Search Results

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

Bibliography of major sources and additional sources used in this study of Paul’s Letter to Philemon Previous Philemon List Next Philemon - Bibliography Bibliography of major sources and additional sources used in this study of Paul’s Letter to Philemon. Some of the resources on the author's bookshelf. Tom Faletti October 4, 2025 Major Sources Ashby, Earnest G. “Philemon.” The International Bible Commentary: With the New International Version . F.F. Bruce, General Editor. Marshall Pickering/Zondervan, 1986. Barclay, William. The Letters to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon . The Westminster Press, Revised Edition, 1975. Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997. Dunnam, Maxie D. Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, & Philemon . The Communicator’s Commentary (Mastering the New Testament) , Lloyd J. Ogilvie, general editor. Word Books, 1982. Fitzmyer, Joseph A., S.J. “Philemon.” The New Jerome Biblical Commentary . Edited by Raymond E. Brown, et al. Prentice Hall, 1990. Havener, Ivan, OSB. First Thessalonians, Philippians, Philemon, Second Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians . Collegeville Bible Commentary, The Liturgical Press, 1983. Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: The New Testament, Revised Standard Edition, Second Catholic Edition . Ignatius Press, 2010. Interlinear Bible. Bible Hub , https://biblehub.com/interlinear/ . Liddell, Henry George and Robert Scott . An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, Founded Upon the Seventh Edition of Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899. For the full Lexicon from 1940 available online, see A Greek-English Lexicon , Furman Classics Editions, http://folio2.furman.edu/lsj/ or A Greek-English Lexicon , Internet Archive , Volume I: https://archive.org/details/b31364949_0001/mode/2up and Volume II: https://archive.org/details/b31364949_0002/mode/2up . New American Bible, revised edition (NABRE) . Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, 2010. Scripture texts in this work are taken from the New American Bible, revised edition © 2010, 1991, 1986, 1970 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, D.C. and are used by permission of the copyright owner. All Rights Reserved. No part of the New American Bible may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the copyright owner. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary . Edited by Raymond E. Brown, et al. Prentice Hall, 1990. The New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version: With the Apocrypha: An Ecumenical Study Bible . Eds. Michael D. Coogan, Marc Z. Brettler, Carol A. Newsom, and Pheme Perkins. 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2010. New Revised Standard Version Bible , copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance . Bible Hub , https://biblehub.com/greek/21.htm . Vine, William E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary , 1940, StudyLight.org , https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/ved.html . Additional Sources The British Museum. “Slavery in ancient Rome.” Exhibition: “Nero the man behind the myth,” 2021. The British Museum , https://www.britishmuseum.org/exhibitions/nero-man-behind-myth/slavery-ancient-rome . Coleman-Norton, Paul Robinson. “The Apostle Paul and the Roman Law of Slavery.” Studies in Roman economic and social history . Coleman-Norton, Paul Robinson, editor. Books for Libraries Press, Freeport, N.Y., 1969, 155-177. Internet Archive , https://archive.org/details/studiesinromanec0000cole/page/155 . Ignatius of Antioch. “The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians.” Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. From Ante-Nicene Fathers , Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. Christian Literature Publishing Co., Buffalo, NY, 1885. Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. New Advent , http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0104.htm . Orthodox Church in America. “Apostle Onesimus of the Seventy.” Orthodox Church in America , https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2018/02/15/100526-apostle-onesimus-of-the-seventy . Welch, John W. and John F Hall. “Chart 6-4: Estimated Distribution of Citizenship in the Roman Empire.” Charting the New Testament , BYU Studies, 2002, https://byustudies.byu.edu/further-study-chart/6-4-estimated-distribution-of-citizenship-in-the-roman-empire/ . White, Joel. “The Imprisonment That Could Have Happened (and the Letters Paul Could Have Written There): A Response to Ben Witherington.” JETS 61.3 (2018), 549–558, https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/files_JETS-PDFs_61_61-3_JETS_61.3_549-558_White.pdf . Witherington, Ben III. “The Case of the Imprisonment That Did Not Happen: Paul at Ephesus.” JETS 60/3 (2017), 525–532, https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/files_JETS-PDFs_60_60-3_JETS_60_3-525-532_Witherington.pdf . 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 Philemon List Next

Jesus is buried: Some people take action; others wait and watch. [Matthew 27:57-61; 27:62-66] Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 27:57-66 Jesus is buried: Some people take action; others wait and watch. Gustave Doré (1832-1883). The Burial of Christ . Woodcut. Detail. The illustration was originally published as one of 241 wood engravings created by Doré in La Grande Bible de Tours , issued in 1866. It is in the public domain due to copyright expiration. This image was reproduced from The Doré Bible Illustrations , Dover, 1974, and made available online by Felix Just, S.J. (see http://catholic-resources.org/Art/Dore.htm ) at https://catholic-resources.org/Dore/John19f.jpg , and its use is authorized by him. Tom Faletti May 17, 2024 Matthew 27:57-61 Jesus is laid in a tomb, under watchful eyes In verse 57, what does Matthew tell us about Joseph of Arimathea? He is rich, from Arimathea, and a disciple of Jesus. Mark adds that he is a respected member of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish council that had condemned Jesus (Mark 15:43), and Luke adds that Joseph had not agreed to the council’s actions. Scholars aren’t sure where Arimathea was. The early Christian historian Eusebius, writing nearly 300 years after the time of Jesus, identified it as the Old Testament town of Ramathaim or Ramah where Samuel the prophet was born (1 Sam. 1:1; 2:11), approximately 5 miles north of Jerusalem. What does Joseph do? Jewish Law required that criminals be buried on the same day they were executed (Deut. 21:22-23), and it would have been particularly unseemly to leave Jesus’s body to scavenging dogs on the Sabbath. Joseph steps in, in place of the family members who ordinarily would have acted. What does Matthew want us to understand about (1) the way Jesus’s body was handled, and (2) the status of the tomb he was buried in? Joseph’s action would have called attention to himself with Pilate and also might have deepened the wedge between him and other members of the Sanhedrin. How is Joseph an example of courage? How might we imitate Joseph in situations we might face in our own lives? Where might this kind of courage be needed? Who is watching as Joseph buries Jesus? The “other Mary” was the mother of James and Joseph – see verse 56. John 19:25 suggests she is the sister of Jesus’s mother Mary and the wife of Clopas. Some scholars sort out the family somewhat differently and think that Clopas ws the brother of Jesus’s (adopted) father Joseph, which would make this “other Mary” the sister-in-law of Jesus’s mother. Either way, the women of the family are steadfast to the end. Why do you think these women continue to follow the action, to the bitter end? Their commitment to God no matter what bad things happen, reminds me of Job’s comment, “Though He slay me, yet will I trust in him” (Job 13:15, KJV). It is as though they are saying: “Though He may die, still we will be there for Him.” How is their example a witness to us? Matthew 27:62-66 Setting a guard to avoid a hoax Who goes to Pilate? What is their concern? The Pharisees were last referenced in Matthew 23:29. All of the drama since then has involved the chief priests and elders – the political and religious leadership – not the rank-and-file Pharisees who are so concerned about fervently living out every detail of their understanding of the Law. Why do you think the Pharisees are involved again now? Why do they care whether people make up stories about a dead Jesus? The day of Preparation was the day before the Sabbath. Matthew says they went to Pilate on the day after the day of Preparation. If we understand the timing he is suggesting, it means they went to Pilate on the Sabbath, which would be a significant violation of the Sabbath required by the Law and show how concerned they were about Jesus even after his death. What do they specifically ask Pilate for? Notice that Pilate does not offer a simple “Yes.” His answer in verse 65 is literally, “You have a guard.” (Some translations say, “Take a guard,” but that is an interpretation, not the literal words in the Greek.) Pilate’s unclear answer has led to two different interpretations: Interpretation #1 : Pilate agreed to their request and made Roman soldiers available. There is a problem with this interpretation: If the guard was a Roman guard, it is hard to believe the soldiers would have gone to the Jewish leaders after the resurrection (see Matthew 28:11) and joined in a hoax that, if found out, would have caused them to be executed for dereliction of duty. Interpretation #2 : Pilate indirectly rejected their request by reminding them that they have their own soldiers – the Temple guard, who helped arrest Jesus – and is telling them to set up their own guard if they are concerned. There is a problem with this interpretation: If it was Jewish guards, why would they have been concerned about Pilate hearing about their failure at the tomb (Matthew 28:14)? A possible answer is that when a person has failed a task, they don’t want anyone in power knowing about it, even if they aren’t directly under that person’s authority; and in this case it might be even more troubling since Pilate, in effect, commissioned them to do the task. On balance, Interpretation #2 seems more likely, but it doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of our faith who the guards were. In verse 66, what do the Jewish leaders and the guard do? What do you think they expect will happen next? Barclay remarks on the irony of Pilate’s last statement, regarding the plan to guard the tomb: “make it as secure as you can” (Matthew 27:65, NRSV). Barclay says, “It is as if Pilate all unconsciously said, ‘Keep Christ in the tomb – if you can.’” He adds: “They had not