Psalm 1: Prison Graduation Speech

Opening remarks and formalities

“Blessed is the one who does not walk in step with the wicked or stand in the way that sinners take or sit in the company of mockers, 2 but whose delight is in the law of the Lord, and who meditates on his law day and night. 3 That person is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither—whatever they do prospers. 4 Not so the wicked! They are like chaff that the wind blows away. 5 Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous. 6 For the Lord watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked leads to destruction.”

Over two and a half thousand years ago, before Jesus came to earth, these words greeted the people of God when they opened the Book of Psalms. Psalm 1 stands at the front of the Book of Psalms as an introduction to the whole book; a message to anyone who would open this book of prayers and songs belonging to the people of God. It encourages the hearer of this psalm to delight in God’s law, that is, in God’s word as revealed in scripture. Today, graduates, as you graduate with your Certificate in Christian Ministry, this psalm belongs to you. I would like to use its message to encourage you about your future, now that you have completed this program.

First of all, know that you are blessed! Psalm 1 tells us that God does not bless the wicked, the sinner, or the mocker. Who does he bless? The one whose delight is in God’s word, who meditates on it day and night. As graduates of the Certificate in Christian Ministry, you have meditated on God’s word. That means you have read the word. You have reflected on the word. You have wrestled with the word. You have taken the word and applied it in your minds to areas of personal life, spiritual life, and church life.

And so as graduates of the Certificate in Christian Ministry, as those who have been blessed by God, let me encourage you: continue to delight in the law of the Lord! There is a difference between reading the word and delighting in the word. It is the same difference between eating food and enjoying food. We all must eat, but we do not always enjoy. Let the Bible be your favourite food for your minds and your hearts, so that you want to come back to it and have it again, so that you choose it over any other spiritual food, because it will bring you joy that you don’t find anywhere else. Continue to meditate on God’s word day and night.

You have finished your Certificate in Christian Ministry, but you have not finished with the Bible. Continue to seek God's instruction from the Bible. Search for books that discuss the Bible. Listen to sermons that explain the Bible, sing songs that rephrase the Bible. Watch people whose lives are shaped by the Bible. God's message, his instruction, exists in all those things. When you read scripture, or hear scripture, or sing scripture, or talk about scripture, or even remember scripture, enjoy the fact that it is God's very own teaching for your life. Recognise its value. Think about it all the time - not just in a studying way, but in a real world practical way, thinking, "How does what God has told me fit into this bit of my life right now?" When you hear other people say different things about how you should live, hold up God's instruction and measure their message against God’s message.

It's not how much of Bible you read, or how often that matters. Reading the Bible more will certainly help more. But there are very, very few people who get to spend all day and night reading the Bible. We have to work, to look after our families, to eat and to sleep. What matters is delighting in God's teaching whatever you are doing. Value God’s instruction, let it sink in, think it over, deliberate on it, and hold it up as the truth against which all other teachings get compared.

If you do this, Psalm 1 says not only will you be blessed; you will also be fruitful! Like a tree planted by a stream of water, you will yield God’s fruit in season, and you leaves will not wither – whatever you do will prosper. This is the picture Psalm 1 paints of the person who delights in the law of the Lord. I have no doubt that many of you have already seen the fruit of God’s word growing in your own lives, and in the lives of others studying this course. That is the power of our God through the Lord Jesus Christ and by his Holy Spirit – he changes us for the better! He saves us, and he changes us into the people he wants us to be: people who are not wicked, but who delight in his word. That is the fruit that God loves to grow.

So my encouragement to you is this: value the fruit that God grows. Don’t go chasing after the prosperity of this world – phones, cars, houses, children and cattle. To quote our Lord Jesus, “[T]he pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them.” Psalm 1 tells us that the wicked, who seek these things, are like chaff that the wind blows away. They cannot stand in the judgment! They cannot stand before the assembly of the righteous! Instead, as members of the assembly of the righteous, stand like a strong tree planted beside water whose fruit is the prosperity of God; the fruit that he grows through his spirit - love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control – and the fruit that he grows through his word – a family for God 30, 60, 100 times what he has sown.

