Search Results

Actually, you have many purposes! Previous Next You Have a Purpose Actually, you have many purposes! Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti You have a purpose! In fact, you have multiple purposes in many different dimensions of your life. You are part of God’s great plan for the human race, a plan that depends on your active cooperation and creativity. You are made in God’s image, and God is working to reveal that image in you and through you. God is also working in every person around you. Your mission, your calling if you accept it, is to shine forth the image of God fully, in your unique way, and to help others do the same in their unique ways, so that the world may become what God has always intended it to be. You are not an accident. God designed the universe so that it had the capability to produce a person with your unique abilities and interests. He did this with a goal: so that you could freely choose to take on the character of God and let it shine forth in your own unique way. Because of your unique nature and experiences, you have the opportunity to reflect the image of God in your own distinct and special ways. This is one of the many beautiful things about God‘s creation: that each person has the potential to show forth the very image of God in their own unique ways. You are not alone in this potential. It is inherent in every human being. We all are made with a purpose and a unique role to play in bringing the image of God to life in this world. In order to reflect God‘s image accurately, we need to know what God is like. Fortunately, God did not leave us groping in the dark for an understanding of His nature and character. He sent his son Jesus to show us who He is. Jesus became one of us to show us how to live — how to be like Him in our own unique ways. Jesus talked about the kingdom of God — the place where what God desires for humans actually happens. He said the kingdom of God is “near” or “at hand” (Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9). He wants us to embrace God‘s ways and infuse them into every aspect of our natural lives. When we take on the character of God and allow it to transform our lives, we change the world around us so that it is a little bit more like what God intended, so that a little more of the kingdom of God is present. This means that for each and every one of us there is an ever-present invitation from God, telling us all the time: You Can Change Your World! I’m not saying you’re going to change the entire world in one grand act. But every day, multiple times every day, we have opportunities to change our little part of the world. At every moment, we can make our part of the world reflect more fully God’s vision for the world, or we can let it reflect something else. We can choose to show forth the image of God — what He intends us to be, what He has designed us to be — or we can miss the opportunity. The choice is ours. The invitation is always fresh. This is the unseen truth about our lives: that the God who created the universe is standing with each of us at all times, always ready to enable us to bring a little bit more of Himself into every situation. And every time we say yes to God and do the things that reflect who God is, we transform another part of the world and become a bit more like Him. God does not force us to accept this invitation. The choice is always ours: Right now, at this very moment, will I be like Jesus, and change a little bit of this world to be more like what God intended it to be, or will I go my own way? That is always a choice. But God’s desire is even greater than that. He is not interested only in transforming us as individuals and transforming our little parts of the world. He wants to change the entire way that human society operates. He wants to transform all of human life so that it reflects His nature. No single person can do that. Fortunately, we are not alone. God calls us to work together to redeem the culture, change social structures where needed, and transform the world. Guided by God’s clear teaching in the Bible, working in and through the community known as the church as well as with other people of good will, we can work to transform the social structures of our society to make them reflect more of the nature and character of God. This, too, is part of our calling, because this, too, is part of God’s desired plan. What an adventure God is offering us! No day need be dull when we accept the invitation He is offering us. In this book, we will explore who God is, what He is trying to do in this world, and how we can cooperate in the transformation He is trying to achieve in us and, through us, in the world. In the course of our explorations, we will have to confront some difficult questions, the foremost of which is: If God is all-loving, why does He allow so much suffering in the world? To answer that question, we will have to put on the mind of Christ in order to understand more fully what God’s purposes are for human beings, individually and as a whole. A second difficult question we will have to confront is this: Deep down, most people know how they should act towards others. Yet time and time again, people put themselves first and mistreat others. Why do people cause so much suffering in the world? Why do we ourselves get it wrong so often? And what does God want us to do about it? Fortunately, there are answers to these questions, if we are willing to search the Scriptures carefully and put on the mind of Christ. As we learn to see as God sees and think as God thinks, we can understand what God is trying to do in the world and in our lives, and find a way to participate fully in God’s work. When we do that, we discover another unseen truth about the world: There is great joy in participating in the work of God. If you are ready to tackle tough questions and embrace your calling to participate in God’s work to change the world, read on! 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 Next

Your attitude determines what is a “win.” Previous Next Look for the Perspective that Allows You to See Joy Your attitude determines what is a “win.” Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti February 21, 2024 A mother called in to the Internet radio station K-Love at 9:55 a.m. EST on January 25, 2023. The DJs were asking listeners to fill in the blank in this sentence: “I am wealthy because . . . (not necessarily wealthy monetarily, but wealthy in some way).” In response, the mother told a story about making dinner. She made a casserole with chicken, broccoli, and rice. When she went to serve it to her 12-year-old son, he said, “I don’t want any broccoli.” So she gave it to him without the broccoli. He went to a drawer in the kitchen and pulled out a sauce packet from Chick-fil-A. He poured the sauce on his dinner and ate it. When he was done eating, he said, “That was the best dinner I’ve ever had!” As she told this story on the air, this mother summed it up this way: “Mom for the win! Any time you can make a dinner and your middle-schooler loves it, it’s a win.” Your attitude determines what is a “win” As I listened, I thought about all the ways this mother could have had a different attitude. She could have objected to her son not eating the broccoli. She could have grumbled about his adding the Chick-fil-A sauce to her casserole. Instead, she accepted the situation for what it was and found joy in her son’s joy. Your perspective influences your attitude If she had approached the situation from the perspective that her son’s daily intake of vegetables was deficient, she wouldn’t have been able to call it a “win.” If her perspective had been that she makes good meals and doesn’t need “improvements,” she wouldn’t have been able to call it a “win.” In either of those cases, she wouldn’t have been able to share in her son’s joy. Mom for the win? It all depends on what you focus on, and what you choose to see. St. Paul wrote, “[W]hatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” (Phil. 4:8, NRSV). He also wrote: “Rejoice with those who rejoice” (Rom. 12:15,NRSV). Sharing in the joy of others is one of the secrets of a joyful Christian life. We are encouraged to find a perspective that allows us to look see joy. Your perspective influences the joy of others American film producer Samuel Goldwyn, founder of MGM, has been quoted as saying, “When someone does something good, applaud! You will make two people happy.” This mother’s son left the table happy about a good meal but also happy in his mother’s appreciation of his joy. If she had scolded him, there would have been no joy in that house for either of them that night. Our decision to look for joy can make ourselves and everyone around us happier. Whenever you can, share in the joy of others! 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 Next

