some choose to live in darkness What does verse 17 say? Many people have a highly developed concept of God as a God of judgment. How might verses 16-17 help balance our image of God? The Greek word that is translated as “condemned” can also mean “judged.” Verse 18, with its reference to being “already” condemned, could be misinterpreted to suggest that people don’t have a choice. That is not what John is saying. This verse must be interpreted in the light (pun intended) of verses 19-21, where John indicates that people choose to live in light or darkness. What does this tell us about people’s final judgement or ultimate status with God? People have a choice to believe or not. Some people embrace the light and live with Christ. But some people reject the light. They have judged or “condemned” themselves by their own choice to reject the light of Christ. In verses 18 and 19, John identifies two pieces of evidence that indicate that someone has chosen to walk in darkness: they do not believe (verse 18), and their work is evil (verse 19). What are some examples of evil acts you see in our world today that appear to come from the darkness? Now look at the other option. Based on verses 18-19, what is the evidence that indicates that a person is walking in the light? Verse 18 gives us the first piece of evidence that we are walking in the light: that you believe in Jesus. And believing is not just a matter of saying that you believe: for John, believing means that you are putting into action what you claim you believe. John gives us a second piece of evidence in verse 19: that your deeds are not evil. What do verses 18-19 tell you about yourself? In verse 20, what reason does John give for why people prefer to avoid the light? Do you think it is true that there are people who resist the light of Christ because they don’t want to give up the things they are doing that are inconsistent with being born from above? Explain. Although each of us may have made a clear decision at some point to be born from above and live in the light of Christ, we are not perfect. Are there ways that we might not want to give up things that don’t belong in the light? Are there ways that we try to hang out in the shadows, so that the aspects of ourselves that are not Christlike might not be noticed? How so? This passage draws a bright line. In John’s view, there are only two options: to choose to be in the light or to choose to be in the darkness. But sometimes we fail; sometimes we sin. John makes it clear in other places that Jesus forgives us when we sin. How can that promise of forgiveness encourage you to live more fully in the light of Christ? How does this passage challenge you in your faith, in your thought life, in your words, or in your actions? Take a step back and consider this: John’s language is so black and white (light vs. darkness) that many Christians wonder how God at the end of our lives, will deal with the fact that even when we have chosen to believe in him we still sin. The various Christian traditions have different answers to this question. Here are some examples: The Catholic Church teaches that when people die, they go through a final purification called “Purgatory” in order to achieve the holiness necessary to enter heaven (Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1030-1031 ). Protestant churches see it differently. For example, Calvin taught that every person is predestined by God for eternal life or eternal condemnation. He affirmed that those destined for heaven continue to sin in their earthly lives, but he argued that God purifies them immediately at death, with no purgatorial process. In some Protestant traditions, there is a belief that, for people who have committed their lives to Christ, God no longer sees their sins but only the saving work of Christ. St. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 that on the Day of Judgment, the work of each person will come to light. He speaks symbolically of our deeds being like gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, and says that our work will be tested by fire. For some people, he says, their work will be burned up and the person “will be saved, but only as through fire” (1 Cor. 3:15). This suggests that there is a process by which God purifies us when we die so that we can enter into eternal life with him purged of our sinfulness. God knows that believers will not be perfect, and he purifies them as he brings them into eternal life with him. Knowing that God loved the world so much that he sent his only Son to live and die for us, how do you think God deals with the fact that, because even believers sin, when we die we are not likely to be fully without sin? Bibliography See John - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/john/bibliography . Copyright © 2026, 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 John List Next

What is the small gesture or action you could take? Previous Christian Faith Articles Next Reconciliation Can Start with a Gesture What is the small gesture or action you could take? Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti February 24, 2024 It is sometimes hard to reconcile with someone who has hurt you, or whom you have hurt. We may think the gulf lying between us is too great. We know that the Bible tells us to forgive each other (Eph. 4:32; Matt. 5:23-24; Matt. 6:14-15; Col. 3:13). In Philippians 4:2, Paul asks the believers in Philippi to help two women leaders in the local church to be reconciled to each other. But how do we do it? It can be hard to know how to even take the first step. Sometimes, it all begins with a gesture of good will. The Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Church have been separated since the 16 th century. Many people of good will on both sides desired at least a thaw in relations, if not a formal reconciliation, but the rift seemed unbridgeable. After the Roman Catholic Church’s Second Vatican Council in the 1960s, the Catholic Church embraced a new openness to dialogue. On March 24, 1966, Pope Paul VI and the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Michael Ramsey, met in Rome in the basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls. At that meeting, they signed a declaration in which they agreed to pursue a serious dialogue with each other. Perhaps more significant than the declaration was a gesture that Pope Paul VI made during their meeting. Here is how Gerald O’Connell of America magazine describes it: Paul VI took the ring off his finger and placed it on Archbishop Ramsey’s finger. The archbishop burst into tears because he understood that the bishop of Rome was, in a symbolic rather than doctrinal way, recognizing his role as archbishop and inviting a deep relationship toward full visible unity. Ever since, the archbishops of Canterbury have worn that ring when they visit the pope. ( A short history of Catholic-Anglican relations—and the last roadblocks to unity ) Pope Paul VI offered Archbishop Ramsey a ring. And he made it personal by placing the ring on the Archbishop’s finger. This simple gesture did nothing to break through the doctrinal disagreements between the churches. But it did everything to start the dialogue. The lesson is clear for us. We don’t have to achieve a full reconciliation in one step. The question is, can we take a first step? In our normal lives, I can’t imagine a situation where offering a ring would be a helpful gesture. But each ruptured relationship is unique. For one, it might be a token or gesture, for another it might be a note or small act of kindness. But our God is the God of reconciliation, so we can trust him that something can break through the cold silence and start the thawing process. What is the small gesture or action you could take with someone you are estranged from, to start the process toward a possible reconciliation? 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 Christian Faith Articles Next