realized one thing – that there was not a tomb in the world which could imprison the Risen Christ” (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , pp. 414). Every opponent of God would like to, in effect, keep Christ in his tomb. Why is that so important? If Jesus is risen, then he is still alive and active in the world today and must be confronted or accounted for; and many people would rather not have to explain what they are doing or not doing with regard to a man who said he was the Son of God and has come back to life – which no mere human could do. Are there ways that leaders in our societies do things that look like they are trying to keep Christ in his place rather than giving him free reign to work in our churches and communities? Explain. Are there ways that people in our churches do things that feel like they are trying to keep Christ in his place rather than giving him free reign to do his resurrection work in our churches and communities? Explain. What are some ways that we might unconsciously try to keep Christ in the “tomb” in our own lives rather than allowing the Risen Christ to have free reign? We have been exploring what happened to Jesus on Good Friday. The next passage describes what happens on Easter Sunday morning, the morning of Jesus’s glorious Resurrection. But there is a day in between – Holy Saturday. Take a minute to contemplate Holy Saturday – that day of waiting between Good Friday and Easter Sunday. Is there value in those days of waiting, between when we first experience pain and loss and when God helps us move to a new resurrection that rises above the pain and loss? What is the value of those days of waiting, between the dark and the dawn? How do times of waiting for God help build our character so that we become more like Jesus? How can we wait for God effectively? A footnote for the scholarly minded (feel free to skip): This story of the guard is only in Matthew’s Gospel, not in the other Synoptic Gospels, even though other parts of Matthew’s and Luke’s Gospels draw significantly from Mark. This bothers some scholars, leading some to suggest that it is merely apologetics (material developed to defend the faith against attacks) or is based in legend. One response is that perhaps Mark and Luke did not consider this story important to their audiences. Matthew’s community was a mix of Jewish and Gentile Christians, and, after Jerusalem was destroyed, the Jewish Christians were frequently challenged by Jewish leaders and even faced expulsion from synagogues. Those Jewish Christians would have valued this story as they tried to defend their faith against people who claimed that Jesus’s resurrection was just a stolen-body hoax. It would have been much less important to Luke’s and Mark’s largely Gentile audiences, who may not have been dealing so directly with that argument. We do not need to have this story to know that Jesus rose from the dead. We have abundant evidence in the 4 Gospels, in subsequent books of the New Testament, and in the lives of believers for 2,000 years. But even today, people who do not want to believe in Jesus like to suggest that perhaps his followers stole his body; so perhaps the story still has special relevance for us today. Take a step back and consider this: The Jewish leaders of Jesus’s time were living in a world of “what-ifs”: What if the people are being fooled by Jesus and it was the devil who sent a wonder-worker named Jesus to turn people away from their historic Jewish faith? What if Jesus’s radically different preaching causes the people to get so riled up that the Romans come down hard on us? What if the disciples of Jesus went and stole the body? What if? What if? What if? “What if” is not always a bad question. Sometimes it keeps us out of trouble or helps us anticipate a problem that we can solve or deflect if we think ahead. But sometimes, “What if” becomes an excuse to avoid confronting the uncomfortable. How do you know when your “what-ifs” are reasonable and when your “what-ifs” are masking your own unjustified resistance to the truth? Is there something that maybe God has been nudging you to do, but you are so caught up in “What ifs” that you can’t get yourself to do it? If so, what might Jesus say to you to encourage you to respond to God’s nudges? Talk to him about it. 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

While the normal routines of life go on, Jesus knows that one of his disciples is in the process of betraying him. How do you keep going when bad things are happening? [Matthew 26:14-16; 26:17-19; 26:20-25] Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 26:14-25 While the normal routines of life go on, Jesus knows that one of his disciples is in the process of betraying him. How do you keep going when bad things are happening? Unidentified artist. Judas mottar de trettio silverpenningarna [Judas receives the silver pieces] . Circa 1425-1450. Chalk painting, Brönnestad Church, Hässleholm, Sweden. Photo by Lennart Karlsson. CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kalkm%C3%A5lning,_Judas_mottar_de_trettio_silverpenningarna_-_Br%C3%B6nnestads_kyrka,_H%C3%A4ssleholm_-_9017124.jpg . Tom Faletti September 15, 2025 Matthew 26:14-16 Judas betrays Jesus Why do you think Judas offers to betray Jesus? There are three ways that scholars commonly attempt to explain Judas’s betrayal: Judas might have been greedy. The Gospel of John supports this idea in John 12:6, where John says that Judas kept the money for Jesus and his companions and used to steal from it. This explanation is supported by the fact that in Matthew 26:15 Judas asks the chief priests how much money they would give him if he betrayed Jesus to them. Judas might have been disillusioned because Jesus was not showing any evidence that he was going to rise up against the Romans and establish an independent Jewish nation. Judas might have believed deeply in the cause he thought Jesus stood for and felt that Jesus was moving too slowly. He might have thought he was forcing Jesus’s hand in order to speed up the inauguration of the kingdom. What is the significance of 30 pieces of silver? Exodus 21:32 indicates that 30 shekels of silver was the value of a slave in ancient Israel – the amount of compensation that had to be paid if a man’s ox gored another man’s slave. The weights of various coins were not very standardized, but the shekel and the “silver pieces” in Judas’s time were close enough that it is reasonable to hear hints of Exodus 21:32 in Matthew 26:15. A story in Zechariah 11:7-13 about a rejected shepherd suggests that 30 shekels is 30 days’ wages, and the silver pieces Judas accepted may have had the value of 30 days’ wages. However, depending on the coin that was used, it may have been worth four times that much, or 120 days’ wages: a third of a year’s wages, which is comparable to $8,000 to $16,000 today ( The New Oxford Annotated Bible , Matthew 26:14 footnote, p. 1785). Judas is betraying Jesus for less than half of the cost of the ointment the woman used to anoint Jesus in the previous passage (Matt. 26:6-13). Why do you think Judas decided to betray Jesus? Do you think he really wanted to see Jesus killed? Explain. If we put the best face on Judas’s actions, he thought he knew better than Jesus how to bring God’s kingdom into its glory. How do people in our day try to force a greater manifestation of God’s kingdom? How does Judas contrast with the woman who anointed Jesus? How is Judas different than the other disciples? How might you sometimes be at risk of trying to force God’s hand rather than waiting for God’s timing and method of working in our lives? Matthew 26:17-19 Preparation for the Passover meal In this passage, Jesus prepares to celebrate his final Passover meal with his disciples. He has probably eaten the sacrificial Passover lamb in Jerusalem every year since he was a child (Luke 2:41 tells us that his parents went to Jerusalem every year for the Passover). What do you know about the Jewish celebration of the Passover? What were they commemorating and how did they commemorate it? Passover is the annual Jewish feast celebrating the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. It is also known as the feast of Unleavened Bread, because the Israelites were told to prepare unleavened bread to take on their exodus out of Egypt, because they would not have time for bread to rise as they left. Passover as the night when the Jews put the blood of a lamb on the lintels of their doors so that the angel of death would “pass over” their households when the death of the firstborns convinced Pharaoh to stop standing against God and allow the Israelites to leave Egypt. Passover is celebrated on the 15 th of Nissan (the Jewish month that, based on the lunar cycle, falls during our March/April). The “first day” referred to here is the day of preparation, the 14 th of Nissan. At sundown, the 15 th of Nissan would begin. The Passover meal was eaten on the first night of a week-long celebration of the salvation from slavery that God provided by bringing the Israelites out of Egypt. What preparations do Jesus and his disciples make for the Passover meal? It appears that Jesus had spoken with someone in advance about using his house to have the Passover meal. This is one of those little clues that remind us that the Bible gives us only a selected sample of everything Jesus did and said (see John 21:25, which suggests that if all the stories were told, the world could not hold all the books that would be written). Do you suppose there are things in your life that Jesus is also preparing in advance for? If the disciples had not done what Jesus directed them to do, the Passover meal might not have been as orderly: there might have been last-minute scrambling, etc. What does this tell you about the importance of listening for God’s guidance and following his direction? Matthew 26:20-25 Jesus acknowledges that he will be betrayed by an insider What does Jesus say he knows? Why do you think he is saying this, rather than keeping it to himself? How do the disciples feel about the possibility that someone might betray Jesus? Why would they ask, “Surely, not I?” Wouldn’t they know they are not going to betray him? Could they be clueless about just how big the betrayal is that Jesus is talking about, and think that Jesus is referring to some more minor way they might “betray” him due to foolishness or pettiness? Are there ways that we might “betray” Jesus in small ways, not by a dramatic denunciation but by our own mundane sinfulness? How might that be? What title for Jesus do the apostles use in v. 22? What title for Jesus does Judas use in v. 25? “Rabbi” is an Aramaic word meaning “teacher” or “master” that was used as a title of honor for teachers. The Jews of Jesus’s time spoke Aramaic, a language related to Hebrew. Matthew is writing his