Murder, anger, insulting others – how are they related, and what can we do about them? Previous Next Matthew 5:21-26 Murder, anger, insulting others – how are they related, and what can we do about them? Tom Faletti April 26, 2024 Matthew 5:21-26 Anger Jesus here begins a series of six teachings, in Matthew 5:21-48, where he states a Jewish law and then provides his own teaching. Each teaching begins with, “You have heard it said . . . but I say. . . .” They are sometimes called the “six antitheses” because some scholars see them as presenting the opposite (anti-) of a principle taught in the Old Testament (thesis). However, they usually go beyond rather than directly rejecting the Old Testament principle, so “antithesis” is not a good term for them. Some scholars call them the six “hypertheses,” because the prefix “hyper” can signify going beyond the thesis or principle that has previously been stated. In each case, Jesus re-interprets and expands on or transforms the Old Testament injunction. Often, he prohibits not only the action but also the thought that underlies the action or leads to the action. In verse 21, what is the Old Testament law Jesus cites? In verse 22, Jesus takes the principle much further in three ways. What does he say about anger? Still in verse 22, what does he say about using abusive or insulting language? In the third part of verse 22, some translations give us the Aramaic word Jesus uses – “Raqa” or “Raca” – which was a term of contempt used to call someone a fool or empty-headed or an idiot. What does Jesus say about using this kind of especially contemptuous language toward another person? Notice that each sin incurs a more serious consequence than the previous one, moving from being liable to judgment , which invokes an image of being brought before a local court of village elders; to being liable to the Council or Sanhedrin , which invokes an image of being brought before the highest court; to being liable to the fires of Gehenna , a word of Hebrew origin that is often translated as “hell’ but actually refers to the Valley of Hinnom southwest of Jerusalem, where there was a garbage dump that was thought of as always having a fire burning. In what ways are these three steps progressively worse – from anger, to insult, to contempt? How are these things related to murder? In what ways do they all start from the same place? When Jesus says that if we do these things we will be “liable” to these kinds of judgment, what do you think he means? Is he speaking literally (about courts and Gehenna) or metaphorically? And if metaphorically, what is he trying to tell us? Why is anger such a serious matter? Is anger always wrong? Is there an appropriate time for anger – what people sometimes call “holy anger”? Mark describes Jesus as being angry once, when Pharisees resisted the idea of a person being healed on the Sabbath (Mark 3:5), and Jesus certainly appears to be angry when he clears the Temple of the moneychangers (Matthew 21:12-13; John 2:13-17). St. Paul says, “Be angry and do not sin” (Eph. 4:26), which indicates that anger is not necessarily sinful. Anger often arises as a physiological response to situations; it’s what we do with it that determines whether it is a sin. How can we stay open to the kind of “holy anger” that pushes back against injustice, yet avoid the kind of anger that Jesus is telling us to avoid? Why is abusive language such a serious matter? Abusive language has become such an embedded part of our culture – a standard part of television shows, comedy acts, etc. – that we might not even realize we are echoing or imitating it. How can we control our own language, the things we personally say? What are some examples of people in our time using the kind of contemptuous, dehumanizing language Jesus is talking about when he uses the word “Raqa”? The principle of human dignity calls us to recognize that every person has an inalienable dignity given to them by God – even the people who may be seen as our enemies. How is this kind of contemptuous language a violation of human dignity? Why is this kind of dehumanizing language so dangerous? What kinds of things can it lead to? Oppression, murder, discrimination, and even genocide sometimes starts with this kind of language, from the dehumanization of Black people in the history of the American South, to the dehumanization of Dalits in Indian history, to the use of the word “cockroaches” that preceded the Rwandan genocide. A brief look through history can bring forth many similar examples, and they continue in our time. Politicians in many countries are using dehumanizing language to delegitimize people they do not like – often with deadly results. Where is the part of this discussion that might make you uncomfortable? Where might you need to adjust how you manage your anger or your language, in order to be more like Christ? In verses 23-26, Jesus shifts the focus slightly. In verses 23-24, what does he tell us to do? Why would God say that reconciling with a brother or sister is more important than making an offering to God? In verses 25-26, Jesus broadens the idea of reconciliation by moving from a religious context to a legal context. What does he say? How is an openness to reconciliation important for avoiding bad court judgments? How might our society be a better place if there was more focus on reconciliation between offenders and those they have harmed? Both of the examples in verses 23-26 presume that we are at fault. We are often not very good at recognizing our own faults. How can you become the kind of person who recognizes when you are at fault? Looking at this whole passage, what is the most important point for you in what Jesus says about murder, anger, abusive language, contempt, and reconciliation? Take a step back and consider this: In the United States and many other countries, there has been a coarsening of social discourse and political discourse. Many social media voices and political leaders treat those who disagree with them with disrespect and contempt and blatantly distort their views – and rack up millions of views, “likes,” and reposts in the process. Christians might consider ways to push back against this ungodly trend. For example, we might decide that we will never forward or “share” a post that uses disrespectful language about another human being. We can find other articles that express the same views more respectfully. Many of us remember being told by a parent, “If you can’t say something good, don’t say anything at all.” While there is a place for criticizing the views of others, we should be able to accurately state the other side’s claims before showing why we think they are wrong, and our arguments for why they are wrong should be based on facts and evidence, not based on distortion and innuendo. If we can’t do that, we aren’t treating them as people made in the image of God. We might consider a 21st century version of our parents’ maxim: “If you can’t say something that respects the humanity of the other person, don’t say anything at all.” Or perhaps: “If you can’t state your opponent’s position in a way that would allow them to say, ‘Yes, that’s what I’m saying,’ then you shouldn’t try to characterize their views at all.” How can you contribute to a more civil public discourse in your country’s social and political life? And what about anger? Anger sometimes comes unbidden – a visceral reaction that arises from the physiology of our humanity. But we can choose whether to nurture that anger and help it grow, or tame it and give it the perspective it needs to be harnessed for good. What do you need to do to tame or harness your anger so that it is serves the good rather than becoming a trigger that leads to sin? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next

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

Outside the timeline Previous Next Where is God? - Part 1 Outside the timeline Tom Faletti (to be continued) 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 Next

You will be judged in the same way you judge others. Previous Next Matthew 7:1-6 You will be judged in the same way you judge others. Tom Faletti June 7, 2024 Matthew 7:1-6 Judge not, lest you be judged What is Jesus saying in this passage? What does v. 2 mean, in speaking about the “measure” you get? A “measure” is the method used to weigh or count the portions of something. In the supermarket, if you buy potatoes by the pound, a “pound” is the measure. If you buy mangos by the number of mangos, then the number of units (mangos) is the “measure.” Lettuce might be sold using either measure – by weight or by the number of heads. Jesus says that the measure you use for judgment is the measure that will be used to judge you. What are some of the things about which we tend to judge others, and what measure do we use to judge their guilt or innocence, or how good or bad their actions are? If we will be judged in the same way that we judge others (i.e., using the same measure we use), what does this tell us about making judgments about other people? What do you think is an appropriate measure for judging other people, or an appropriate way of approaching your judgments, if you know that you will face the same standard of judgment? Consider Galatians 6:7, which tells us that whatever we sow we will also reap. Although Paul is making a different point in that passage, how does the concept of sowing and reaping illuminate verse 2’s discussion of judging? God has built linkages into the natural world that provide useful analogies for the linkages he has built into the spiritual fabric of life. Just as we can’t sow grass seed and reap vegetables, so too we can’t sow judgmental attitudes and reap mercy. In many aspects of our lives, you