Jesus’s followers will face suffering before he returns. What do we need to know, and what do we need to be doing? Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 24:15-31 Jesus’s followers will face suffering before he returns. What do we need to know, and what do we need to be doing? Image by Pavlo Osipov, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti September 6, 2025 Matthew 24:15-28 A great period of tribulation and the Second Coming of Jesus In the previous passage, Jesus warned that the Temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed and described the beginnings of a time of trial that Christians would face. In this passage, he provides more detail. The reference in verse 15 to the “desolating sacrilege” (NRSV) or “desolating abomination” (NABRE) refers to portions of the prophetic book of Daniel (9:27; 11:31; and 12:11) that describe the event in history in which Antiochus Epiphanes, the king of Syria, profaned the Temple in Jerusalem by setting up a statue of Zeus Olympios in the Temple, in 167 BC. That action, described in 1 Maccabees 1:54, sparked the Jewish rebellion that temporarily overthrew their oppressors. (The abomination was removed in 1 Maccabees 6:7.) Matthew’s readers might also recall another incident, in A.D. 40, in which the Roman Emperor Caligula sought to erect a statue of himself in the Temple but was assassinated before he could carry out the deed. Matthew appears to be suggesting that the prophecy in Daniel was fulfilled (again) when the Romans desecrated and destroyed the Temple in AD 70. Jesus is using figurative and metaphorical language to describe events that had not happened yet when he spoke, but that had taken place by the time Matthew wrote: namely, that the Temple would be desecrated, that the Jewish nation would be destroyed, and that the Jewish people would be dispersed. The next passage, Matthew 24:29-36, looks further into the future to the time of the Second Coming of Jesus, but for Matthew 24:15-22, we need to stay focused on the events of AD 70. In verses 15-21, what does Jesus tell Christians to do when the desecration of the Temple is imminent? Here is what actually happened in the years after Jesus spoke. Jewish rebellions against the Roman Empire became frequent in the AD 60s. When the Romans decided that they had had enough, the emperor sent an army led by the general and future emperor Titus to end the uprisings once and for all. Christians mostly fled away from Judea (consistent with what Jesus said they should do). Huge numbers of Jews instead sought refuge in Jerusalem, thinking that the city, with its thick walls would protect them or that God would protect them because the Temple was there. When the Romans armies sieged the city in AD 70 and then burned and destroyed the city, hundreds of thousands of Jews perished. Josephus reported that more than a million people died and nearly 100,000 were enslaved. God mostly allowed these terrible events to take place without acting to stop them, but verse 22 suggests that God stepped in at one point. What did God do? Does God do this in our lives sometimes? While he allows Christians to face the same kinds of disasters, illnesses, etc. as other people suffer, does he sometimes shorten our times of suffering or lessen our suffering as he stands with us? As you ponder times when you have endured suffering and prayed fervently for God to ease it, Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 10:13 might be relevant: “No trial has come to you but what is human. God is faithful and will not let you be tried beyond your strength; but with the trial he will also provide a way out, so that you may be able to bear it” (NABRE). In verses 23-26, Jesus is shifting the focus to his Second Coming. That shift in focus become clear in verses 27-30. He already warned Christians in verse 4 not to be duped, and he warns them again. What specific danger does he warn them about this time? He warns them not to believe it when people claim that the Messiah has popped up in some obscure place here or there. In verses 27-28, he tells them why they should not try to find some obscure appearance of the Messiah. When Jesus comes at his Second Coming, will it be vague, or will it be obvious? What is the point of using a lightning bolt as a metaphor for his coming? Jesus is not saying that there will be a literal bolt of lightning announcing his return. He is using an analogy to say that his Second Coming will be obvious as a bolt of lightning. You won’t be able to miss it any more than you can miss a bolt of lightning that flashes all the way from one end of the sky to the other. Jesus uses a different metaphor in verse 28, and this metaphor often puzzles people. The Greek word that is often translated as “corpse” can also be translated as “carcass,” and the image would be clearer to us if we used that word: Where the carcass is, the vultures gather . Jesus is reinforcing the point in verse 27 about paying attention to clear signs. When vultures circle in the sky, you know there is a carcass nearby – it is a clear sign. In the same way, it will be clear when the Son of Man comes. Some translations use the word “eagle’ in place of the word “vulture,” which leads to additional layers of meaning. The Romans used the eagle as a symbol of the Roman Empire. When the Romans (eagles) gather around Jerusalem (the eventual carcass), you will know that the time of the city’s end is near ( Ignatius Catholic Study Bible , fn. to 24:28, p. 51). Jesus has been using the term “Son of Man” for himself throughout this Gospel, but in verse 27 he uses it in a way that connects it to ideas about the “end times,” when God will decisively intervene in human history. Jesus draws the term “Son of Man” from the Old Testament prophet Daniel. In Daniel 7:13, Daniel has a vision of a “son of man” who would come on the clouds of heaven and be given everlasting dominion. In verses 27-28, Jesus refers to the “coming of the Son of Man,” so now he is talking about the Second Coming. What do verses 27-28 tell us about efforts to study obscure signs and vague timelines in order to figure out when Jesus is coming? Do we need to do that, or will the signs be clear when his return is near? In verse 27, Jesus refers to the “coming” of the Son of Man. The Greek word is parousia (usually pronounced pah-roo-SEE-uh), which means “coming” or “arrival.” Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses this word, and he uses it only in verses 1, 27, 37, and 39 of this chapter. Paul also uses this word in reference to Jesus’s Second Coming in 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians, and James and 1 John also use it in the same way. In this study, I have been using the term “Second Coming” of Jesus for the parousia of the Son of Man. Why is the “coming of the Son of Man” important? Note: Some scholars argue that the main subject of this chapter is the destruction of the Temple, and almost none of it is about the Second Coming. At the other extreme, some scholars claim that this chapter as primarily about the Second Coming, not about the destruction of Jerusalem. Furthermore, people in this second group reject the idea that the language is primarily metaphorical and argue that it should be read as a literal description of what will happen (reading it even more literally than they probably read many other verses of Scripture). The more balanced approach we are taking here, in keeping with Jesus’s other figurative language, is consistent with the broad mainstream of scholars, including both Catholic scholars such as Harrington (pp. 94-97) and scholars with deep evangelical roots such as H. L. Ellison (1146-1147). In this approach, Matthew 24:4-14 stands as warning to Christians of all time periods, Matthew 24:15-22 is about the destruction of the Temple, and then Jesus makes a shift toward the Second Coming that becomes clear in verses 27-41. Matthew 24:29-31 The Son of Man (Jesus) will come in glory Jesus has just told his disciples that when (referring to himself) the Son of Man comes, it will be obvious. Now he describes what it will look like. What does Jesus say will happen when the Son of Man appears? As with most prophetic language and Jesus’s earlier words in this chapter, we should understand that this is metaphorical language. It could happen literally as described – God is capable of anything – but will the sun literally be darkened or is this metaphorical language describing how it will feel to those who experience it? There is no way we can know, but much of Jesus’s language has been metaphorical. Recall that in verse 3, the disciples asked Jesus what will be the “sign” of his coming and the end of the age. Now, in verse 30, he identifies the “sign,” but the sign is none other than himself. What does Jesus say about the “sign”? He says that “the sign of the Son of Man will appear” (NRSV and NABRE) and they will see the Son of Man coming – in other words: the Son of Man himself will be the sign. His coming will be the sign of his coming. This is consistent with his repeated warning not to be led astray by other “signs.” In verse 30, Jesus says that the Son of Man is the sign. In other words, if someone asks you what will be the sign that the Jesus has come back, the answer is: His coming will tell you, and you’ll know it when it happens. This statement should discourage us from empty speculation about the “signs” of his coming. He is saying clearly here that you will know. What does this tell you about how much effort you should put into trying to figure out the “signs” of the Second Coming? Most of the evocative language Jesus uses in this passage is language that appears in similar forms in the Old Testament in passages often described as being about “the Day of the Lord.” Jesus uses phrases that appear in Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Joel, Amos, Haggai, and Zechariah. The things Jesus says here are best interpreted as more symbolic than literal, like the metaphors he has used in his parables and in his descriptions of the kingdom of heaven. It is unlikely that purely naturalistic language about the sun, moon, stars, and clouds can adequately describe the supra-natural event of eternity breaking decisively into time, and Jesus clearly doesn’t want us to waste time trying to figure out what are the signs when we should be focused on what he talks about in the rest of this chapter: whether we are will be ready . Every generation has had people who think their time is the time when Jesus is returning. For 80 generations now, they have been wrong. One might wonder if some people have wasted an inordinate amount of time looking for signs that weren’t there rather than giving their time to fulfilling Jesus’s clear commands in the Gospel of Matthew. What does Jesus say the Son of Man will do when he comes? Who do you think his “elect” are (verse 31)? Considering the things Jesus has told his people to do through this Gospel, what do you think a person must do to be counted among the “elect”? See Faith Versus Works: What Does the Gospel of Matthew Say for a discussion of what Jesus expects of those who wish to be counted among the “elect.” Given that Jesus is speaking in figurative or metaphorical language rather than giving us a script for the Second Coming, what do you think are the key points he wants us to take from this passage that can be useful in our lives? Among the key points he is making are these (and there are probably more): 1. He is coming back, so be ready for it. 2. It will be obvious when he comes back. 3. He has all power and holds the future of the world in his hands, so we can take courage when life is hard. Take a step back and consider this: It has been 2,000 years since Jesus told us that he will return, and it could be hundreds or thousands of years more before he actually does return. However, we all will face our own encounter with the Son of Man at our death, and that will be a moment as clear and decisive as Jesus says his Second Coming will be. What do you think you need to be doing to be ready for his coming, whether it is at the end of the world or at the end of your 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 List Next