Gospel in Greek, so he almost always translates into Greek what the people would have said in Aramaic. Everywhere else, he uses the Greek word for teacher where Jews would have said “rabbi.” But not here. Here, Matthew preserves the fact that Judas called Jesus “rabbi.” What does it tell you about their relationship when a person calls someone else “Lord”? Does “Teacher” have the same connotation? Are our teachers seen as our lords? Does the fact that Judas uses the word for teacher, when the disciples usually refer to Jesus as Lord, give us a hint as to Judas’s attitude toward Jesus? Explain. In what ways do you see Jesus as “Lord”? In verse 25, when Judas says, “Surely, not I?”, Jesus replies, “You have said so” rather than a simple “Yes.” Why might Jesus have phrased it this way? Jesus’s choice of words is significant here. If Jesus had said, “Yes,” rather than “You have said so,” it would have suggested that Judas was locked into a path of betrayal and no longer had any choice. By saying to Judas, you have said so, Jesus leaves room for Judas to decide to say otherwise, to change his mind, to retreat from the path he has started down. This shows that Jesus, to the end, loves Judas and is holding out hope that Judas will do the right thing. Note: The fact that Jesus’s death fulfills Scripture does not mean that Judas was forced to betray Jesus. Judas is not a puppet. Jesus ultimately would have died on a Roman cross even if Judas had changed his mind and not helped the Jewish leaders. God did not need Judas to be evil in order to accomplish his work of salvation. In Matthew 26:24, Jesus says, “It would have been better for him if he had not been born.” Some people find this troubling because it seems harsh. However, it is not as harsh as verse 25:41: “Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” Jesus does not actually say that Judas is going to hell. Judas’s final judgment remains to be seen. He could still repent. Does God ever give up on the possibility that you, or any other person, might repent and move away from a path of sin or evil? How can you keep an open mind about others’ potential to turn around? Take a step back and consider this: In these passages, we see the normal routines of life going on – the ordinary preparation for an annual celebration – while the wheels are turning that will lead to Jesus’s crucifixion. And Jesus knows what is going on! How do you think Jesus handled the stress and inner turmoil that comes with knowing that bad things are happening? We face this same problem sometimes. Bad things may be happening in our lives, not necessarily life-or-death situations like Jesus is facing, but serious, potentially life-altering circumstances. Perhaps we are waiting for medical test results that could indicate we have a serious illness or disease. Perhaps we are watching an adult child or other loved one struggle with drugs or other serious impairments. Perhaps a business we are deeply involved in is failing. Perhaps a government is trying to find us and deport us even though we have never done anything wrong other than cross a border to find safety from a life-threatening situation. How do you deal with stress when bad things are happening around you or you are waiting for potentially bad news? Where do you turn for help in those difficult times? Do you see Jesus as someone who has gone through that kind of stress and can help you get through it? What could you do to reach out to him and draw strength from him? Jesus appears to have enjoyed spending time with his disciples. Other than going away to spend time in prayer with his Father, we never see him trying to avoid the disciples. Human beings are social creatures. Jesus was God, but he was also human, and as a human, he may have found encouragement in spending time with those he loved. Who around you might be experiencing the stress of living in a bad situation or waiting for potentially bad news? How could you be a help to them? 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

Two responses to Jesus: total opposition and extravagant devotion. How can you show how you feel about Jesus? [Matthew 26:1-5; 26:6-13] Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 26:1-13 Two responses to Jesus: total opposition and extravagant devotion. How can you show how you feel about Jesus? Maître François (fl. 1460-1480). Anointing of Jesus , from an illuminated manuscript of Augustine's “ La Cite de Dieu ,” book I-X. Circa 1475-80. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anointing_La_Cite_de_Dieu.jpg . Tom Faletti September 15, 2025 In Matthew 26, we begin Jesus’s “Passion”: the events immediately surrounding his suffering and death on the cross. These are his final 48 hours on earth before he gives up his life for humanity. In the course of his mistreatment, he will be called “Messiah,” “Son of God,” and “King of the Jews.” In Matthew 26:1-13, we see 2 extreme reactions to Jesus: extreme hatred and extreme love. Matthew 26:1-5 Extreme hatred: the chief priests and elders plot Jesus’s death At this time, the high priest was appointed by the Roman rulers. Caiaphas was high priest from A.D. 18 to 36, an unusually long time considering that the average tenure of a high priest was around 4 years at this point in Jewish history. This suggests that Caiaphas was very good at navigating the politics of dealing with the Romans and keeping the peace (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , pp. 361-362). In his book Mere Christianity , C.S. Lewis said that Jesus hasn’t given us the option of being neutral about him: I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. (Lewis, pp. 55-56, at the end of the chapter entitled “The Shocking Alternative”) The chief priests and elder have made their choice. What does Jesus say is going to happen to happen? Jesus again states the specific manner by which they will kill him – crucifixion – and says that he will be “handed over” – a passive phrase that suggests that no one is truly in control of him; rather, God is in ultimate control and allowing all of it to happen ( The New Jerome Biblical Commentary , par. 147, p. 669). This term “handed over” will appears frequently in the passages ahead. Jesus has already used it in 17:22 and 20:18 to describe what is about to happen to him. He will be “handed over” multiple times before his death: he will be handed over to the chief priests in 26:45 and to Pilate in 27:2; he will be handed over to be crucified in 27:26; and his body will be handed over to Joseph of Arimathea in 27:58). What is this “Passover” that was about to be celebrated? This is the annual Jewish festival celebrating God’s saving action in the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Who is involved in the conspiracy against Jesus? The chief priests and the elders are the parties to this plot. They are the religious and political leaders and powerbrokers of the society. Notice that the people who seek Jesus’s death are not the Pharisees and scribes , even though they frequently clashed with him. Jesus’s death was not an act of “the Jews” as some amorphous collective. The Pharisees – the Jews most focused on a living a holy life – were not part of this plot except those Pharisees and scribes who also were leaders. Jesus was executed by the scheming of the political and religious leaders, who saw him as too great a threat to their fragile hold on all they held dear. What do the chief priests and elders want to do, and what holds them back? How can a person reach a such an extreme stage of hate that they want to have Jesus killed? When you get focused on protecting what you have, what holds you back from doing wrong? Matthew 26:6-13 Extreme devotion: the anointing of Jesus at Bethany Where is Jesus when this happens? Recall that Bethany is a village on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, where Jesus has been staying each night. Luke and John tell us that Bethany is where Martha, Mary, and Lazarus lived. In John 11:45-53, the man is Lazarus and the woman is his sister Mary. Here in Matthew and also in Mark 14:3-9 the woman is not named. Luke 7:36-56 tells the story of a penitent woman who anointed Jesus’s feet at the home of Simon the leper. In the other accounts she is not identified as a penitient woman. In Luke and John, the woman anoints Jesus’s feet, but in Matthew and Mark she anoints his head. The differences in details suggest that there may have been 2 events where Jesus was anointed – probably Matthew, Mark, and John describing one event and Luke describing the other – but that some of the details may have become blurred or merged as the Christian community recalled the stories. The word for leprosy could refer to any of a variety of skin diseases, but having any of those diseases required that a person be separated from the rest of society to protect against the spread of the disease. Therefore, Simon was probably healed by Jesus at some earlier time. What does the woman do? Mark 14:5 says that the ointment could have been sold for more than 300 days’ wages – in our day that might be $18,000 to $36,000. She used costly ointment and spread it extravagantly. Why do you think she does this? How does the woman’s action affirm Jesus’s identity as the Messiah? “Messiah” means “Anointed One.” In the Bible, anointing was a way of signifying that God had chosen someone – for example, to be a king as when Samuel anointed Saul and later David. The woman may not have been making an intentional statement about Jesus’s identity as the Messiah – she may have just been expressing her extreme appreciation of him by giving him the most precious thing she owned – but the action does have messianic overtones. How do the disciples react to what the woman did? Notice that the disciples seem to be responding reasonably to Jesus’s clear and repeated concern for the poor. Jesus addresses that concern. How does Jesus describe the woman’s action in verse 10? She has done a good thing for him. We will talk about Jesus’s comment about the poor in a few minutes. Stay focused on the woman for now. What is the significant of Jesus saying that she did it “for me”? Does Jesus’s reaction give you any guidance in trying to judge when an extravagant action might be appropriate? The woman’s action was an act of love, coming from her heart. The disciples’ reaction was an act of practicality, coming from reason. How can we choose wisely in trying to decide when to listen to the heart and when to listen to practical reason? Don’t settle for a glib “always listen to your heart.” Listening to your heart always seems to work out in Disney movies, but in real life people’s lives have sometimes been shipwrecked by uncritically listening to their heart: rash marriages, bankruptcy, unnecessary dangers, and even death have followed those who fail to tame and guide the yearnings