get back what you give out. What is the meaning of Jesus’s image of the speck (or splinter) and the log (or beam) in verse 3? What might be some examples of the logs or beams in our own eyes that might make it hard for us to make sound judgments about what others do? What biases make it hard for people to judge other people accurately? How do you know when you have a “log” in your eye? How do you know when you have a blind spot that makes it hard to accurately judge what is going on around you? Someone else can tell you; you can try to put yourself in others’ shoes; you can immerse yourself in God’s Word and check your actions against God’s Word. One of my Bible Study members, Phyllis Hegstrom, told us that she asks her boss: What are my blind spots? How might that approach to our own behavior make us more effective followers of Jesus? Jesus tells us to take the log (or beam) out of our own eye first. How can we do that? How can we remove the things that make it hard for us to see clearly? In Matthew 5:38-42, Jesus tells us not to resist those who seek to do evil to us but to turn the other cheek, go two miles, etc. What are the traits of Christian character that Jesus is trying to foster both in that passage and here in Matthew 7:1-6? Verse 6 uses some metaphors that need to be unpacked: for example, what does a “pearl” stand for and what does a “dog” or “swine” stand for? Note: Dogs were mostly undomesticated scavengers in Jesus’s time. According to the Law, swine were unclean, so Jews were prohibited from eating or handling them. When you put it all together, what does verse 6 mean? What are the “pearls” we should be preserving? One interpretation of verse 6 is that the pearls are the deeper truths of our faith. If we follow that interpretation, what is Jesus saying about not giving the pearls to those who will trample them? Don’t try to convince others of the deeper truths of the faith if they have not accepted the more basic truths. In order to follow verse 6, we would need to make judgments about who falls into the metaphorical category of the “dogs” or “swine.” Doesn’t that require judging? Explain. Do you conclude from this passage that we should never judge, or only judge certain kinds of things (and if so, what)? Explain. How can we apply in our lives the principles Jesus is teaching us here about judging? Take a step back and consider this: Social psychologists working in the field of attribution theory explore how we decide why people do what they do. If someone does something we think is wrong (fails to show up for a meeting, says something unkind, etc.), how do we decide what the causes of their behavior might be? We might attribute their behavior to situational causes – to external factors that might explain their behavior. For example, we might say to ourselves: He must have had an unexpected crisis that kept him from coming; maybe someone in his family got sick. She must be having a bad day; maybe her boss chewed her out or her child did something wrong – that’s why she said what she said. Alternatively, we might attribute their behavior to dispositional causes – to internal factors in their personality or character. In this case, we might say to ourselves: He is unreliable; he doesn’t respect other people’s time and effort. She is a mean person and doesn’t appreciate the effect of her words on other people. We don’t usually know the whole story behind people’s actions. To be honest, we never know the whole story. But we make judgments. And arguably, judgments are sometimes necessary. If George routinely fails to show up for meetings that have been arranged with him, we need to recognize that and not assign essential tasks to him where a no-show would cause harm. The interesting thing is that we have attribution biases that distort our assessments. If we already have a positive view of a person, we are more likely to explain a false step as being caused by situational factors rather than signaling a flaw in their personality. If we think a person is similar to us, we are more likely to give them a pass rather than deciding that they have a bad character trait. The bias that is most relevant to Jesus’s words about judging others is the fundamental attribution error : the tendency to think that if we have done something wrong, it is because of something external that caused the problem; but if someone else has done something wrong, it is because of their own internal dispositions (Robert S. Feldman, Understanding Psychology , 14th edition, McGraw Hill Education, 2019, pp. 563-564). In other words, people have a tendency to think that the speck or log in the other person’s eye is caused by flaws in the other person’s character, while any speck in our own eye is only due to the external circumstances we face. This fundamental attribution error may be the biggest log of all in our eyes, because it signals an unconscious belief that we are better or less flawed than other people, and that other people are choosing to be bad while we are with good intentions just trying to make the best of a difficult world. Jesus calls us to stop thinking that we are better, or that we are doing better, than others. That is the fundamental log in our eyes. When someone does something that you perceive to be a slight or that hurts you in some way, are you more likely to attribute it to a flaw in their personality/character or to attribute it to external circumstances that made it difficult for them to do what you wanted them to do? Can you describe a time (or times) when you did that? When you do something that someone else perceives to be a slight or that hurts someone else in some way, are you more likely to make justifications for your action based on external circumstances or to do some soul-searching about whether this shows you need to work on your character? Can you describe a time (or times) when you did that? If you were talking with Jesus right now, what would he say to you about whether you treat others the way you treat yourself in terms of how you attribute motives to your behavior and others’ behavior? What steps can you take to adjust your thinking about other people, so that you are more merciful in the judgments you make about other people? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next

Is your faith built on rock? Is the Sermon on the Mount a central part of your faith? Previous Next Matthew 7:24-29 Is your faith built on rock? Is the Sermon on the Mount a central part of your faith? Tom Faletti June 9, 2024 Matthew 7:24-27 The house built on rock What are the two things Jesus says a person must do to be like the wise man? What does it mean to truly “hear” God’s word? What does it mean to “act on” these words? Jesus uses the metaphor of building a house. What does the “house” stand for in our lives? There are many possible answers, including: your faith, your principles, your worldview, your habits, your character, your life choices, etc. How does a “wise” person built this kind of house? What is the “rock” on which your life stands? And how does it operate as a “rock” for you? What might be some examples of “sand” that are not solid things on which to build your life? What are the rain, floods, and winds that will test the “house” you have built? Why does Jesus contrast “hearing and doing” vs. “hearing and not doing”? What does this tell us about the role of obedience and action in our lives? What is something you might consider doing that might help ground your life more fully on the rock rather than on shifting sands? Matthew 7:28-29 The effect of Jesus’s teaching Matthew ends the Sermon on the Mount by saying of Jesus, “he taught them as one having authority and not as their scribes” (Matthew 7:29, NRSV and NABRE). What does this mean? Among other things, the scribes only explained and interpreted what the Law said; they did not add to it. Jesus is speaking as one who has the authority to create new teachings for people to follow. In what ways do you see the teachings in the Sermon on the Mount as manifesting Jesus’s authority? The fact that Jesus is acting like he has the authority not just to interpret but to re-think and expand upon the law, and to do other things that mere scribes cannot do, will soon get him in trouble with the religious leaders. Stay tuned by continuing the study of Matthew. Conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount Skim back over the Sermon on the Mount (chapters 5-7). Which of Jesus’s teachings strikes you as being most uniquely Christian – that is, which of the teachings of Jesus seems to be most distinct from the teachings of other religions or ethical systems? What does this uniquely Christian message tell you about God or people or God’s desires for us? How important is the Sermon on the Mount in your understanding of your faith? What passage or teaching from the Sermon on the Mount do you think God is calling you to give special attention to right now in your life? What is one concrete step you can take to live out that teaching more faithfully? Take a step back and consider this: We know that Christians are not perfect. We don’t live up to the fullness of the gospel as presented by Jesus. As Peter said to Jesus, “Who then can be saved?” (Matt. 19:25, NABRE). Jesus’s answer – “For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:26, NABRE) – is