Living parables: Incidents in Jesus’s ministry that tell a bigger story, including the feeding of the 5,000. [Matthew 13:54-58; 14:1-12; 14:13-21] Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 13:54-14:21 Living parables: Incidents in Jesus’s ministry that tell a bigger story, including the feeding of the 5,000. The feeding of the multitude. Hagia Sophia, Trabzon, Türkiye. Late 13th century fresco. Photo by Dosseman (Dick Osseman), 6 Sept. 2018, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trabzon_Hagia_Sophia_Feeding_of_the_thousands_93_080.jpg . Tom Faletti June 6, 2025 In chapter 13, Matthew gathered together a broad group of Jesus’s parables. Now, from Matthew 13:54 through chapter 14, Matthew gathers together some of Jesus’s actions that might be thought of as living parables : stories that reveal something bigger than just what happens in the story. Matthew 13:54-58 Rejection in his hometown of Nazareth What does verse 54 tell us that Jesus does? How do the people react? At root, what is the reason Jesus is not accepted in Nazareth? What is beneath their doubt? Is it jealousy? Insistence on upholding the accepted social hierarchy? Something else? Do you think the proverb quoted in verse 57 is true most of the time, or only occasionally? Explain. Verse 58 says Jesus did not do many miracles there. Why? Read Mark 6:5-6 , which provides a bit more detail. Why do you think that some people who were sick were able to be healed by Jesus? Matthew 13:58 says that Jesus did not do many miracles there, but Mark 6:5 says that Jesus was not able to do many miracles. Most scholars believe Mark’s Gospel was written first, and that Matthew drew from Mark. There are a variety of places where it appears that Matthew made edits to Mark’s words as he incorporated them into his Gospel. In this case, perhaps he did not want to imply that Jesus could be limited. Do you think the reason so few miracles were done was because Jesus did not want to heal people who didn’t believe in him, or because their lack of faith did not provide the right conditions for him to act? Explain. How might we be preventing God from acting mightily in our lives due to our lack of faith? How is this reaction of the people of Nazareth a living example of the parable of the sower and the soils? If we take this story as a living parable illustrating a bigger point for the early church and for us, what might that point be? Matthew 14:1-12 The death of John the Baptist Herod the tetrarch was a son of Herod the Great (the one who tried to have Jesus killed as a baby) and inherited one fourth of Herod’s territory – including Galilee. What happened to John the Baptist? Why had John criticized Herod? Why was John the Baptist killed? According to Jewish historian Josephus, Herod had John killed because he was afraid that John had become so popular that he could start a rebellion (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , pp. 103-104). Is that plausible? From Herod’s perspective, why was John killed? From Herodias’s perspective, why was John killed? From Salome’s perspective, why was John killed? From the perspective of the early Christians, why was John killed? From Herod’s perspective, the matter is political and personal, and eventually touches on his ego and his social standing. From Herodias’s perspective, the matter is personal and also touches on her legitimacy as Herod’s wife, so it is vindication. From Salome’s perspective, it is something she can do for her mother, and also possibly for power. For the early church, John’s death is a passing of the torch and is also a foreshadowing. John was committed to speaking the truth and died honorably for it. Herod was committed to upholding a foolish vow even though it meant an innocent man would die. Staying true to your word doesn’t make you honorable if it means doing something wrong. How do you know when you should stick with a commitment? Should you ever let a commitment go unfulfilled? If we follow Jesus’s command to not swear by anything (Matt. 5:34-37), we will never be in a position where we have to choose between going back on an oath or doing something evil. Some people think Herod was experiencing guilt for what he had done, and that is why he imagined that Jesus might be John, raised back to life. John the Baptist was Jesus’s cousin. They probably had times together when they were growing up. How might Jesus have reacted to John’s execution? According to John 1:35-42, some of the disciples started out as followers of John. How might they have reacted to John’s death? If this story is a living parable illustrating a bigger point for the early church and for us, what might that point be? Matthew 14:13-21 Jesus feeds 5,000 We use the shorthand phrase that Jesus fed 5,000 people, but verse 21 tells us that it was 5,000 men, plus the woman and children who accompanied them; so it was actually far more than 5,000 people. Why do you think Jesus withdrew to a deserted place? How do you think he felt when the people found him so quickly? When Jesus saw the crowd, he had “compassion” for them. What does this say to you? What happens in this story? What does this story tell us about Jesus? What does this story tell us about the crowds of people? They were focused on wanting to be with Jesus, so focused that they chased after him and didn’t pack their bags first. They may not have always been thinking clearly, but they were orderly and open to God. What does it tell us about the disciples? They were caring and practical, even though they didn’t have a miracle in mind. They didn’t know Jesus would care so much. They were instruments of God’s miraculous work. Put yourself in this story. Where would you have been, and what would you have been thinking about what happened? What do you think God wants us to learn from the fact that there were so many leftovers? What do you think God wants us to learn from the fact that so many people were fed? What does this overall story say to you? Why do you think God doesn’t multiply food all the time? Hundreds of millions of people go hungry every day. Nine million people die from hunger every year, including 3 million children. Why do you think God doesn’t feed them all, as Jesus fed everyone here? Note that although God doesn’t fix everything for us, he always welcomes what we bring to him and seeks to transform it to do more – when they said they had 5 loaves and 2 fish, Jesus said, “Bring them here to me” (Matt. 14:18). This story is so central to story of Jesus that it is the only miracle (other than the Resurrection) that is told in all 4 gospels. Christians of all stripes see this story as far more than just a story about a good thing happening to 5,000+ people. It illustrates much bigger points about God and our relationship with God. If this story is a living parable illustrating a bigger point for the early church and for us, what might that point be? From this story, people often draw lessons about the power of God, God’s provision for us, God’s love for us, how much can be done when we take what little have and hand it over to God to what he wants with it, etc. There are some bigger points here as well: First, this story is an anticipation of the Eucharist (Communion), through which God feeds us spiritually today. The language in Matthew 14:19, where Jesus “looked up to heaven” (perhaps in prayer), “blessed and broke the loaves,” and “gave them to the disciples,” is very similar to the actions he took at the Last Supper when he instituted the Eucharist/Holy Communion (Matthew 26:26). What