Let these fruits be what you seek, because Psalm 1 says that way of the righteous is the way of life that God watches over. As you have studied God’s word and let its power change who you are, God has watched over your path like a father watching his child’s first steps, because the path of the righteous is the same path that Jesus walked in his life – and because Jesus is God, that means the path of the righteous is God’s path! You have been walking along God’s path, in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.

And so my final encouragement to you today is to keep walking on that path; keep living God’s way of life. So often we see situations and hear stories of people who are not living righteously but seem to be doing really well, while those who are living righteously suffer for doing it! Big companies profit from child labour while paying no tax, and their shareholders cheer; people in positions of power become corrupt and take money away from the needy, yet their power increases; people campaign for God to be removed from schools and public speech, and their voices spread across the media. Meanwhile those who release evidence of corruption and blow the whistle on wrongdoing get forced into exile; those who pray for the release of prisoners are arrested; those who spend their lives healing the poor are kidnapped by terrorists. Where is the blessing? Where is the prosperity?

Psalm 1 lets us look further forward, to see the end result of a righteous life and a wicked life. God watches over the way of the righteous. It is a way of life that lasts forever - not because by being righteous we earn our place in eternity with God, but because a righteous life is the life we will live in that eternity. The righteous life is the way of life of the eternal God, and that eternal way of life starts now.

But the wicked way of life? It will be destroyed. There is no room in God's eternal kingdom for wickedness. And thank God for that! Greed, lust, murder, theft, corruption, violence, rebellion against God - all of these things are temporary! They don't last! God doesn't just punish those who live that way; he destroys that way of life entirely! We are reminded of these truths every time we see the wicked get brought down, every time their schemes go wrong, every time they are exposed; we're reminded every time we do the right thing and we see God's plans furthered in people's lives. That's the way it's meant to be, and that's the way it's going to stay.

My prayer for all of you graduating today is this: that in the blessing of your graduation you will keep on meditating on God’s word; that in the fruit of salvation and change God has worked in your life, you will pursue God’s prosperity; and that as you stand up as members of the assembly of the righteous, you will remain on the path of the righteous watched over by God, that remains forever. Let me finish with the prayer of Paul for the Ephesians: “Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, 21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen."

Psalm 1: Meditating on God's Law

 
"Blessed is the one who does not walk in step with the wicked, or stand in the way that sinners take, or sit in the company of mockers, 2but whose delight is in the law of the Lord, and who meditates on his law day and night." Over two and a half thousand years ago, well before Jesus walked the earth, these words greeted the person who opened the Book of Psalms. Psalm 1 stands at the front of the Book of Psalms as an introduction to the whole book; it’s a message to anyone who would open this book of prayers and songs belonging to the people of God. Psalm 1 encourages the hearer to treat every psalm as God's law, God’s teaching to his people. And it does this by telling us what we should do with God’s teaching: we should delight in it, and we should meditate on it day and night.
 
This semester, our devotions begin with a four week series on spiritual disciplines – that is, habits we should form to keep our spiritual lives strong. And I start this series by looking at delighting in God’s teaching and meditating on God’s teaching. We are all here at NETS because of God’s teaching. And so today, I have chosen Psalm 1 to stand at the front of our devotions for the semester, just as it stands at the front of the book of psalms. I want us to be encouraged to delight in God’s teaching, and to meditate on it day and night.
 
What are we delighting in and meditating on? The word translated 'law' in this psalm is torah. When we think of Torah, we usually think of the first five books of the Bible - that is, the Old Testament Laws. But the word torah means 'instruction' or ‘teaching’ – less like instructions for putting something together, but more like the teaching a student receives from a teacher. And God's teaching to us is more than just following laws. As I said, one of the reasons this psalm is at the beginning of the book of psalms is because it encourages people to treat these songs as God's teaching too. Today, we Christians are blessed to have not just the first five books, not just the psalms, not just the Old Testament, but the whole New Testament as well. And from this collection of different kinds of writings we discover God's teaching to us, God’s message for us. So when Psalm 1 talks about the law of the Lord, about God’s teaching, we are talking about the whole Bible.
 