a comfort to modern Christians, who believe that God will indeed save them. It is sad, however, that many Christians, when they study the Sermon on the Mount as we have, are surprised to learn these details of the kind of life Jesus calls us to live. Perhaps too many people have not been effectively taught the full gospel, or even the full Sermon on the Mount. (And, of course, too often, we hear but don’t act on what we hear.) A detailed study of the Sermon on the Mount prompts many Christians to embrace new habits. That’s a good thing. But there is a danger. It would be easy to turn every teaching in the Sermon on the Mount into a new law. We could add to the Ten Commandments another 10 or 20 laws to follow, just from these three chapters. The risk is that we might turn into modern-day Pharisees, focused on the laws as ends in themselves rather than living in a vital relationship with the God behind the teachings. Without that relationship, the Sermon on the Mount will seem like an impossibly difficult, ever-expanding work list. But with a relationship with God, the Sermon on the Mount is a continual invitation to keep become more like Jesus, to keep being empowered by the Holy Spirit to respond to ever-new opportunities to bring God’s love and grace to the world. How can we encourage ourselves and our fellow believers to embrace the full Sermon on the Mount, but do so in ways that avoid turning it into another soul-deadening Law? How can we find joy in our relationship with God in responding to the dos and don’ts of Jesus’s teachings? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next

The Golden Rule is part of the fundamental choice Jesus is calling us to make. Previous Next Matthew 7:12-23 The Golden Rule is part of the fundamental choice Jesus is calling us to make. Tom Faletti June 7, 2024 Matthew 7:12 The Golden Rule What word or phrase comes to mind as you consider this passage? In my Bible Study group, here are some of the ideas that were considered: empathy, consideration, reciprocal treatment, kindness, walking in the other’s shoes. How does this go beyond the “eye for an eye thinking” of earlier civilizations? Almost all religions and ethical systems have some form of the Golden Rule, but most are expressed in the negative: Don’t do to others what you don’t want them to do to you. No one before Jesus expressed this idea in the affirmative, requiring that we “do.” How does Jesus’s way of saying it push us further? There are a variety of possible answers to this question. One think worth noting is that the negative formulation only requires you to hold back and not do something bad. Jesus’s rule requires us to affirmatively take action to be helpful in ways that we would want others to be helpful to us. To live the Golden Rule seriously, we have to take the time regularly to think about what we might wish others were doing – and then do that thing. Is that an easy or difficult challenge for you? Explain. How would the Christian witness to the world be different if we truly lived the affirmative version of the Golden Rule that Jesus taught? Matthew 7:13-23 The fundamental choice Verses 13-14: The wide way and the narrow way. In the poem “The Road Not Taken,” Robert Frost wrote: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. (Robert Frost, “The Road Not Taken,” 1915, Poetry Foundation , https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44272/the-road-not-taken .) Jesus is similarly proposing a fundamental breakpoint where a choice must be made. Where does the narrow gate lead (verse 14)? What do you think he means by “life”? How have you experienced this “life” that is found on the narrow way? What choices did you have to make to set you on the path with the narrow gate? On the narrow way (verse 14), why do you think Jesus says the road is “hard” (NRSV) or “constricted” (NABRE)? How is the narrow way hard? Where does the road with the wide gate lead (verse 13)? What do you think he means by destruction”? Are there times when you have experienced the effects of spending time on the easy road with the wide gate? Explain. If you have spent time on the wide way, what choices did you have to make to get of that road and move to the narrow way? How would you characterize the difference between how a person lives their life on the narrow way versus the wide way? Are there differences in outlook, focus, character traits that are exhibited, priorities, etc.? Verses 15-20: False prophets Prophets are people who speak the word of the Lord to the people. While we think of prophecy mostly in terms of predictions about the future, most prophetic activity in the Old Testament and probably in the early church involved the delivering of commands from God about how the people should live, often in response to what was going on at the time. We know from other passages in the Bible that itinerant prophets would come through town and expect to be fed them and supported while they were there. The question was, were they moochers, or evilly inspired, or from God? According to Jesus, how can you judge whether some is a good prophet (verses 16 and 17)? What does good fruit look like? What fruits would you look for in trying to judge whether someone is of God? Among many criteria, we might look for: How are they living their lives? Do their lives exhibit righteousness and repentance, or are they caught up in sinful behaviors? Do their lives conform to the Golden Rule that Jesus has just laid down a few verses earlier? How well do they manifest the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23)? Do they live lives of discipline or excess? Do they care for the poor or focus on the wealthy? How do they handle adversity? Do their teachings promote unity or sow division? Do their teachings cohere with what God has already revealed or promote new, hidden knowledge known only to them? Why does Jesus say in verse 19 that bad trees are cut down and thrown into the fire? Who are the “prophets” of our time whom we need to judge by their fruits? Are there “prophets” you are tempted to listen to? How can you make sure you are judging them wisely and not being drawn in by clever words and enticing ideas? Verses 21-23: Saying “Lord, Lord” doesn’t mean you’re in the kingdom of heaven Jesus says that saying, “Lord, Lord,” is not enough. What needs to be done to enter the kingdom of heaven? Only those who do the will of the Father enter the kingdom of heaven. In this context, what do you think Jesus means by “doing the will of the Father”? What must we do? What deeds are not sufficient evidence that someone will be welcomed into the kingdom of heaven (verse 22)? Why are those powerful signs of God’s presence not sufficient? What do you think those people should have been doing instead? Note: Jesus will spell some of this out more explicitly later in Matthew’s Gospel, including where he says that the ultimate test will be how we treated the least of us who were in need around us (Matthew 25:31-46). It is popular to say that we need to “walk the walk and not just talk the talk.” How does that idea reflect what Jesus is saying? What is the “walk” that is needed, that goes beyond the “talk”? Notice that the people Jesus is describing here weren’t just “talking.” They were doing impressive, attention-grabbing things. They may have even been doing good things. But Jesus said that is not enough. What are they missing? What does this passage say to you about your own life? What do you need to be doing, in order to be what you are called to be? Take a step back and consider this: It is interesting that the Golden Rule sits between a set of passages that, on one side, tell us to stop judging others and to pray continually to God with confidence that our Father in heaven will give us what we need, and, on the other side, tell us that we need to make a fundamental choice to take the hard way that bears good fruit and look good. Perhaps the linkage is that the Golden Rule, if lived fully by a committed Christian, will lead us to the right dispositions: If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, we will cut others as much slack as we hope they will cut us and that God will cut us. If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, we will trust God for our needs and not look for ways to squeeze every last dollar out of the people around us. If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, we will live lives that the people around us will recognize as bearing good fruit. If we treat others the way we want them to treat us, the Lord will not say, “‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers” (Matt. 7:23, NABRE). If we take the Golden Rule in its full, affirmative form – do what you want others to do – how might it change not only our actions, but our entire way of thinking? Pick an area of your life where you are dealing with other people and the situation is currently bothering you or not going as you would like. How can you apply the Golden Rule creatively, in its affirmative direction to do what you wish others would do for you? How can you do something differently in that situation, in the spirit of the Golden Rule? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next