connections would you make between this miracle and the Eucharist/Holy Communion? Second, it can be interpreted as a foreshadowing of the eternal banquet which we will enjoy with God forever in heaven (see Matt. 8:11; Rev. 19:9). What connections would you make between this miracle and the heavenly banquet God is preparing for us? Take a step back and consider this: The Bible shows that God loves situations where lots of people are fed: We see this in the scenes where Jesus feeds thousands of people (Matt. 15:29-39 as well as Matt. 14:13-21). We see it in Jesus’s imagery of heaven as a place where feasting is the norm (Matt. 8:11; Matt. 26:29; Luke 22:29-30; Matt. 22:1-14). We see it in John’s vision of heaven (Rev. 19:9). We see it in the Old Testament, in God’s provision for the Israelites in the dessert (Ex. 16), in the celebration of the Passover feast (Ex. 12:1-28; Num. 9:1-14; Deut. 16:1-8), and in prophecies of the future (Isaiah 25:6). Clearly, God loves feasts and wants us to associate good eating with him. How can you make every meal a reminder of God’s love and a celebration of God’s provision for us? 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 List Next

When you welcome children as God does, you never know the impact you might have. Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 19:13-15 When you welcome children as God does, you never know the impact you might have. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Matthew 19:13-15 Welcoming children Who do you think was bringing children to Jesus, and why? Why do you think the disciples were trying to keep them from Jesus? Some commentators argue that this is not about playing up how wonderful children are. A footnote in the New Oxford Annotated Bible says that this is: “Not an idealization of childhood” ( The New Oxford Annotated Bible , footnote to Mark 10:1-16, p. 1810). This may be about status, not about how cute or sweet or innocent children are. Children had the lowest status in Jewish society. The disciples were trying to maintain “control” so that Jesus could focus on more important things than children; but Jesus disagrees. What is Jesus’s view of those who have no status? No one is unimportant to Jesus. What is important to Jesus? What does this passage tell us about how things look or feel in the kingdom of heaven? How should this affect how we go about our lives? Take a step back and consider this: If parents are modeling the love that Jesus has for children, it will have lifelong effects on their children. The effects may sometimes be hidden at the time, but later, that love may manifest itself in powerful ways. In the movie Belfast (directed by Kenneth Branagh, TKBC and Northern Ireland Screen, 2021), the deeply loving relationship between 10-year-old Buddy’s grandparents has generation-crossing effects on their children and grandchildren. When Buddy’s father teaches Buddy to be welcoming to people of all faiths, we understand that he learned it from his parents. And now he is shaping his child (who became the actor Kenneth Branagh we know), who has shaped the thinking of millions of people through his movies. Our faithful love, reflecting the love of God in our marriages and family relationships, and the ways we pass on that love to our children, matters deeply. By our love, we shape how well our world reflects its Creator. So let us not lose sight of how important our treatment of children is. We have an awesome calling to show children the love of God and let them experience what it means to be part of the love in God’s kingdom. When we love them, we may be setting in motion good things that may bear fruit years later. How can we use well the awesome opportunity to love the children in our families and help them experience the welcoming and love of Jesus? 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 List Next

Blessed are those who are focused on what God cares about. Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 5:6-12 Blessed are those who are focused on what God cares about. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti April 20, 2024 Matthew 5:6-12 – For context, re-read Matthew 5:1-12 : The “Sermon on the Mount” In our last study , we looked at the first 3 beatitudes that appear in what has been called Matthew’s “Sermon on the Mount.” Today we will look at the remaining beatitudes. Having read the entire list of beatitudes, what do you think is the overall message Jesus is trying to communicate in this discussion about what makes a person “blessed”? Verse 6 What does it mean, to “hunger and thirst for righteousness”? In general, how is hungering or thirsting for something different than simply wanting it? Barclay says that in the Greek language, the ordinary grammatical structure for the words hunger and thirst connote a desire for some – I hunger for some bread, not the whole loaf; I thirst for some water, not the whole pitcher. But in this sentence spoken by Jesus, the grammatical construction connotes a desire for all of it, for the whole thing – in this case, for total righteousness, for being wholly righteousness (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 96). Do we truly hunger and thirst for righteousness? Or do we tend to just want some righteousness? What can we do to become more like the person Jesus pictures who hungers for total righteousness? There is a promise associated with this hungering. What does it mean when he says that they will be “filled” (5:6 NRSV) or “satisfied” (NABRE)? How can we become filled to the point that we are no longer hungry for righteousness? What does that mean? Luke’s 6:21 says, “Blessed are you who are now hungry, / for you will be satisfied” (NABRE) or “filled” (NRSV). That is a literal hunger. Why would Matthew focus on a spiritual interpretation rather than Luke’s literal experience of hunger? What value is there in Matthew’s version of this beatitude? It is very possible that Jesus said it both ways at different times. What does Matthew’s choice of words suggest about his audience, compared to Luke and his audience? Verse 7 What does it mean to be merciful? How does it feel to receive mercy? What is that experience like? How can I become more merciful? Among many possible answers, consider these: Cut others some slack. Try to walk in their shoes. Does this remind you of any other Bible passages? For example, the Lord’s Prayer; the forgiven servant (who didn’t forgive). What kind of mercy do you particularly hope you will receive, or in what kinds of situations do you most hope you will encounter mercy? Are those situations perhaps the situations where you also need to give mercy? Verse 8 What does it mean to be “pure in heart” (NRSV) or “clean of heart” (NABRE)? Pure has many good connotations. We often focus on purity in our conduct or behavior. There is also the idea of having a pure heart in the way we relate with others. What does that kind of pure heart look