of their heart. Yet, excessive reliance on reason can sometimes lead to loneliness, missed opportunities, and a cold and joyless existence. How can we choose wisely when to listen to our extravagant hearts and when to listen to our practical and utilitarian minds? How does a person reach a stage of such extravagant love toward Jesus? The woman proactively seized the opportunity to honor Jesus while she could. If she had waited, the opportunity would have been lost. Are there times when we need to act while we can, to do some service for God, because we might not have the chance later? What does this tell you? Have you ever had a time where, out of love for God, you took an action that was extravagant or exceptionally generous or unusually self-giving? How did it feel to be doing that, and what happened? Is there anything you feel God calling you to do right now, out of love for him, that might be beyond the norm? How might you test that feeling to see if it is genuinely from God? Now let’s focus on verse 11. What does Jesus say in verse 11? The actual phrasing in the Greek does not say that you will always have the poor with you. Some translations get this wrong. The Greek word “have” is in the present tense – you [currently] always have the poor with you (the NRSV gets this translation right). It is not a prediction about the future, nor is it an excuse for not trying to reduce poverty. Why do you think it was true in Jesus’s time that they always had poor people among them? What kinds of societal structures were common in Jesus’s time that contributed to the fact that poverty was common? Why do you think it is true in our present time that we always have poor people among us? Are there societal structures in our time that contribute to the presence of poverty in our midst? Jesus is drawing on Deuteronomy 15:11, which commands God’s people to help the poor: “Since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth, I therefore command you, ‘Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.’” (NRSV). How important is it to God that we care for the needy, and why do you think he cares? This passage does not support the view that poverty is inevitable and therefore we should accept it. First, Deuteronomy tells us to do more than just accept it – it tells us to open our hand to the poor and needy. Second, the Gospel of Mark has an additional sentence that Matthew left out when he shortened the story. In Mark 14:7, Jesus tells us that we can do good to the poor whenever we want. In Mark 14:7, Jesus says that you can do good to the poor whenever you want. How much of a priority do you think we should place on meeting the needs of the poor? Do you think Jesus would be comfortable with a world where Christians just accepted the existence of poverty and didn’t do much about it? Explain. What do you think we should be doing about poverty in our time – individually, through nonprofit organizations, through governments, and in other ways? In Matthew 26:12, what does Jesus say the woman has done for him? What do you think this means? What does Jesus say about the woman in verse 13? What does the example of this woman say to you about your interactions with Jesus? Can you draw any additional conclusions about this passage when you recall that in the previous passage Jesus said that what we do for the “least” among us we do for him? If what we do to those in need we do to Jesus, how might we “anoint” Jesus by the way we treat the least among us? Throughout history, women’s stories have seldom received as much attention as men’s stories and often have not been preserved at all. How does Jesus affirm/elevate women in verse 13 and throughout this story? How might we help affirm the value of what women do in our society? Take a step back and consider this: Jesus affirms that this particular act by this particular woman has lasting value. Not all acts of extravagance have such value. What matters is what has value in God’s eyes, not the world’s eyes. What can you do because of your love for Jesus that will have lasting value in the eyes of God? 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

Wise men come to see the newborn king – and still do today! Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 2:1-12 Wise men come to see the newborn king – and still do today! Possibly Antonio Vassilacchi ( also called L'Aliense) (1556-1629). Chiesa di San Zaccaria church, Venice, Italy. Image provided by Wix. 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 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

The danger of riches: What kind of grip do they have on you? Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 19:16-22 The danger of riches: What kind of grip do they have on you? Image by freestocks, provided by Unsplash via Wix. Tom Faletti February 13, 2024 Matthew 19:16-22 The rich young man Why do you think Jesus starts off by asking the man why he is asking about the good? Describe the young man. Besides being rich, what kind of person was he? Some people might say that the young man was a “good person” who also happened to be rich. Do you know people like that? Others might say he was person who followed religious rules but kept his wealth to himself and didn’t care about the poor. Do you know people like that? In verse 16, the young man asks: What good deed (singular) must I do? At first, it sounds like he thinks there is one magic step that would guarantee him eternal life. How would you answer, if someone asked you what is the one thing they need to do to go to heaven? My answer, which would show that faith (and life) is more complicated than that, might be: The one thing you need to do is to give every part of your life over to Jesus to serve him. In other words, there isn’t one simple, single thing. When the young man asks which commandments he needs to keep, what is Jesus’s response? Notice that Jesus includes not only parts of the Ten Commandments but also to love your neighbor as yourself. How does that up the ante for what is expected? In verse 20, we find out what the heart of the problem is. This young man has been striving valiantly to fulfill all of the laws in the Old Testament (and there were very many! – 613 of them). He still feels a void. The very fact that he is asking this question, rather than feeling smug in his devotion to the Law, tells you the internal struggle he is going through. You can hear the pain in his voice as he asks, “What do I still lack?” (19:20, NABRE) Have you ever hit a point in your spiritual life where you felt like you were doing everything you were supposed to be doing and it still wasn’t enough? If so, what did you learn from that time of struggle? In verse 21, Jesus prefaces his directive to sell all with the phrase, “If you wish to be perfect.” The Greek word translated “perfect” here means complete or finished and responds to the man’s sense of being unfinished in his pursuit of eternal life. Jesus is inviting the young man to a new level of perfection or completion in his desire to follow God. In verse 21, Jesus tells the young man that to address what he feels is lacking in his life, he needs to sell his possessions, give the money to the poor, and come follow Jesus – i.e., follow him completely, without any earthly attachments. How might that address what the young man feels is lacking in his life? Do you think this directive to sell all you have applies to all people, or was it specifically chosen to meet the need of this young man? Consider that while many people shared from their wealth in the early church, they were not required to do so – see, for example, Acts 5:1-4. Also consider friends of Jesus such as Lazarus, Martha, and Mary, who did not sell all they had and follow him. If we don’t give up our possessions, does that mean we can’t be “perfect”? Does it mean we can’t go to heaven? Does it mean there is some stage of discipleship that we will miss out on? Why might riches be an obstacle to perfect discipleship? Members of my Bible Study group offered answers such as: They might lead people to think they don’t need God. They might be a distraction from what is important to God. They might cause us to put our focus on material things instead of the things that matter most to God. They might encourage us to focus on ourselves, our own ego and interests, and become selfish. For you, how might your possessions and wealth (however big or small) be an obstacle to following Jesus more perfectly or completely? Some people think that Jesus was asking this particular young man to take the step he needed to take to fulfill his calling, but that it does not necessarily apply to all people. Why might this not apply to everyone? What might be the particular step you need to take to fulfill your calling? Take a step back and consider: Since each of us is unique, it wouldn’t be surprising that what one person needs is different than what another person needs. One person feels called to the priesthood, another to a marriage relationship, and a third never feels a tug in either of those directions. One person feels called to government service and another to the world of high finance. One person is a prosecutor while another is a public defender. One person feels called to the interior life of prayer and meditation, while another is devoted to a wide range of social relationships and activities. God has made each of us unique. Yet whoever we are, wherever we are, we need to come to grips with our relationship with possessions. Even a hermit might have to struggle with this: Where do “things” fit into my life and how do they affect my spiritual life? There are many people who will tell you how to deal with the possessions in your house, whether by buying closet organizers, sorting things into piles, or gently giving them away. Jesus’s concern here is not where you put your possessions, but what hold they might have on your heart. What is your current relationship with your possessions? Do you give them an appropriate priority, or do they tend to overshadow things that are more important? Are things that have a “grip” on you that you need to break free from? Is there something you need to do with your possessions to address something lacking in your spiritual 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