Wise men come to see the newborn king – and still do today! Previous Next Matthew 2:1-12 Wise men come to see the newborn king – and still do today! Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Matthew 2:1-12 The wise men seek the newborn king, and unintentionally alert King Herod The “wise men,” or “magi” in the Greek, were, according to The New Oxford Annotated Bible , “a class of Parthian (Persian) priests, renowned as astrologers” (fn. to Matthew 2:1-12, p. 1749). That may suggest more certainty than we have; other scholars do not think it is so certain. We mustn’t think of “astrologers” as being like modern-day fortune-tellers. They were scientists, trying to make sense of physical phenomena and how those phenomena might affect humans. There were whole bodies of “knowledge” that had been developed, connecting different nations to different “stars” (actually, planets). Why did the wise men from the East come looking for a baby in Jerusalem? In Matthew’s mind, what is the significance of the fact that these were wise men from the East rather than people from Judea? Note: The star could have been a comet, but it was more likely a juxtaposition of planets (“stars”) that had auspicious meaning according to the wisest understandings of the natural world at that time. There is a reference to a star in the Old Testament: In Numbers 24, Balaam prophesied that “a star shall come out of Jacob, / and a scepter shall rise out of Israel” (24:17, NRSV) and “Edom will become a possession” (24:18, NRSV) – i.e., Edom will be taken over and lose its independence. Herod, with an ancestry reaching back to Edom, would have been especially troubled by this. Why do you think these men want to pay homage to a Jewish baby king? Note: Herod the Great was “king” from 37 BC to 4 BC, most of that time as a vassal (a client state) to the Roman Emperor. He was known for his great building projects, including his marvelous renovation and beautification of the Temple in Jerusalem, but he was also known for his ruthless treatment of any rivals; he even had his own wife and several members of his family executed. He was not from Judea. He was from Idumea, south of Israel, part of a non-Jewish Edomite family, and although his people several generations earlier had been forced to become Jews, he was always suspect among strict Jews, both because of his ethnic heritage and because of his profligate lifestyle. Why do you think Herod was frightened or troubled by the news these wise men brought? We sometimes sanitize the Bible of its politics. This is a story with a huge element of politics. Why might “all of Jerusalem,” perhaps including the chief priests, have been frightened or troubled by the news from the wise men? The people of Jerusalem knew that Herod often killed whole groups of people when he thought someone was trying to challenge him. When a tyrant is upset, everyone around him is on edge. Incidentally, Bethlehem was 5 miles south of Jerusalem, so if Jerusalem was stirred up, it also would have stirred up people in Bethlehem. Matthew tells us that Herod immediately thinks this might have something to do with the Messiah. What does this tell you about Herod? Herod is tuned in to Jewish thinking and is very sensitive to any claims that might be made against him. The idea that Jesus might be a king will remain a dangerous concept all the way to the end of Jesus’s life. We see him accused of that in his trial, and it is ultimately what he is charged with when he is executed (see Matt. 27:11,29,37). Note that Herod might have been suspicious of the magi from the beginning if they were Parthians. Before Herod was king, he took the side of Hyrcanus II when Hyrcanus’s nephew Antigonus took the throne from Hyrcanus. The Parthians were on the opposite from Herod in that fight. Herod went to Rome to seek help to gain the restoration of Hyrcanus, but the Roman Senate unexpectedly appointed Herod king, if he could gain control of Judea, which he did. The chief priests and scribes were able to name an Old Testament prophecy that they thought told where the Messiah would be born. What does this tell you about them? The prophecy in verse 6 is taken from Micah 5:1-5a (the verse numbering might be off by one in your Bible, as the Hebrew versions of our Old Testament counted 5:1 as 4:14). What does that prophecy say about Jesus? Bethlehem was David’s hometown and the place where David was anointed as king (1 Sam. 16:1-13). It was also the hometown of Ruth’s mother-in-law and father-in-law and of Boaz, who she ultimately married (he was David’s great-grandfather). In 2 Sam. 5:2, when King Saul died in battle, all the tribes of Israel came to David and said, “The LORD said to you: it is you who shall be shepherd of my people Israel, you who shall be ruler over Israel” (NRSV). Remember that Matthew set up in chapter 1 the importance of Jesus being the son of David. Matthew is making the connections for us here. Herod also professes to want to pay homage to the child (verse 8). That, we learn, is a lie. However, it raises questions for us. Why should we give homage to this child? What does it mean to “give homage” to Jesus? How can we do it genuinely and well? How does the faith of these Gentile wise men contrast with Herod’s attitude toward Jesus? How does the faith of the wise men prefigure the response to Jesus among Gentiles in Jesus’s own time and in the early church? The wise men were “overwhelmed with joy” (verse 10) when the star stopped and they knew they were near to finding the child they had been looking for. When have you been “overwhelmed with joy” at experiencing Jesus? What can you do to foster that joy? What can we learn from these wise men? They are open to other cultures; they are seekers of truth; they recognize that a future king could be poor – i.e., that poverty is not a defining limitation of a person. Note: In 2:11, Matthew tells us that: “On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother” (NRSV). “The house” indicates that when this takes place, Mary, Joseph, and Jesus are not in a cave or stable. However, they could have been in the lower quarters of a house where the animals were kept (with “bedrooms”or sleeping quarters for the normal residents upstairs). There is no evidence about how many wise men there were, but since Matthew lists three gifts, the tradition developed that there were three of them. What is the significance of the gifts of “gold, frankincense, and myrrh”? Gold is obviously costly, but so were frankincense and myrrh. How might these gifts have been, perhaps unwittingly, symbolically appropriate for Jesus? Gold symbolizes royalty. Jesus is our king. Frankincense symbolizes priesthood, in that priests offer incense as a sacrifice to God. When offered to Jesus, is suggests that Jesus is the Son of God. Also, Jesus is our great high priest, offering himself as a sacrifice for our sins. Myrrh was used for burial. Jesus’s death saved us. The myrrh symbolizes his humanity and his sacrifice for us. But also, myrrh was used in the tent tabernacle in the desert (before there was a Temple) to anoint the holy things (the tent, the ark of the covenant containing the tablets of the Law – God’s Word given to the Israelites, the sacrifice table, the utensils used in the sacrifices, etc.) and to anoint the priests (Exodus 30:22-33). Jesus is the tabernacle (the holy place that God resides) and he is the ark of the covenant (the Word of God in human flesh), anointed by God to bring us into a close relationship with God (and ultimate to take up residence in us through the Holy Spirit) and to deliver the fullness of God’s Word to us. Note: Some scholars think Matthew is adding details that go beyond the story, perhaps drawing from Psalm 72:10-11 (where the psalmist prays: may the kings of other lands bring gifts to the great future king of Israel) and Isaiah 60:6 (which says that people from Sheba will bring gold and frankincense); however, if Matthew was doing that, he would have called attention to those passages as additional “fulfillment prophecies”, and he does not do that. So it is unlikely that Matthew is making up details here to fit Old Testament passages. In 2:12, the wise men do not return to Herod but go a different way. In order to follow God faithfully, we too are sometimes called to avoid things we might have been involved with previously and “go a different way.” What is something in your life that you might need to avoid in order to follow God, and how will you “go a different way”? Take a step back and consider this: Christians delight in the story of the wise men. We honor their passion to find the new king of a far-off land. But Christians sometimes have attitudes that directly conflict with this praise for the wise men. The wise men studied the signs and evidence in nature that could expand their understanding of God’s activity in the world. Yet Some Christians disparage the work of people in our day who think hard and study carefully all of the evidence they can find in the natural world, in their search for truth (in our day, we call them “scientists”). The Scriptures don’t attack the wise men for following the evidence in the natural world wherever it leads, and neither should we attack those who follow the evidence in the natural world today. We can object when they go beyond the evidence to make claims not supported by evidence, but