like? Purity of heart also can be considered in our relationship with ourselves, in an honesty with ourselves. What does that look like? Among many possible answers, consider these: Being free of mixed motives; not manipulative; doing the right thing regardless of your feelings; without a personal agenda, but rather, having God’s agenda as your only agenda (because then you will be connected to him in an intimate way; you will “see” him). What does the promise mean, that they will “see God”? Do you think this opportunity to “see God” is all in the future, or is there a sense in which the pure in heart experience it partially in their present life? Why is purity necessary in order to see God? In what sense do the pure in heart see God in a way that other, less pure Christians might not? What can I do to become more pure or clean of heart? Verse 9 What is “peace”? “Peace” in Greek is eiréné , but the Jews would have had in mind the Hebrew word shalom , which does not mean the absence of strife but the presence of all that is good (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 103) or a “total well-being” ((Benedict T. Viviano, O.P., “The Gospel According to Matthew,” The New Jerome Biblical Commentary , par. 24, p. 640). What is a “peacemaker”? What do you have to do to be a peacemaker? Is it possible to be so focused on keeping the peace that you fail to address problems that then grow and break the peace? Is peacemaking sometimes a struggle? If so, how can we stay focused on peace making , and not just avoiding strife? Barclay tells us that the Jewish rabbis said that peacemakers are the people who “establish right relationships between man and man” (William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 105) – i.e., who bring people together and resolve conflicts. He contrasts “peace-makers” with “trouble-makers.” In what ways are you a peacemaker? How does a person make peace between people? Are there ways that you would like to be more consistent or effective as a peacemaker? Explain. How can we become better peacemakers? What promise comes to the peacemakers, and what does it mean? They will be called children of God when all is said and done – not necessarily in the heat of the peacemaking struggle. The phrase is literally “sons of God.” They are like God or reflect the lineage of God because they are doing the work of God. In what ways is God a peacemaker, so that being a peacemaker is being like God? Verses 10-12 What kind of persecution is rewarded with this blessing – i.e., according to v. 10, for what are they being persecuted? What do you know of the sufferings of the early martyrs? What persecutions did they suffer, and why? They were executed in many gruesome ways, mainly for not offering the required sacrifice to Caesar. They could not acknowledge Caesar as Lord because for them, only Jesus was Lord. Jesus elaborates on this beatitude in vv. 11-12, shifting from talking about “they” to talking to “you.” In v. 11, when are “you” blessed? Why are you blessed when you are persecuted? Notice that Jesus does not name a promise in this beatitude the way he did in the other beatitudes. The promise is implicit – that you will be counted with the prophets. Why is that a high reward? What do you think are the benefits or rewards that come with being persecuted? Some of the rewards include: the chance to live with God forever, to be counted among the prophets, to know that you were able to stay faithful to the God you love, and to know that you were participating in God’s great work on earth. Translations that use the word “glad” are understating the level of joy Jesus is suggesting here. The Greek word means to exult – nearly the same word Mary uses in her Magnificat when she says, “my soul rejoices .” It comes from two words that mean “much” and “leaping” – i.e. to leap for joy (see, for example, William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 112, and “21. agalliaó,” Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance , Bible Hub , https://biblehub.com/greek/21.htm ). What would it take for you to see persecution as a cause for rejoicing? How, if at all, are we persecuted in our time? What can we take from this exploration of the blessings of being persecuted? Looking back at the whole expanse of the beatitudes, what key points do you see? What stands out to you as especially important? What is most important to remember? What beatitude is God calling you to live out more fully? What can you do to become more a beatitude person? Take a step back and consider this: The beatitudes are just the beginning of the story Matthew and Jesus are telling us about kingdom of heaven and what the life of a Christian looks like. What attracts you about a Savior who starts with the Beatitudes as an introduction to life with God? What troubles you about this as his starting point? What do you think Jesus would say to you about what attracts you and what concerns you here? 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 List Next

Responding to difficult questions and dealing with politics. Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 21:23-27 Responding to difficult questions and dealing with politics. Image by Buddha Elemental 3D, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti August 5, 2025 Matthew 21:23-27 The chief priests and elders challenge Jesus’s authority The locus of opposition to Jesus has been shifting from the Pharisees and scribes to the chief priests and scribes and now to the chief priests and elders. The Pharisees were members of might be thought of as a religious society that was mostly trying to live a devoted life to God. The scribes were the lawyers (or theologians of our day) who knew the details of God’s Law and the Scriptures and might be aligned with the Pharisees or the chief priests. But the elders, which included many of the chief priests, were the power brokers of Jerusalem. The chief priests and elders, together, were a potent force: The chief priests ran the Temple, and the elders made the political decisions that affected the whole city of Jerusalem. Recall that Jesus has entered the city in a very disruptive way, kicked people out of the Temple precincts, healed people in the Temple precincts, and now was back, teaching the people right there on the Temple grounds. What do the chief priests and elders ask Jesus? Why do you think they ask him this question? Not everyone who claims to be from God actually is. Is it reasonable to ask where a person’s authority comes from when they are shaking things up? How can we judge whether someone who is shaking things up is coming from God or not? Notice that Jesus does not answer their question. Is there a lesson for us in choosing when to defend ourselves and when to let a challenge pass without an answer? If Jesus had chosen to answer the question, what would his answer have been? Jesus chooses to counter with a question, to either