Jesus endured the torture and the mocking for us. How can we embrace his sacrificial attitude? [Matthew 27:27-31; 27:32-44] Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 27:27-44 Jesus endured the torture and the mocking for us. How can we embrace his sacrificial attitude? Édouard Manet, Jesus Mocked by the Soldiers , 1865, oil on canvas, Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Photo taken by Tom Faletti, 21 July 2018. Tom Faletti September 20, 2025 Matthew 27:27-31 The crown of thorns A Roman cohort had six “centuries” of up to 80 soldiers each, so there were 480 soldiers in a full cohort. Each century was headed by a centurion. We don’t know whether Pilate had brought an entire cohort to Jerusalem when he came to make sure things stayed under control during the Passover feast, but he certainly would have had a large force in order to be ready to deal with the crowds that swelled the city during the feast. What did the soldiers in Pilate’s cohort do? What do you think they thought of Jesus? How might they have viewed him? What was the point of the crown of thorns? Why do you think they mocked Jesus as “King of the Jews”? Matthew 27:32-44 Jesus’s crucifixion and the people who interact with him during it In this section, we will look at the crucifixion of Jesus through the perspective of the people who interacted with him during his final hours. We will see in verse 55 that there were other people present, standing at a distance, but right now we will focus on the people who directly interacted with Jesus. Simon from Cyrene: Verse 32 How does Simon end up in Jesus’s story? Cyrene was the capital city of a Roman province called Cyrenaica on the north coast of Africa. He had probably come to Jerusalem for the Passover feast. He was pressed into service. Roman soldiers had the right to demand that people in occupied territories perform services for them: for example, to carry a burden for up to a mile. He was asked to carry Jesus’s cross. What do you think Simon thought of Jesus? How might he have viewed him? Do you think his view of Jesus might have been affected by helping Jesus carry his cross? Mark 15:21 says that Simon was “the father of Alexander and Rufus.” This implies that Mark knew them, so they were probably Christians when Mark wrote his Gospel. This leads to at least two possibilities: (1) Simon may have already been a follower of Jesus, who was following Jesus on his path to his execution and was grabbed by the Roman soldiers and forced to help Jesus. In this case, Simon’s sons must have been known to Mark’s community when Mark was writing. (2) Simon may not have had anything to do with Jesus before he was pressed into service by the Romans. Luke 23:26 says that Simon was coming in from the country, so he was not following what was happening to Jesus. In this case, although Simon may not have been a follower of Jesus when he was pressed into service, by the time Mark wrote, Simon’s sons must have become known among the believers. In this case, Simon may have experienced a conversion after or as a result of helping Jesus carry his cross. When you are given the opportunity to do something that “helps” Jesus – that helps make Jesus or the kingdom of God a little more real for someone – how does it make you feel? In what ways are you being called to help carry Jesus’s cross in your life today? Is there someone you know who is carrying a heavy cross right now, and you might be able to help lighten their load by helping them bear the burden? What could you do to help them carry their cross? The soldiers in the unit that crucified Jesus: Verses 33-37 The soldiers took Jesus to the site of his execution. John tells us there were 4 soldiers directly involved in the crucifixion (John 19:23). The Jews did not allow executions within the walls of God’s holy city of Jerusalem, and the Romans appear to have been honoring this practice. Jesus is taken to Golgotha, a small hill that was, at that time, outside the city walls. “Golgotha” was an Aramaic word for “skull.” (“Calvary” is Latin for “skull,” which is why we know it as Calvary.) The most common explanation for why it had this name is that it was shaped like a skull, but some scholars think the name arose because it was used for executions. What did these soldiers do? (They did a lot. Look at verses 32, 34, 35a, 35b, 36, and 37.) In verse 34, Jesus was offered wine mixed with gall, a painkilling drug intended to deaden the pain as they drove the nails through his hands and feet. Matthew doesn’t mention it, but this is often seen as fulfilling Psalm 69:2, which reads: “They gave me poison for food, / and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink” (Psalm 69:21, NRSV). Jesus refused the painkiller, choosing to fully experience the worst of it. The Roman soldiers had a right to take a condemned man’s garments. The dividing of the garments recalls Psalm 22:18 (NRSV; 22:19 in the NABRE). What do you think these soldiers thought of Jesus? How might they have viewed him? How would the sign over Jesus’s head – “King of the Jews” (verse 37) – have been interpreted differently by the Romans and the Jews? Crucifixion was an excruciating torture. The victim had to lift his body to take every breath. If he became too exhausted to lift himself, he would not be able to breathe and would begin to suffocate. Meanwhile, flies and birds would be attacking his bleeding wounds, and he would be helpless to stop them. Jesus submitted willingly to this torture – for us. What does his crucifixion mean to you? The two criminals crucified with Jesus: Verses 38, 44 The two criminals who were crucified with Jesus are variously called bandits, revolutionaries, criminals, thieves, robbers, rebels, or outlaws, depending on the translation. The word’s root originally carried a meaning that involved plunder, but it is unclear what kind of criminals these men were. What do the criminals who were crucified with Jesus do? What do you think they thought of Jesus? How might they have viewed him? Note: Luke tells us that one of the two criminals crucified with Jesus (now often called the “Good Thief”) had a change of heart and Jesus said told him he would be with Jesus in Paradise (Luke 23:39-43), but Matthew does not have that story. The passersby: Verses 39-40 What do the passersby do? What do they specifically mock Jesus for? What do you think they thought of Jesus? How might they have viewed him? The chief priests, scribes, and elders: Verses 41-43 What do the chief priests and elders do? What do you think they thought of Jesus? How might they have viewed him? What do they specifically mock him for, in verse 42? in verse 43? Why are they focused on the claim that he is “the King of Israel”? Note: “King of the Jews” is how a foreigner such as Pilate would say it. The chief priests wouldn’t say “King of the Jews” any more than an American would refer to the “President of the Americans.” Jews would use the proper name for their nation: “King of Israel,” just as Americans would say “President of the United States.” “King of the Jews” is a foreigner’s way of referring to him. Why are they also focused on his claim to be the “Son of God”? What evidence would they offer in support of their claim that he was not the Son of God? How does Jesus’s refusal to “come down from the cross” show that Jesus’s claims are true? William Booth, the English Methodist preacher who with his wife Catherine founded the Salvation Army, is quoted as saying, “It is precisely because he would not come down that we believe in him” (quoted in many places, including William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2 , p. 405). Why is the cross part of God’s plan and evidence that Jesus is God’s Son?? Almost every group of people present at the crucifixion mocked Jesus: the chief priests and elders, the passersby, and the two men crucified with him. How do you think Jesus felt as he faced all this mocking? The mocking seems to fulfill the statement in Psalm 22: “All who see me mock me…” (Psalm 22:7-8; 22:8-9 in the NABRE). Jesus will quote from the beginning of that psalm before he dies. It is interesting to note that the soldiers who were directly responsible for carrying out the crucifixion are not listed among those who mocked Jesus. Why do you think that is? Here are some of the possibilities: (1) Perhaps they did mock him, but Matthew has already told us that the whole cohort mocked him early and didn’t feel the need to reiterate it. (2) Perhaps in their mind they were just doing their jobs and weren’t personally invested in it. (3) Perhaps since Jesus didn’t resist or make their job difficult, they did not want to rile up a compliant captive. Or: (4) Perhaps they were impressed by him in some way. What might have impressed the soldiers about Jesus? If you had been there watching all of these people who interacted with Jesus, whose reactions to Jesus would have most intrigued or troubled you, or impressed or appalled you, and why? Why do you think Jesus put up with all this abuse and humiliation without responding? Have you ever been mocked or humiliated? How does Jesus’s example offer guidance to you if you should suffer such abuse in the future? What difference does it make to your faith, that Jesus endured all of this? Take a step back and consider this: Jesus is showing us in his Passion what he taught us in the Sermon on the Mount. In those teachings, way back at the beginning of his ministry, he said: Don’t be angry (Matt. 5:22). Turn the other cheek (5:39). Love your enemies (5:44). Pray to the Father, “Thy will be done” (6:9-10). Seek first the kingdom (6:33). Enter through the narrow gate (7:13). We are not all called to give up our lives literally as Jesus did, but we are all called to let go of ourselves, take up our cross, and follow him (Matt. 16:24), embracing his way of life. He teaches how to live as children of our Father in heaven, and he models that life for us. The life he taught and lived is “the road that leads to life” (7:14). Even when it doesn’t look like it, it is the way to life now and forever with Jesus. How can we embrace the sacrificial attitude Jesus modeled on the cross and taught in the Sermon on the Mount? When it seems hard to embrace Jesus’s way, you might consider talking with a mature believer and gaining their perspective. And talk it over honestly with God. You don’t need to hide anything from him (actually, you can’t). He wants you to share your struggles, not just your successes. He wants to be there with you when you doubt, not just when you are confident in your faith. Talk to Him. What would you like to ask his help with, right now? And if God’s grace has helped you to embrace the life that comes with giving up your life for Christ, are there people you could come alongside and be an encouragement to them when God seems distant? How can you shine the light you have been given, to be a blessing to others who feel like they are surrounded by the dark? 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