Now, I hope you have Psalm 1 open in front of you so that you can follow with me. Psalm 1 opens with the first benefit of delighting in and meditating on God’s teaching: "Blessed is the one who does not walk in step with the wicked, or stand in the way that sinners take, or sit in the company of mockers, 2but whose delight is in the law of the Lord, and who meditates on his law day and night." God does not bless the wicked; he does not bless the sinner; he does not bless the mocker. Who does God bless? The one whose delight is in God’s teaching, and who meditates on God’s teaching! If you delight in God’s teaching, you are blessed! If you have come to NETS to meditate on God’s teaching, then you are blessed! Ask the lecturers if spending their lives meditating on God’s teaching has been a blessing to them; they would agree. The fourth year students can testify that the time they have spent meditating on the Bible has been a blessing to them. I would hope that all the students, even the first years who have been here only a few months, can testify to that blessing. So you know it is true! Time spent meditating on God’s teaching is a blessing.
 
But delighting in and meditating on God’s teaching is not just something to do at seminary! Does Psalm 1 say “Blessed is the one who delights in the law of the Lord, and meditates on it when they go to seminary”? No! It says “Blessed is the one who delights in God’s word and meditates on it day and night”. This is a discipline you can grow here at NETS, but it should be something that you do “day and night” – something you should do always. It is a discipline that all Christians can learn and grow.
 
At this point some might be asking themselves, “What does it mean to delight in and meditate on God’s teaching?” So let me address this now. You see, the simple answer we often give is that to meditate on God’s word is the same as reading it. But I think that is too simple. It is like saying that when you play football, you kick the ball with your foot! Of course you should kick the ball with your foot; it’s football! But you aren’t going to win the World Cup with these simple instructions – you can’t even play a game of football like that! It’s the same with the Bible: of course you should read the Bible; it’s a book! Books are for reading. But you aren’t delighting in God’s teaching and meditating on God’s teaching simply by reading the Bible.
 
As a matter of fact, you could play in a whole game of football without ever kicking the ball with your foot – but it would be a difficult game. In the same way, you can meditate on God’s teaching without ever reading the Bible yourself, but it is hard.
 
As preachers, as leaders, as Christians seeking to serve our brothers and sisters in Christ, we must recognise the fact that some people find reading the Bible difficult. Sometimes it is because of a lack of education; sometimes it is because there is no good translation in their heart language; sometimes it is because they have a problem like dyslexia or blindness that makes reading difficult; sometimes it is because they don’t have a Bible to read; and sometimes they just don’t like reading! We should remember that in ancient Israel, not every family could afford a Torah scroll, and not every person could read. But Israel had priests who read the Torah regularly at special gatherings; the Israelites remembered the stories of their people and their God and told them to their children orally; they had psalms that they would sing together. Even these people, who could not read the Bible by themselves, could still delight in God’s teaching, and meditate on it day and night, and they would sing Psalm 1 to each other telling one another to do so!
 
What does Psalm 1 say about delighting in and meditating on God’s teaching? Look with me at verse 3, “Such a person” – that is, the person who delights in God’s word and meditates on it day and night – “is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither.” A tree planted by streams of water is never missing out on water. There is always water there to sustain it. What a healthy tree that must be! Covered in fruit when harvest season comes. Leaves that are always green and plump. That’s a great tree. Delighting in and meditating on God’s word is how we make sure that we are always sustained by God’s words, so that we are sustained even when we are not reading.
 