establish their sincerity or spotlight their spiritual bankruptcy. What question does Jesus ask them (verse 25)? Why is this a hard question for them to answer? What would be the right answer to Jesus’s question? Notice that the right answer to Jesus’s question is also the right answer to the question the leaders asked Jesus: John and Jesus were both operating based on authority given to them by God. How does their inability (or unwillingness) to answer Jesus’s question expose how badly they are out of touch with what the people can see that God is doing? What can we learn from this story for ourselves? My Bible Study group saw many things they could learn from this story. For example: Ask questions. Don’t feel the need to defend yourself or answer every question from others. Jesus often doesn’t dictate answers to people; he lets them reach their own conclusions – perhaps we should too. Instead of getting caught up in verbal battles with others, pay attention to what God is doing. Why does Jesus allow people to think things that are wrong rather than trying to prove to them what is right? Jesus is building hearts and minds, not robotic teleprompters or answering machines. He wants to develop people who can think like God thinks and act like Jesus would. If he forces us to think a certain way, we can never develop hearts and minds that follow him by our own free will. Jesus’s approach to other people, even those who oppose him, always honors the importance of free will. How can we use our free will well? God always hopes that we will use the free will he has given to us to respond to what he has revealed give our lives freely in service to him and others. Take a step back and consider this: Some people would see the chief priests and elders as master politicians: They are very aware of the ways that the people don’t agree with them, and very savvy about how to manage that problem so that they don’t get on the bad side of the people. However, in the process, they have lost a bit of themselves and their integrity. They are playing for power, rather than for working for truth, or justice, or goodness. If they were working for truth, they would make their case and try to show the people why they are wrong. That might appear difficult with so much evidence on the other side; but if they genuinely believed they were right then they would be willing to stand up for their beliefs and make their best case, whether others agreed or not. But that is if they were working for truth, not playing for power. If they were working for justice, or goodness, or any other good motive, they similarly would make the case for what they believe in. Only the coward or the person playing politics would back down when asked a question and not even try to offer an answer. Politics is not inherently bad. Some people are called to the difficult work of trying to manage disagreements in a society or community and find solutions or approaches that address a wide range of concerns and hold the community together even though many people can’t have all they want. But that is when they are doing the hard work of politics, not playing politics for their own benefit. How can a politician do the hard work of politics and still act like a Christian? In a democracy, Christians are called to get involved in politics, at least to the extent of voting and perhaps in other ways, in order to exercise their responsibilities as citizens to promote the good of all. Beyond that, almost everyone is involved in politics in other ways – the politics of the office, the give-and-take and negotiating that goes on in families, and even the managing of different groupings in a church. We are called to be like Jesus in all situations, even in those places. How can we do the work of politics well in our everyday lives? 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 List Next

To follow Jesus, we need to make some choices. Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 8:18-34 To follow Jesus, we need to make some choices. Rembrandt (1606-1669). Christ in the Storm on the Sea of Galilee . 1633. Detail. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rembrandt_Christ_in_the_Storm_on_the_Lake_of_Galilee.jpg . The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, MA, https://www.gardnermuseum.org/experience/collection/10953 , stolen in 1990. Tom Faletti July 31, 2024 Matthew 8:18-22 Jesus cautions people who claim they want to follow him There are two stories here. The first story involves a scribe. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus undermined the common understanding of many Old Testament passages by his novel interpretation of the Scriptures. Yet now a scribe, a scholar trained in analyzing the Law, comes to him and says he will follow Jesus. Why is it significant that a scribe expresses interest in following Jesus? Jesus’s response if rather cryptic. What is the meaning of his reply to the scribe (verse 20)? What is Matthew hoping we will take from this story about the scribe? In verse 21, another man approaches Jesus. This man is a “disciple” – in other words, someone who has already been following Jesus around. What does he say? Scholars suggest that when he says, “Let me go and bury my father,” he probably doesn’t mean that his father just died. Rather, he is saying: I will follow you after my father dies. This might be meant literally, but it also might be meant figuratively: When I am no longer under his authority, or when I no longer have any obligations to him, or when I won’t have to deal with his disapproval of my following you. In any of these cases, it might be years before this “disciple” could actually envision following Jesus with his whole self. When or how do we sometimes put off following Jesus, or put off getting more serious in our commitment to him? What is the meaning of Jesus’s reply? Some scholars think that “let the dead” means let those who are unresponsive to the new life Jesus is proclaiming. If so, what is Jesus saying? Sometimes people are unresponsive to new ideas because they don’t want to question what they already believe – they’re too embedded in their comfortable mental ruts. My high school drama teacher Tom Beagle, the teacher who had the greatest impact on my life, was fond of saying, “People who stop thinking are as good as dead. They haven’t lain down yet, but they sure do stink up the place.” What is Jesus implying in calling some people “dead”? The key to this passage may be the word "first" in verse 21, which involves the issue of priorities. Matthew is trying to make a point about discipleship – about being a follower of Jesus. What is he trying to tell us? How important is it to be a 100%, all-in follower of Jesus? What do these two interactions with Jesus say to you about your own level of discipleship? Do these passages make you more or less eager to be a follower of Jesus? Explain. In the next set of 3 miracles, Jesus expands