The various denominations within Christianity don’t agree on whether Mary had other children besides Jesus, but they do agree with his statement that those who do his will are his brothers and sisters. How can we respond? [Matthew 13:54-58; Mark 6:1-6; Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21] Previous Mary List Next Session 5: Jesus’s family The various denominations within Christianity don’t agree on whether Mary had other children besides Jesus, but they do agree with his statement that those who do his will are his brothers and sisters. How can we respond? [Matthew 13:54-58; Mark 6:1-6; Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21] Everyone can be a brother or sister of Jesus, if they are willing to do the will of God. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti July 16, 2025 In the next two sets of passages that we are going to explore, the Gospels refer to Jesus’s “brothers.” The question of how to interpret the word “brothers” divides the body of Christ, with Protestants on one side and Catholics and Orthodox on the other. At its root, the question is whether Mary had other children after she gave birth to Jesus or remained a virgin all her life. Protestants say she gave birth to many children and Catholics and Orthodox say she was “ever-virgin.” There is also a question as to whether Jesus had stepbrothers who were children of Joseph from a prior marriage. This study is designed to be useful to people from all Christian denominations, so we will not insist that everyone reach the same conclusion. What this study will do, however, is call attention to the many pieces of evidence that scholars consider as they study the question, because the evidence is not as simple as some would like to think it is. Matthew 13:54-58 / Mark 6:1-6 Isn’t Jesus the son of Mary and the brother of James et al? Matthew and Mark tell about the same incident in these passages, which is why they are paired together here. Before we explore the main point of the passage (which is not whether Mary was a perpetual virgin), let’s deal with the issue of Jesus’s “brothers.” Without trying to argue one side or the other, can you state in one sentence why the word “brothers” is controversial? Why does it matter whether Jesus had “brothers” or not? There are a variety of issues to consider in exploring the disagreement about what “brothers” means in this passage. Here is the background: Three common interpretations of the references to Jesus’s “brothers” Protestants take the word “brothers” literally and argue that Mary had sex with her husband Joseph after Jesus was born and gave birth to children who were the blood brothers and sisters of Jesus. The Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church have always maintained that Mary was a virgin throughout her life and that “brothers” is properly interpreted as “relatives” – most likely cousins. A third view, which is acceptable to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, is that “brothers” refers to sons of Joseph from a prior marriage, who would therefore be stepbrothers of Jesus (because Jesus was, in effect, adopted by Joseph). What is the evidence that might help us determine whether “brothers” means blood brothers, cousins, or stepbrothers, when it is used with regard to Jesus? To evaluate whether when the Bible refers to Jesus’s “brothers” it is referring to blood brothers, cousins, or stepbrothers, we must consider a variety of evidence, background information, and Scripture passages. Here are some of the factors to consider: In both the Old and New Testaments, the word “brother” is used for a variety of relationships, figurative and literal, partly because the Hebrew language did not have a word for “cousin” ( Ignatius Catholic Study Bible , Matthew 12:46 fn., pp. 29-30). In Greek, which is the language of the New Testament, the word for “brothers” is adelphoi , which is used for many kinds of relationships: (1) blood brothers (including stepbrothers), (2) people from the same nation, (3) one’s fellow men, and (4) fellow believers. It does not always mean a literal blood brother, so its meaning in any particular passage must be considered carefully, taking into account everything we know. The Gospels never refer to any person as a child of Mary except Jesus. We see references to Jesus’s brothers, but no one other than Jesus is ever called a child of Mary. This does not prove that Mary was ever-virgin any more than the references to Jesus’s “brothers” proves they were blood brothers. It is just evidence to be considered. Matthew 12:55 and Mark 6:3 tell us the names of four “brothers” of Jesus: James, Joseph (or its Greek variant Joses, in Mark’s Gospel), Judas, and Simon. Later, Matthew 27:56 tells us that one of the women looking on at Jesus’s crucifixion was “Mary, the mother of James and Joseph.” Similarly, Mark 15:40 refers to “Mary the mother of the younger James and of Joses.” Joses is a variant of Joseph. If both of these references to a James and Joseph are referring to the same pair of brothers, (which is likely but can’t be proved), it would mean that James and Joseph are not blood brothers of Jesus because their mother was with Jesus’s mother Mary at the crucifixion. They could be relatives, however, if, for example, this Mary and Mary the mother of Jesus are sisters or sisters-in-law. John 19:25 says that standing at the cross of Jesus were his mother and “his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas.” This might indicate that the Mary who was with Jesus’s mother at the cross was Jesus’s mother’s sister. Some people find that doubtful because it would mean that the two sisters were both named Mary. Alternatively, since “brother” and “sister” could refer to a wider circle of family relationships and not just blood brothers, it is possible that this Mary is the wife of a brother of Joseph. If that is the case, then she is the sister-in-law of Jesus’s mother, not her immediate sister. In either case, this might indicate that the James and Joseph who are identified as Jesus’s “brothers” are these relatives, sons of the Mary who was with Jesus’s mother at the cross. While Jesus is hanging on the cross, in John 19:26-27 Jesus entrusts his mother Mary to the beloved disciple (who is traditionally believed to be John). If Mary had other children, it would have been the norm for Mary to automatically come under the care of her other children. Jesus would not have needed to entrust her to a non-relative, and to do so would have been considered a serious breach of tradition. One explanation sometimes offered for why Jesus might have entrusted his mother to someone outside the family is that Jesus’s “brothers” did not believe in him. John 7:5 tells us that this was true for at least a period of time earlier in Jesus’s ministry. However, if the word “brother” is to be taken literally every time it shows up with reference to Jesus, then Jesus did have a “brother” who soon after that was a recognized leader of the church. Either he was already a believer when Jesus was executed, or he became a believer soon after. This “brother” is mentioned by Paul in Galatians 1:19, where Paul says that when he first went to Jerusalem after he started preaching the gospel of Christ (probably around AD 37, which is only a few years after Jesus’s death), he met with Peter but did not see “any other” apostles except “James, the brother of the Lord.” His use of the word “other” indicates that this James was considered an apostle. Two Jameses are named as apostles in the Gospels: the James who, along with John, was a son of Zebedee (Matthew 4:21), and the James who was the son of Alphaeus (Matthew 10:3). Matthew tells us the names of their fathers. Since neither of their fathers is Joseph, they cannot be sons of Mary. Therefore, if “brother” always means blood brother when applied to Jesus, then Paul is not referring to either of them. Acts 12:17 and Acts 15:13-21 tell us of a James who is a leader of the church in Jerusalem. According to tradition, the first bishop/leader of the church in Jerusalem was “James the brother of the Lord,” so that is probably who Paul is referring to. That means there was a James who believed in Jesus and was a “brother of the Lord,” and he was so prominent that he was a recognized leader of the church just a few years later. Jesus could have entrusted his mother to that “brother,” if indeed it was a blood brother; there would have been no need to turn Mary over to a non-family member. Therefore, the claim that Jesus turned his mother over to John because his family didn’t believe in him does not easily fit the facts. A better case can be made that this James the brother of the Lord is the son of the other Mary who was with Jesus’s mother at the cross, and therefore that in at least this instance, “brother” may mean cousin or relative. Some early church fathers taught that Joseph was an older man when he married Mary and that he had children by a previous marriage. That claim first appears in the Protoevangelium of James , a document written around AD 150. That document was not accepted as part of Scripture and was specifically rejected by some early Church leaders because some of its content was considered fiction or legend, but it offers some insight regarding ideas that were circulating in the early days of the Church. That document explains that Mary was dedicated to God as a virgin when she was born, that she was raised in the Temple from the age of 3 until she was 12, and that Joseph was then selected by lot, with a full understanding that she was a dedicated virgin, to take care of her by taking her as his wife. The references to the brothers and sisters of the Lord would then be references to the children of Joseph from an earlier marriage. They would therefore a stepbrothers and stepsisters of Jesus by adoption – not sons and daughters of Mary but still “brothers and sisters” of the Lord. A variety of church fathers before AD 400 taught that Mary was a perpetual virgin, but many of the early church fathers did not discuss the question, perhaps because it did not become an issue until a group of people in the 4th century began to teach explicitly that Mary was not a perpetual virgin. The details of who taught what over the years are beyond the scope of this study, but citations and quotes from various church fathers on the subject can be found in many places, including in “ Which church father first taught the perpetual virginity of Mary? ” A thousand years later, Martin Luther rejected the Catholic practices of venerating Mary and praying to her, but he taught the perpetual virginity of Mary. To summarize, there is a lot of evidence indicating that this is not a simple question. “Brothers” can mean many things in the Bible. Catholic and Orthodox readers find a lot of support for the position that Mary was a lifelong virgin and the word “brothers” refers to relatives of Jesus, but Protestant readers of the Scriptures prefer the plain-language interpretation of the literal words of the Bible. No Bible Study is going to resolve the ongoing disagreement among Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants about whether Mary remained a virgin throughout her life (or about the other issues about