we need to honestly evaluate the evidence they find before rejecting it. Throughout history, Christians have suggested that God speaks to us in two “books”: the book of the Scriptures and the book of Nature. When you learn from Scripture, you are learning about God. When you learn from science, you are learning about God’s work in the world. We need to be open to the truths that arise from our careful study of nature, because nature is authored by God. Psalm 19:1-4 affirms that God speaks to us through the natural world: “The heavens are telling the glory of God; / and the firmament proclaims his handiwork. / Day to day pours forth speech, / and night to night declares knowledge” (Psalm 19:1-2, NRSV). In other words, the natural world tells us about the work of God. When Christians belittle the importance of using our minds to expand scientific understanding – whether it is about diseases or vaccines or changing climate patterns or how stars are developed or how species change over time – they are acting exactly the opposite of how the wise men in today’s Scripture passage acted when they studied the heavens so carefully. If we close our minds to people who seek truth in the natural world that God created, we may miss important truths about God’s creation that would allow us to serve God better and take better care of his creation and his people. How can you be more open to the truths discovered by scientists? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next

Who can be saved? Your wealth won’t save you, but what will? Previous Next Matthew 19:23-26 Who can be saved? Your wealth won’t save you, but what will? Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Matthew 19:23-26 The danger of riches Jesus uses a vivid illustration to make his point about the dangers of wealth. His statement about the camel going through the eye of a needle has led many people to search for answers – particularly because they don’t want to take it literally (and given that fact that Jesus was raised as a Jew in a culture where exaggeration for effect was the norm, he probably was exaggerating in some sense). Some scholars suggest the existence of a small gate into a walled city, separate from the wide, main gate, where a camel could only go through if it was stripped of all it was carrying. This smaller entrance is supposed to have been called the “needle’s eye.” There is no evidence for the existence of such entryways, but the image might be apt anyway. We need to let go of any possessions that would keep us from entering the kingdom of God, and that means we need to let go of everything we cling to, like a camel being relieved of its burdens, before we can go through. However, the disciples don’t envision there being any way through the eye of a needle. The disciples are astonished by what Jesus says about rich people because they think rich people are more likely to get into to heaven than poor people. That was common thinking in their day. Would that be a correct way of thinking? Explain. What is Jesus’s answer to their question, “Then who can be saved?” (19:25, NRSV) Note that Jesus is not saying rich people can’t go to heaven. Zacchaeus was rich (Luke 19:9). Joseph of Arimathea was rich (Matt. 27:57). Nicodemus was rich (John 19:39). Rich people were not required to give up their wealth in the early church (Acts 5:4). What do you think Jesus means by saying that for humans it is impossible? What do you think Jesus means by saying that for God all things are possible? What is he saying about us and wealth? What is your reaction to this passage? What does it say to you about your own wealth or lack of it and how it might affect your salvation? Take a step back and consider this: God is at work in us, in this world. He knows that we need possessions: a frying pan to cook in, clothes to wear, a toilet; etc. And the more advanced our world gets, due to the ingenuity of the human mind – which was created by God and then invited to use its free will to create other things – the more things we come to need: cars or bicycles, cell phones, microwave ovens, etc. The problem is not that things exist; the problem is that they sometimes take over the focus of our lives. Jesus has at least two different purposes in today’s conversation: to push us to re-focus and put our priorities in the right place, and to guide us to a deeper point – that there is nothing we can do to save ourselves. Only God can do that. Wealthy persons can live a life focused on their many possessions and the next possession they hope to get, or they live a life focused on sharing the love of God with those around them. Poor people can live a life focused on their meager possessions and the next possession they hope to get, or they live a life focused on sharing the love of God with those around them. Whatever a person’s situation, only God can bring them to the kingdom of heaven. Neither having many possessions nor having few possessions gives you a ticket to heaven. Only God can do that. What is one, small change you could make today, to take a bit of your mind off of wealth or “things” so that your mind and heart can focus more on people and God? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next

Pre-tribulation theories contradict Jesus and Paul. What does the Bible actually say? Previous Next The Rapture? It’s Not a Pre-Millennial Escape from Tribulation Pre-tribulation theories contradict Jesus and Paul. What does the Bible actually say? Image by CHUTTERSNAP, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti December 13, 2024 In 1 Thessalonians 4:17-18, the apostle Paul refers to the “rapture” while he is discussing the end times when Christ will return. The word “rapture” comes from the Latin word that translates the Greek word in verse 17 where Paul says that we will be “caught up” (literally, “snatched”) to meet the Lord in the air. Authors Tim LaHaye of the Left Behind series and Hal Lindsey of The Late Great Planet Earth fame have popularized an approach to interpreting what the Scriptures say about the end times that leans heavily on a modern interpretation of Paul’s “rapture.” These authors (and others, who don’t always agree among themselves) combine their interpretation of the rapture with their interpretation of the “1000 years” mentioned in Revelation 20:2-3 and other Bible passages to produce an entire timeline of the end times that is not consistent with the historic understanding of the Scriptures. Their views are based on ideas that mostly did not spread until the 19th century. Most of Christendom from the time of Augustine in the 5th century until the 19th century has taken a very different approach to interpreting the Bible’s end-times passages. Currently, the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and many Protestant denominations – including the Episcopal, Lutheran, and Methodist Churches and others – reject that interpretation of the end times. This summary of the problem is drawn from a variety of sources, in an attempt to identify the commonalities in Catholic and Protestant thinking about the subject. In addition to the sources used in my 1 Thessalonians study, it also considers Trent Horn (Catholic), Karlo Broussard (Catholic), Alan S. Bandy (Reformed), the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (Lutheran), and “Where does the Rapture fit into UM beliefs?” (United Methodist). The historic churches and denominations have much in common in their understanding of the end times. The main divide on this topic is not between Protestants and Catholics. The main divide is between a fundamentalist segment of modern Christianity and the rest of Christianity. Frameworks for thinking about the end times There are roughly 6 common frameworks for thinking about the rapture, the tribulation, and the 1000-year “millennial” reign mentioned in Revelation 20:2-3: The first three approaches all revolve around the idea that the rapture will precede a 1000-year millennium of peace and righteousness on earth. However, the pre-millennialists don’t agree on whether the rapture will happen before, during, or after the tribulation that precedes the end: Pre-tribulation, pre-millennial: Christ will come and take the Christians who are alive to heaven (the “rapture”) before the tribulation. Then the tribulation will come, in a world devoid of Christians. Then Christ will come again with the church (which sounds like a second Second Coming, since he already came to rapture people). Then Christ will reign for 1000 years, and then there will be the final judgment (which sounds like a third Second Coming). This is the view of the people like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey who have fed the “rapture” industry. Mid-tribulation, pre-millennial: This approach is similar to the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial approach, except that the rapture will happen in the middle of the tribulation (i.e., halfway through the 7-year tribulation), not before it begins. Therefore, Christians will experience some of the tribulation and not be fully spared. Post-tribulation, pre-millennial: This approach says that Christians will not be spared the tribulation at all. Christians will not join Christ until he comes in his Second Coming at the end of the tribulation. Then Christ will