beyond the narrow realm of physical healing. Matthew 8:23-27 Jesus rebukes the storm There are anecdotal stories of sudden, fierce storms on Lake Kinneret, the modern name for the Sea of Galilee. The lake is nearly 700 feet below sea level, in a valley surrounded by rugged and arid terrain, and it is affected by Mediterranean sea breezes as well as the temperature dynamics in the valley. What is the disciples’ reaction to the storm in verse 25? What is Jesus’s response in verse 26? What does his rebuke say to them and to us? Note that Jesus doesn't say they have "no" faith – just "little" faith. How might this be an encouragement to us? What does Jesus do? What is the meaning behind the question the disciples ask in verse 27? What are they really wondering? In Jesus’s time, how might this kind of miracle – calming a storm – have been considered a sign of even greater power than physical healings? What does this miracle tell us about Jesus? People often see this incident as metaphor for how we deal with the storms of life. What does it say to you personally as a metaphor for life? Matthew 8:28-34 Jesus, men, demons, and pigs There is uncertainty about the location of this event, because Mark 5:1 says it is in the land of the Gerasenes, whereas Matthew says Gadarenes. Gerasa was 35 miles from the Sea of Galilee. Gadara is a more likely location. It was a predominantly Gentile town (one of the 10 cities of the Decapolis) just 6 miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee ( Ignatius Catholic Study Bible , Matthew 8:28 fn., p. 21) . However, the early church father Origen believed it happened in Gergesa, a town that was directly on the shore (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 326), and that name appears in some of the later manuscripts ( New American Bible, revised edition , Matt. 8:28 fn. ) and ended up in the King James version of the Bible. It was common for Jews in Jesus’s time to think that demons were everywhere and were behind every bad thing that happened. This incident happens in a town that had many Gentiles. We know this because Jews would not have had a herd of pigs, since it was forbidden to eat pork – even dealing with live pigs was considered unclean. This is the second miracle (the first involved the centurion) where Matthew shows that Jesus is for all people – Gentiles as well as Jews. How do you think the people in this town felt about the two demon-possessed men, as they approached Jesus? What do they shout at him in verse 29, and what does it mean? In Jesus’s time, many Jews expected that the Messiah, when he came, would vanquish demons as well as earthly powers. The demons are implicitly recognizing Jesus as the Messiah and suggesting that he is acting before his appointed time. What do the demons ask of Jesus? Why do you think Jesus agreed to do this? People sometimes object to the possibility that Jesus might have caused the death of these innocent pigs. Those of us who eat pork and do not have a religious objection to pigs might be more sympathetic to the pigs than a Jewish audience would have been. Barclay has an interesting response. In Jesus’s time, many people believed that legions of demons were all around them everywhere they went in their daily lives. Jesus might have realized that it would be hard for the two men to believe that they had been freed from their demonic tormentors without some visible sign. The stampeding of the pigs served as physical evidence that the demons were no longer in the men. And since it was believed that demons are killed by water, it would be clear that these demons are now dead and could no longer torment them or anyone else. In this view, a herd of swine is not too high a price to pay to save two men ((Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , pp. 329-330). How do you think that Jews observing this would have felt about what happened? Why would Jesus’s power over demons have been seen as a greater power than even power over the storm? What does Matthew want his readers to understand about Jesus? The swineherds run off and tell the whole town what happened, and the people come out to Jesus. But whereas the people who heard about Jesus from the woman at the well in the Gospel of John came out to learn from him and ultimately believed in him, the people of this town had a different reaction. How do the people of the town react? What do the ask Jesus to do? Why do you think that is their reaction? They probably were concerned about the economic impact of the loss of the swine. They may also have had other fears. Isn’t it sad that the people of this town, when given an opportunity to spend time with the Messiah, ask him to leave? Compare this tragedy to the loss of the swine. Are there ways in which we ask Jesus to stay at a distance from us because of fear that he might ask us to do things that would affect our pocketbooks or finances? How might it be true that we don’t even see the choices we are making, small and large, that keep Jesus from being an integral part of our lives? If you were God, how would you respond to the fact that some people don’t want quite such a powerful, active, and personal God? Take a step back and consider this: Previously, Jesus healed people, showing his power over illness and therefore, in a sense, his power of the human body. In these two miracles – the calming of the storm and the freeing of the demon-possessed men – we see Jesus revealing his power over nature and over the demons in the unseen spiritual world around us. This is monumental power he is showing. And since how power comes from his Father in heaven, he is showing that he has been given authority over all of creation – both visible and invisible, seen and unseen. Most Christians do not see God working in such dramatic, physical ways. But to tell the truth, most Christians would be uncomfortable if God did act in such dramatic, physical ways. Is it possible that we don’t often see God working in dramatic ways because, deep down inside, we’re not sure we want to be quite so close to such a powerful, active, personal God? What might hold us back? Are there ways in which you might be afraid of the uncertainty of living with a God who acts so powerfully? Are there ways in which you might be afraid that you might have to give up too much of what you own, if you give your life totally to this kind of God? Are there ways in which you might be afraid of the level of discipleship and commitment this powerful and active God might want of you? How would Jesus respond to your concerns? As he got in the boat and left that town, he probably did so reluctantly, with deep sadness in his heart. He would have wanted to stay, and teach them, and share with them the love of his Father. He wants to be with us and teach us, and love us, and work through us. What is Jesus saying to you as you consider this story? 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 List Next