Mary that divide us). For the purpose of how you live your life, to what extent does this disagreement matter? _____ Matthew 13:54-58 / Mark 6:1-6 continued Now let’s return to these passages and look at what actually happens in this incident. Jesus has been traveling around Galilee preaching, and he returns to his hometown of Nazareth. What happens? Why do they not believe in him? How do you think Mary feels about the resistance of her fellow townspeople to believing in Jesus? What does Jesus’s statement about “a prophet” in Matthew 13:57 and Mark 6:4 mean? What do you think Mary’s view of Jesus is at this point? Who do you think she believes him to be? Are there ways that we are like the people of Nazareth? Do we ever find ourselves unwilling to accept the value of people who are doing the work of God, because they are too familiar to us? If so, what do we need to do to avoid missing what God is doing? It may require humility, letting go of our ego that wants to ask why he’s so great if I’m not, seeing with new eyes, and having some faith that God is at work in people and that they can grow to be more than what we may have seen in them. Are there ways that we are like the people of Nazareth in not embracing the teachings of Jesus because he or his teachings have become too familiar to us? If so, what do we need to do to continue to embrace his teachings and have them remain fresh and potent for us? Matthew 12:46-50 / Mark 3:31-35 / Luke 8:19-21 Jesus’s mother and brothers come to him Jesus has been traveling all over the region of Galilee. His mother and brothers have not been traveling with him. From Mary’s perspective, what happens at the beginning of this story? Why do you think she and the brothers have come and are standing outside the place where Jesus is preaching? What do you think Mary wants? When Jesus receives word that his family is outside, how does he react? Jesus says that whoever “hears the word of God” (Luke 8:21) and “does the will of God” (Mark 3:35) or “does the will of my heavenly Father” (Matthew 12:50) is his brother and sister and mother. What do you think he means by that? How can determine whether we are hearing the word of God and doing the will of God? How do we know if our actions are consistent with that description of the brothers and sisters of Jesus? How might God be calling you to respond right now to the call to hear the word of God and do God’s will? Even before Jesus was conceived, Mary was someone who heard the word of God and did God’s will. So is Jesus drawing a distinction that separates her from those who follow him? Or is he expanding the concept of his family, as he expanded on many Old Testament teachings when he said, “You have heard . . . , but I say . . .” (for example, in Matthew 5:21-48), to include others along with his mother? Explain. How do you think Mary interprets what Jesus says here? Note that Jesus presumably loves his mother dearly, but he wants to make a bigger spiritual point. We will see Jesus push us to see a bigger picture again soon. Take a step back and consider this: Jesus’s relationship with his mother was different when he was an adult than when he was a child. In what ways did Mary have to accept a change in her relationship with Jesus, and how do you think she dealt with it? We also have a changed relationship with parents and other family members as we grow older. Are there times when we are called to step outside the comfort zone of our previous relationship with a parent or other family member, as Jesus did? If so, how do we continue to honor our parents or other family members even as we live our lives in ways that might be different from their expectations? Sometimes it is the other person (perhaps a grown-up child) rather than us who is responding to an inner call that changes their relationship with us. What can we learn from this story that might help us deal with those changes? Bibliography See Mary - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/mary/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 Mary List Next

Pre-tribulation theories contradict Jesus and Paul. What does the Bible actually say? Previous Christian Faith Articles 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 Christian Faith Articles Next

Jesus chooses a particular place – Galilee – to begin his ministry. Previous Matthew List Next Matthew 4:12-17 Jesus chooses a particular place – Galilee – to begin his ministry. Image provided by Wix. Tom Faletti March 22, 2024 Matthew 4:12-17 Jesus starts his ministry in Galilee Why does Jesus leave the area around the Jordan River where John had been baptizing? The geography is important here. What region does Jesus begin his ministry in? What city does he move to? What body of water is he near? What is your impression of Galilee? Galilee was not a large place. Roughly 50 miles north-south by 25 miles east-west, its size was around the size of the small state of Rhode Island. The northern part of Galilee was more mountainous and remote; but the southern part, which included Jesus’s hometown of Nazareth, was not the isolated place that many think it was. The sneer against Galilee in John 7:45-52 was not about Galilee being culturally backward, but rather about the alleged lack of evidence that the messiah could come from there, combined with the belief among Pharisees that Galileans were less devoted to following every detail of the law. Even Nathanael's jibe in John 1:46 – “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” – must have reflected mainly a local rivalry since John 21:2 tells us that Nathanael came from Cana, which was less than 5 miles from Nazareth. We have tended to misinterpret these comments to think that Galilee and Nazareth were more remote and insular than they actually were. Nazareth itself was probably a small village, but in a region, Galilee, that was actually a crossroads for international travel. It included two capital cities, Sepphoris and Tiberius, both founded by the local king, Herod Antipas, and many people spoke both Greek and Aramaic (Eric Meyers, Professor of Religion and Archaeology at Duke University, “Galilee,” From Jesus to Christ , Frontline , Apr. 1998, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/portrait/galilee.html ). According to the Jewish Roman historian Josephus, it contained 204 villages with a population of 15,000 people or more and was the most fertile part of the Jewish lands with an enormous agricultural output (William Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 65). According to Josephus, Galilee was full of people who “were ever fond of innovations, and by nature disposed to changes, and delighted in seditions” (as quoted in Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 66). At the same time, they were courageous and “more anxious for honour than for gain” (also p. 66). Galilee was surrounded by Gentile territory to the west, north, and east, and by Samaritans to the south. The original meaning of “Galilee” was “circle”: The term “Galilee of the Gentiles” in Matthew 4:15 comes from Isaiah 9:1 and refers to the fact that Galilee was encircled by Gentile nations. Galilee had been conquered several times over the centuries and repopulated with Gentiles. When Israel regained independence for around 100 years, from the successful revolt under the Maccabees in the 160s BC until they were conquered by the Romans in 63 BC, that region was turned back to Judaism. However, Galilee was not as insular as Judea to the south (Barclay, Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , pp. 66-67). Many people were bilingual, and the openness of Galileans to different cultures might have made it a good place to grow up for someone who would eventually preach a message intended for all people, not just Jews. Why do you think Jesus leaves his hometown of Nazareth and goes to Capernaum? John the Baptist was arrested by Herod Antipas. Herod Antipas’s capital cities were in Galilee, not far from Nazareth. From a practical perspective, Capernaum might have been safer, with easy escape across the Sea of Galilee if needed. From a ministry perspective, Capernaum was a large commercial town that offered a larger audience and a different pool of people from which to draw his early disciples. Jesus did not just make a quick visit to Capernaum. He “made his home” (4:13 NRSV) or “went to live” (4:13 NABRE) there – the Greek word implies that he took up residence in a house there. Why might he choose to start gathering disciples in a commercial fishing town on the sea, rather than in his hometown? This town was at the north/northwest end of the Sea of Galilee, a large fresh-water lake. Moving here moves Jesus closer to Gentile territory (on the other side of the lake). It also brings him into the commercial area around a very large body of water. The Sea of Galilee was 13 miles long and 8 miles wide, and 680 feet below sea level, which made it a warm area ( The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , pp. 70-71). With Jews on the west and Gentiles on the east, and a high degree of commercial activity, this was a place where people might have been especially open-minded about his mission to all nations. Matthew offers a fulfillment citation from Isaiah 9:1-2. What does that Old Testament quote tell us? This Old Testament quote tells us several things: First, Galilee is mentioned in the Old Testament as a place where God will do something significant. Second, Capernaum in Galilee is in the Old Testament territory of the tribe of Naphtali, so this is part of God’s plan for the salvation of Israel. The Old Testament passage was actually about a prophesied restoration after the fall of the nation of Israel to Assyria in 722 BC. Matthew sees Jesus as fulfilling that prophecy and bringing light to those in darkness. In what way is Jesus’s arrival like the dawning of a light in the darkness? In what ways do you find Jesus to be a light in your life? Matthew provides only a partial quote from Isaiah. The passage contains other well-known messianic prophecies, including, “a child is born to us, a son is given to us”; he will be known as “wonderful Counselor, Mighty God”, etc. (Isaiah 9:6); and he will establish the throne of David in justice and righteousness forever (Isaiah 9:7). Matthew is signaling to at least the Jewish members of his audience, who would know their Hebrew Scriptures and the messianic prophecies, that Jesus is the Messiah. In Matthew 4:17, what did Jesus preach in his early preaching? “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near” (NRSV) or “is at hand” (NABRE). This is exactly, word for word, John’s message. It might have been seen as gutsy to take up the message of someone who had just been arrested by the local king. One might wonder how John’s followers reacted when it appeared that Jesus was claiming John’s mantle