reign for 1000 years, and then the final judgment will come. These approaches all separate the Second Coming of Christ from the final judgment. Jesus never suggests such a separation, nor does Paul. They both describe one decisive event when Jesus comes, takes believers to himself, and presides over the final judgment. Amillennial: This view rejects the separation of the “rapture” from the final judgment and the entire pre-millennial framework. In this view, we are in the 1000-year reign of Christ, which began when Christ broke the power of sin by his death and resurrection and ascended into heaven. The reference to “1000” years in the Book of Revelation is symbolic, not literal: “1000” means a large number and “1000 years” means “a very long time.” Revelation 20 says that in this millennial time, the devil is being restrained. God is giving us time so that the gospel can be spread around the world. After the period we are now in, which includes its own times of smaller tribulation, Satan will be allowed to try to turn people away from Christ and the great, final tribulation will come. The Christians and non-Christians suffer now, and both the church and non-believers will suffer during the final tribulation, as Jesus warned from the beginning (see, for example, Matthew 24:29-31, where the tribulation precedes the gathering of the elect to Christ). After that period of tribulation, the final judgment will begin with Christians being caught up with those who have risen from the dead to meet Christ when he returns (1 Thess. 4:17; also referred to by Paul in 2 Thess. 2:1 as our “assembling” with the Lord). That event is not a pre-tribulation, pre-millennial escape from suffering; it is part of the Second Coming and final judgment exercised by Christ. This more traditional approach to interpreting the end-times Scriptures was the generally accepted view throughout the church from the time of Augustine in the 5th century, through the Protestant Reformation, and all the way until the 19th century. It is more faithful to the Scriptures, and it is followed by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches and a variety of current Protestant denominations, including the Episcopal, Lutheran, and Methodist Churches and others. Although scholars call this approach the “amillennial” approach, that term is not necessarily used by these churches. All of those churches reject the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial approach that was popularized in the decades before and after the year 2000. There are two other views worth mentioning, for the sake of completeness (and there are many other sub-categories and branches dividing all of the approaches). Postmillennial: In this view, first there will be a (literal or symbolic) 1000-year golden age of prosperity and minimal suffering on Earth, during which most people will be converted to Christ and live in righteousness. The devil will be bound during that time but will be loosed at the end of the 1000 years. After that 1000 years of relative peace, there will be a time of tribulation followed by the Second Coming (when believers will be called up to heaven) and the final judgment. This view was popular in the 19th century (the 1800s), until the World Wars of the 20th century made people rethink whether the world could reach such a golden age of righteousness. Metaphorical: In this view, most of the end-times references in the Bible are metaphorical and should not be interpreted literally. There will not be a literal trumpet, a literal 1000-year reign, a literal meeting of Christ in the sky, etc. God has used figurative language and metaphors to help us understand things that are beyond us. All of the key points of Scripture will be fulfilled: Christ will return and judge the world, the dead will be raised, there will be a final judgment, the devil and death will be defeated, and Christians will live with Christ forever. But the details of what it will look like are not for us to worry about. Problems with the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture idea The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture theory is inconsistent with Scripture in several ways: The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture violates the claim in Acts 1:11 that Jesus will return in the same visible way he left, since the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial story creates a scenario where Jesus remains hidden except to believers. The theory claims that Jesus doesn’t stay on Earth after the rapture and only returning visibly 1000 years later. The word Paul uses in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 for the “coming” of the Lord (the Greek word parousia ) in was used by the Greeks before Christ to refer to the ceremonial arrival of a king or ruler. Pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture proponents argue that in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, Christ only comes partly back, gathers the raptured people, and returns to heaven. However, Paul does not say Jesus immediately returns to heaven with them; he only says that those who are caught up to meet him in the air will be with him forever. The word for “meet” in verse 17 is a Greek word used to describe the situation where people go out from their town to meet a visiting official or king and escort that official into their city (in response to the “coming” in verse 15). Paul is saying that when Christ comes to Earth and the risen Christians and the still-alive Christians join him, they will stay with him as he comes to the Earth and does his work of final judgment. The idea that Christ aborts his “coming” and returns to heaven, only to return later, has been added by the pre-tribulation advocates without justification or good evidence. The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture theory that Jesus’s coming to gather the elect is separated from his final judgment by 1000 years contradicts Jesus. 1 Thessalonians 4:16 says that Christ’s Second Coming will be announced with an archangel’s voice and the sound of a trumpet, at which point the dead will be raised. 1 Corinthians 15:51-55 also links the trumpet to the raising of the dead. In Matthew 24:29-31, Jesus links his coming in power and glory (verse 30) with the angels (verse 31), the sound of the trumpet (verse 31), and the gathering of the elect (verse 31). In Matthew 25:31-33, Jesus links his coming in glory (verse 31) with the final judgment (verses 32-33ff). These events are all connected and happen together. The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial approach contradicts Jesus by separating the raising of the dead from the final judgment by 1000 years. In Matthew 24:29, Jesus says that these events happen right after the tribulation (verse 29). The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial advocates seek to escape the tribulation that Jesus clearly foretells. The pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture violates Jesus’s statement in Matthew 16:27 that when he comes with his angels, he will repay people according to their deeds (i.e., the Second Coming with the final judgment). Again, Jesus does not teach any separation between these events. Note: Some rapture fans also interpret Luke 17:34-37 as referring to the rapture. In that passage, Jesus says that one person will be taken and another will be left. However, when you read that verse in context, starting at verse 26, you see that people are being “taken” in judgment. They are not being taken to heaven. They are not being raptured away to be saved from tribulation. Conclusion: The popular theory is wrong, but the Lord will be with us forever. In summary, the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial rapture story created in the 19th century and popularized as Americans endured the Cold War and approached the millennial year 2000 does not have a sound basis in Scripture. The Book of Revelation is filled with symbolic language. There is no reason to distort the teachings of Jesus and Paul in order to interpret Revelation’s round number of 1000 years as a literal 1000 years. It is symbolic for the long period of time we are in before the Lord returns. And Jesus and Paul are very clear that Christians will endure the tribulation before they are united with Christ in his return. We must reject the distortions of their words that are central to every pre-tribulation rapture theory. This also means that no one escapes the tribulation except by dying. What else is true? The Scriptures tell us clearly: Christ will return. The dead will be raised. Christians (both those who have died and those who are still alive) will be united with Christ and live with him forever. Christ will judge the living and the dead and ask them how they treated “the least of these” among us. Fortunately, that’s all we really need to know about the end times. 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 Next