Meditating on God’s teaching is seeking to hear what God says in the Bible to us now. Here at NETS we do that by reading the Bible, but also by reading books that discuss the Bible, by listening to sermons and lectures that explain the Bible, by singing songs that rephrase the Bible, by talking to each other about the Bible, by watching people's lives that are shaped by the Bible. God's message, his teaching, exists in all those things. It's about applying God’s teaching all the time - not only in a scholarly way like in a NETS classroom, but in an everyday practical way too, thinking, "How does God’s teaching fit into this part of my life right now?" And meditating on God’s teaching means when you hear other people say different things about how you should live, you hold up God's teaching against what they say and compare the message, the meaning, the rightness of it against the truth of God’s words.
 
Delighting in God’s teaching is about realising the fact that when you read it, or hear it, or sing it, or talk about it, or even remember it, you enjoy that it is God teaching you for your specific life now, and you value it more than anything else you hear. We always do this with everything we read and hear: we have a little hierarchy in our heads about whose opinion is more valuable and whose is less. Sometimes we base it on expertise, and it’s like a list: so we have well-educated specialist expert on the subject at the top, general expert about the area next, person currently studying the subject who knows a few things, kid who just finished their first lesson on it at school today, random person on the street who shouts at passing cars is last. Sometimes we base it on how well we know someone, and it’s like ripples out from us: so it goes family closest; more distant family and close friends next; friends of friends, workmates, fellow church members; strangers last. Sometimes we base it on age: so older people are more trustworthy on a topic than younger people. Sometimes we base it on how much people agree with us: so we believe people with the same political or cultural or religious views as us, and distrust those with opposing views. Usually it’s a big mix of all of these things, to the point that often we might think we know why we trust someone, but really it’s a mix of conscious and subconscious beliefs we have.
 
The point is that regardless of how we rank people or their opinions, we absolutely must make a conscious decision to have God and his teaching at the top of all of our lists. And it should delight us to do that, knowing that God is the most powerful, most knowledgeable, most loving, most trustworthy person in the universe; and he is the closest person to us at all times, because he lives in our hearts and made us in his image. And yet it can be so easy to choose a different opinion over God’s teaching because it means less work for us, or it fits with our views better, or it’s less controversial, or it doesn’t upset our parents. If we truly delight in God’s teaching, we will always be putting him at the top of our list, because no matter how much pain or trouble it causes, knowing that it comes from our God will give us a greater delight.
 
Meditating on God’s teaching is not about how much Bible you read, or how often. Reading the Bible more will certainly make meditating on God’s teaching easier – as I said, a Christian life without reading the Bible is like a football game without kicking the ball – it’s possible, but very hard. Kicking the ball makes winning the game much easier! So read the Bible, and read it lots. But the truth is there are very, very few people who get to spend all day every day reading the Bible. Most of us have to work, go to school, look after our families. Even NETS lecturers do not get to spend as much time reading the Bible as they would like, I will wager. But Psalm 1 does not say “Blessed is the one who reads the Bible day and night” but “Blessed is the one who delights in the Bible and meditates on it day and night”. It’s about absorbing God's teaching - from the Bible, from sermons, from songs, from books, from talking with other Christians and seeing how they live their lives - and valuing that instruction, letting it sink in, mulling it over, deliberating on it, and holding it up as the truth against which all other teachings get compared.
 
Delighting in God’s teaching is an attitude that values what God is teaching you; and meditating on God’s teaching is taking that teaching and working hard to apply it in your life. You can’t have one without the other.
 
Now we come to the second benefit of delighting in and meditating on God’s teaching: Psalm 1 says that those do so will be fruitful and will prosper. Verse 3 again: “Such a person is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither. Whatever they do prospers.” I have no doubt that many of you have already seen the fruit of God’s teaching in your own lives, and in the lives of others who you study with. That is the power of God through the Lord Jesus Christ by his Holy Spirit – he changes us for the better when we delight in his teaching and meditate on it day and night! He saves us, he changes us into the people he wants us to be: people who are not wicked, but who delight in his word. That means even if we are struggling to delight in God’s teaching, we can pray to God and ask him to give us that delight for the teachings he has given us; to give us the strength to meditate on his word and apply it in life.
 