by taking his message, given that Jesus was not in John’s inner circle. It didn’t take long, however, for Jesus’s message to develop further than John’s. Do you think Jesus meant the same thing as John by this message of repentance? What does it mean when it says he “proclaimed” or “preached”? What would that have looked like? The Greek word is the word for a herald’s proclamation from a king (Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 , p. 69), so the word signals a high degree of authority. What does it mean to you when Jesus says that the kingdom of heaven “has come near” or “is at hand” (Matthew 4:17, NRSV and NABRE)? We might think of the kingdom of God as any place where God reigns. The word “kingdom” indicates sovereignty – that the place where God is sovereign, rather than flawed humans, is entering our sphere in a new way. We can now live our lives under his reign. Note that in Matthew, Jesus refers to the “kingdom of heaven,” whereas in the other Gospels it is the “kingdom of God.” Scholars have sometimes tried to find a distinction between the two, with little success. The best explanation is that Matthew is more sensitive to the ways that Jews talked. Jews at that time avoided saying the word “God,” so Matthew uses “heaven.” It is quite possible that Jesus also used the word “heaven” and that the other Gospels, with less concern about this Jewish desire to avoid saying God’s name, might have used “God” to make it more clear precisely what the term means (see Benedict T. Viviano, O.P., “The Gospel According to Matthew,” The New Jerome Biblical Commentary , p. 639, and H. L. Ellison, “Matthew,” The International Bible Commentary , p. 1123). (The Gospel of Matthew does, however, use the term Kingdom of God four times, in 12:28, 19:24, 21:31, and 21:43.) As we go through the Gospel of Matthew, we want to hang onto this idea that Jesus is describing what the world looks like when God is acknowledged as sovereign and allowed to reign. How can you make space for the kingdom of God to be “at hand” in your life? What is something new you learned today about Jesus, and what difference does it make? Take a step back and consider this: In some ways Galilee might have been the perfect place for the boy Jesus to grow up, to prepare him for his ministry. He would have been raised in a Jewish village in a region that was culturally diverse, where the Jewish language was spoken but also the Greek language that was the common language of a vast empire that dominated a large swath of the Earth. He would have been exposed to different cultures, and those experiences would have prepared him to craft a message that could reach not only Jews but people of diverse backgrounds. God used that breadth of experience effectively. Similarly, God can use the experiences of your past to prepare you for opportunities for ministry in your life now. As you look back on your life, how has God used events from your past as preparation for opportunities you had to serve him later? Are there events from your past that you are still hoping God will use in support of future opportunities for service? Those hopes might be good things to bring to God in prayer. 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

How can we approach someone with a difficult a request in a way that might keep our relationship with them strong? Previous Philemon List Next Philemon 8-25 How can we approach someone with a difficult a request in a way that might keep our relationship with them strong? Philemon reads Paul’s letter. “A Letter to Philemon.” VideoBible.com . Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, https://www.freebibleimages.org/illustrations/vb-philemon/ . Tom Faletti October 5, 2025 Philemon 8-9 Paul urges by way of love, not command In verse 8, Paul says he hopes Philemon will “do what is proper” (NABRE) or “do your duty” (NRSV). What does “proper” mean, and how do you decide what is “proper” or your “duty” and not just something that someone else wants you to do? How does Paul characterize himself in verse 9? Look at verse 19 along with verses 8-9. Why does Paul think he could order Philemon to do what he wants? Why does Paul choose not to issue a command? What do you think of Paul’s approach to Philemon, where he tries to urge and not command? In situations you face or think you might face in your life, where might it be useful to try Paul’s approach of leaving some freedom for the other person to make a choice rather than trying to command them? As a teacher, I found that in many cases I was more likely to achieve my goal if I gave students choices, while making clear what I hoped they would do, rather than simply trying to order them to do what I wanted. Philemon 10-14 Paul makes a case for Onesimus After a long introduction, Paul finally mentions Onesimus in verse 10, though he doesn’t actually make his formal request until verse 17. Paul is making a pun in these verses. “Onesimus” means “Profitable” or “Useful.” Onesimus was supposed to be profitable for his master, but instead he has been useless and unprofitable. But now, Paul says to Philemon, Onesimus is useful both to you and to me. Read verse 10. What does Paul mean when he says that Onesimus is his child and he has become Onesimus’s father? What is the relationship between them that he is referring to? Onesimus has apparently come to faith in Jesus through his involvement with Paul, and Paul has become totally invested in Onesimus like a father and his son. Barclay quotes a Rabbinic saying: “If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Scripture reckons this the same as though he had begotten him” (Barclay, pp. 280-281). In other words, you become like a father or mother to those you teach about God. Is there anyone for whom you feel somewhat like a parent in the faith? How does that affect your feelings toward them? What do you think happened in Onesimus that changed him from useless to useful when he became a Christian? Read Ephesians 2:10 . What does Paul say we are made for? How has your faith made you more “useful” in fulfilling your calling? Why is Paul sending Onesimus back to Philemon (verses 12-14)? Why did Paul want to keep Onesimus with him? What does this passage of Philemon suggest to Christians about the need to face up to the past and deal with the consequences of past actions? Philemon 15-25 Paul makes his request In verses 15-16, Paul sees the providential hand of God in the situation and suggests that maybe there was a purpose in Onesimus having been away (run away?) from Philemon. What does Paul suggest might have been the greater purpose? Note that the idea of providence here is not predestination. God did not force Onesimus to become a believer. Similarly, we can embrace or reject opportunities that might lead to good outcomes. In verse 17, Paul finally makes his explicit “ask.” What does he request? Paul does not explicitly ask Philemon to set Onesimus free (manumission). But he asks Philemon to see Onesimus “no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a beloved brother” (verse 16) and asks Philemon to “accept him as you would me” (verse 17). Do you think Paul is implying that Philemon should set him free? Or is he just asking him to treat Onesimus as a brother in Christ even as he continues to have Onesimus serve him as a slave? What are some ways that Philemon could respond? He could punish Onesimus severely, punish him lightly, accept him but with resentment and not forgiveness, accept him back as a slave but with forgiveness, send him back to Paul to serve Paul, or free him to do whatever he wants. And he could publicly attack Paul, quietly resent and snub Paul, or welcome Paul’s intervention in his life. How should we respond to people who do wrong and then return? What does this passage say to you about forgiveness? How should we respond when people ask us to do something that is outside of the social norm? In verse 18, Paul tries to “sweeten the pot” by offering to pay for any costs, which implies that Onesimus might have done something wrong. What do you think Onesimus might have done before he ran away? How might verse 19 make it harder for Philemon to say no? In verse 20, Paul uses the word “profit” – which has the same root as Onesimus’s name – when he says he hopes to “profit from you in the Lord.” He also asks Philemon to “refresh” his heart – the same word he used earlier to describe how Philemon refreshed others. How important is that phrase “in the Lord” in verse 20? Explain. When have you found that you could be useful to someone else, but only if you let go of something that would have been beneficial to yourself? Paul is pulling out all the stops, making every case he can to save his friend Onesimus. How do verses 21-22 add to the ways he is pressing Philemon? In verse 23, Paul reiterates what he said in verse 9: that he is in prison. How might the fact that he is in prison affect what he says about slavery? Does anything in the final greetings in verses 24-25 surprise you? Epaphras founded the Colossian church (see Col. 1:7). Aristarchus spent a significant amount of time with Paul (see Acts 19:29; 20:4; and 27:2). We see more about Mark, Demas, and Luke in 2 Timothy 4:9-13. How important do you think Paul’s companions were to him? How important is it for you to have “co-workers” with you in the faith? Do you think Paul’s letter is reasonable, or does it go beyond the bounds of propriety? Why? Here are some of the reactions I have seen: On the one hand, the letter feels somewhat manipulative. Paul has appealed to Philemon in ways that would feel like Paul is pressuring him. On the other hand, Paul has not been coercive. He never says, “Do this or else I’ll . . . ,” nor does he say, “God says you should do this.” And his pressure is based on genuine love for both Philemon and Onesimus. Take a step back and consider this: Paul is working hard to raise a difficult topic with someone he wants to maintain a relationship with, in a way that will achieve his goal and not hurt the relationship. We all have been in such situations, where we need to choose our words carefully because we want to gain the support of someone who does not have to do what we want them to do. Paul’s effort might give us some ideas. Looking over the whole letter and the strategies Paul is using to deal with a difficult situation, when have you used similar strategies, and what happened? What can you learn from Paul’s strategies, that you might be able to apply in your own life? People sometimes think they are applying good strategies but do it in a way that is not effective. What might be an example of that, and how can you avoid mistakes like that in dealing with tricky situations? Bibliography See Philemon - Bibliography at https://www.faithexplored.com/philemon/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 Philemon List Next