Who is Jesus? – Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus. Previous Next Matthew 1:1-17 Who is Jesus? – Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus. Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Matthew 1:1 Who is this Gospel about? How does Matthew identify or describe the chief character of his story? What do each of these terms mean: Jesus, Messiah, son of David, and son of Abraham? Why is each term important to Matthew or significant to the Jews or early Christians? Let’s look at each one. Jesus : Greek for the Hebrew name Joshua (Yeshua), which in Hebrew means “God saves,” or “Jehovah (Yahweh) is salvation,” or “Yahweh, save [us]!”. Why is this identification important for Matthew’s Gospel and for us? Messiah : Hebrew for “Anointed One”; Christ, from the Greek Christos , has the same meaning). Special people were anointed, usually kings and priests; but the “Messiah” took on a greater connotation of a savior of some kind. Why is this identification of Jesus important for Matthew’s Gospel and for us? Sneak peak: You are probably familiar with the story of the key turning point when Peter first recognizes that Jesus is the Messiah, which is told in Matt. 16:16. Son of David : The Jews expected that they would find relief from foreign occupation and domination when David’s throne was restored. God had told David that a descendant of his would be on the throne forever. Why is this identification of Jesus important for Matthew’s Gospel and for us? Consider Isaiah 9:2-7; see verse 7: “there shall be endless peace / for the throne of David and his kingdom.” (NRSV) Consider Isaiah 11:1-9; see verse 1: “a shoot shall come out from the stump of Jesse” (NRSV) – Jesse was David’s father. Consider Jeremiah 33:14-17; see verse 15: “I will cause a righteous Branch to spring up for David; and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land” (NRSV), and verse 17: “David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel” (NRSV). Sneak peak: The term “Son of David” will be used by people who were healed by Jesus and by people in Jerusalem when he entered the city on the first day of his last week on Earth, so it takes on important significance as his crucifixion nears. Son of Abraham : God made the Jewish people’s original covenant with Abraham, and all Jews trace their lineage from him (whereas not all are from the house of David). Why is this identification of Jesus important for Matthew’s Gospel and for us? David was only one part of one of the 12 tribes of Israel. Abraham was the father of the entire Jewish people. Muslims also see their lineage going back to Abraham, but it goes further than that. Through Abraham, all people were to be blessed, not just Abraham’s children: Gen. 12:2-3: “I will make of you a great nation, and . . . in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (NRSV). After Abraham shows his willingness to sacrifice Isaac: Gen. 22:17-18: “I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And . . . by your offspring shall all the nations of the earth gain blessing for themselves” (NRSV). Pick one of these identifications of Jesus and explain why it is important to you or has special meaning for you. Matt. 1:2-17 Jesus’s genealogy What names or other features of this genealogy stand out for you? It was unusual to include women in a Jewish genealogy, but Matthew’s genealogy names four: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba. . What makes these four women stand out as worthy of mention? All four of the women were from other nations; they were not Israelites: Tamar, Canaanite: Genesis 38. Rahab, from Jericho, so Canaanite: Joshua 2:1-21; 6:22-25. Ruth, Moabite: Ruth 2-4. Bathsheba, Hittite: 2 Samuel 11-12. Why would Matthew want to call attention to these foreign women in Jesus’s genealogy? What message would that send? Matthew might have included these women in part to deflect any criticism about Jesus’s birth circumstances. If the irregularities in David and Solomon’s lineage did not disqualify them from the throne of an eternal dynasty, then Jesus’s lineage does not disqualify him either. Joseph essentially adopted Jesus into the family line by taking him into his home, so he had a legitimate claim to being a son of David on the human level. Matthew’s genealogy ends with “Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born” (1:17 NRSV), which does not follow the standard male-line genealogy of “So-and-so, the father of So-and-such,” which might have been expected to end with “Joseph, the father of Jesus.” That would not have been accurate, as Matthew will explain shortly. When we look at God choice to make room in Jesus’s lineage for people of different backgrounds, how might that guide us in our attitudes toward people who have different backgrounds from ours? How does the presence of Gentiles in Jesus’s ancestry connect to the last two verses of Matthew’s Gospel (Mat. 28:19-20)? The good news about Jesus is meant for people of all nations. Sneak peak: Matthew spends a significant portion of his Gospel reporting Jesus’s preaching, healing, and miracles in Gentile areas. Matthew says in verse 14 that his genealogy has 3 sets of 14 generations. The number 14 might have been considered important as the numerical value of the sum of the three letters that make up David’s name in Hebrew. Matthew’s genealogy walks through the story of the Jews from the beginning with Abraham, to a high point when David was king, to the depths of despair when the Israelites were sent into exile to Babylon, and on to Jesus. How do you see Jesus serving as the climax to this story? Note: The Gospel writers were not aiming for genealogical perfection. Matthew is focused on his 3 times 14 arrangement. Luke has many more names in his list and is telling the genealogical history to make a different point. (Note: It is possible that Luke’s list is a genealogy of Mary, but there is no evidence to support the claim.) Matthew is not trying to nail down every genealogical detail. For example, considering the many decades between Rahab’s role in the Jericho story and Boaz’s role in the story of Ruth (David’s great-grandmother), Rahab could not have been the mother of Boaz. (Matthew is the only one who makes that claim; the book of Ruth, where Boaz’s story is told, does not make that claim.) Matthew’s list also doesn’t quite match up with the list in 1 Chronicles (see 1 Chron. 3:11-12). The Gospel writers were not trying to nail down every genealogical detail. They were trying to make much bigger and broader points. What do you think Matthew’s goals were in including this genealogy at the beginning of his story of Jesus? What points does he want us to take from it? It connects Jesus to the great past figures and also prepares us for the unique birth of Jesus by showing that irregularities show up in many places in the story of God’s people. Scholarly footnote: The third genealogical group, from the Exile to Jesus, is only 13 generations. Some scholars wonder if the 14th generation is Christ begetting the church. Take a step back and consider this: During Advent of 2023, my home parish posted online a musical reflection for each of the weeks of Advent. On the page Music for the Second Week of Advent ( St. Peter’s Church on Capitol Hill , https://saintpetersdc.org/pray/advent23/35171-music-for-the-second-week-of-advent ), we could listen to some lovely music including a remarkable interpretation of the genealogy of Jesus. The third musical selection on that page offered a video titled “…which was the Son of — Arvo Pärt (b.1935).” It can be found on YouTube here: Which Was the Son of... (Arvo Pärt) - Sofia Vokalensemble (“Which Was the Son of... (Arvo Pärt) - Sofia Vokalensemble.” Sofia Vokalensemble , 23 Oct. 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyPmFBpiF7E ). In this piece, a choir sings a beautiful musical selection telling the genealogy of Jesus as presented in the Gospel of Luke. The commentary on the page posted by St. Peter’s Parish acknowledged that “it can be dull to hear about Jesus’s genealogy,” but went on to say: “Estonian composer Arvo Pärt has set Luke’s version of this genealogy in such a way that it is no burden to hear Jesus’s family tree. Rather, Pärt’s music seems something like an overture to the whole biblical narrative, an epic tale on par with Lord of the Rings or Chronicles of Narnia. We are not bored by Jesus’s family tree; we are overwhelmed with wonder at its sweep across time.” This is beautiful! Jesus takes his place within an entire history of the working of God in our world, so that he can save all of the people in that genealogy, all of the people who descended from them, and indeed all human beings, wherever they fall in human history. God loved this world and the people he created so much that he chose to embed Himself in the world he created, in the history of that world, in the person of Jesus. That is what we celebrate at Christmas — not a pleasant story about a sweet little baby, but rather an audacious story about a God who loved his creation so much that he was not afraid to get his hands dirty and assume our genealogy, to become one of us so that we could become like him. Glory in the story — the story of God coming among us at Christmas! We can embrace Joseph as a role model of one who was willing, as Mary did, to say “Yes” to God, so that God could do his great work of salvation among us. What is one way you can say “Yes” to God, that will allow God to do something new in your life or the lives of those around you? Bibliography Click here for the bibliography . 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 Next