As people who delight in God’s teaching and meditate on it, we will value the fruit that God grows. We won’t go chasing after the prosperity of this world – phones, cars, houses, children and cattle. To quote our Lord Jesus, “[T]he pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them.” Psalm 1 tells us that the wicked, who seek these things instead of God’s things, are like chaff that the wind blows away. They cannot stand in the judgment! They cannot stand before the assembly of the righteous! Instead, as members of the assembly of the righteous, we should stand like strong trees planted beside water, whose fruit is the prosperity of God; the fruit that he grows through his spirit – love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control; and the fruit that he grows through his word – a family for God 30, 60, 100 times what he has sown.
 
Now whenever we talk about prosperity in the life of the Christian, so often we remember situations and stories of people who are not living righteously but seem to be doing really well, while those who are living righteously suffer for doing it! Big companies profit from child labour while paying no tax, and their shareholders cheer; people in positions of power become corrupt and take money away from the needy, yet their power increases; people campaign for God to be removed from schools and public speech, and their voices spread across the media. Meanwhile those who release evidence of corruption and blow the whistle on wrongdoing get forced into exile; those who pray for the release of prisoners themselves are arrested; those who spend their lives healing the poor are kidnapped by terrorists. Where is the blessing? Where is the prosperity?
 
Psalm 1 lets us look further forward, to see the end result of a righteous life and a wicked life. God watches over the way of the righteous. Read from verse 5 with me, “Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous. 6For God watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked leads to destruction.”
 
When you delight in and meditate on God’s words, these fruits will be what you seek, and it will shape the way you walk in your life. Psalm 1 says that God watches over the way of the righteous. As you study God’s word and let its power change who you are, God watches over your path like a father watching his child’s first steps, because the path of the righteous you will be following is the same path that Jesus walked in his life – and because Jesus is God, that means the path of the righteous is God’s path! You are walking along God’s path, in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.
 
It is a way of life that lasts forever - not because by being righteous we earn our place in eternity with God, but because a righteous life is the life we will live in that eternity. The righteous life is the way of life of the eternal God, and that eternal way of life starts now.
 
But the wicked way of life? It will be destroyed. There is no room in God's eternal kingdom for wickedness. And thank God for that! Greed, lust, murder, theft, corruption, violence, rebellion against God - all of these things are temporary! They don't last! God doesn't just punish those who live that way; he destroys that way of life entirely! We are reminded of these truths every time we see the wicked get brought down, every time their schemes go wrong, every time they are exposed; we're reminded every time we do the right thing and we see God's plans furthered in people's lives. That's the way it's meant to be, and that's the way it's going to stay.
 
It’s a strong message, because if you're not delighting in God's teaching and meditating on God’s teaching, then you are not like a tree planted by streams of water. In fact, Psalm 1 has quite a few powerful descriptions of the people who are not delighting in and meditating on God’s word. Verse 1 – they are the wicked, the sinners, the mockers, and God does not bless them. Verse 4, “Not so the wicked; they are like chaff that the wind blows away.” Everything they do will eventually dry up and blow away like dry husks left behind after a harvest. Their lives will end up being worthless. Ultimately, there is no future for those who do not delight in God’s teaching and meditate on it day and night.
 
So let us encourage one another as fellow students of God’s teaching to delight in that teaching, and to meditate on it day and night. Read the Bible often; but also enjoy the fact that God uses it to speak to you and teach you; make it the most valuable teaching in your life, ahead of all other things; read it often, but also read about it often, think about it often, speak about it often with each other, sing about it often together; and whenever you do these things, consider how you can put God’s teachings into practice in your life. And of course, as in all things in the Christian life, pray: pray that God will give you the delight in his teaching that it deserves; and pray that he will equip you to meditate on it powerfully and practically. Let’s do that together now.

Matthew 5

v41

The scathing instructions of unfathomable difficulty just keep on rolling here.

Now, I've been forced to go many miles with people, but that force was usually the sort of unwritten semi-internal cultural quasi-forcing, rather than someone using physical force to require me to do something. But the point is that this verse isn't talking about a requirement that someone may have of you for their own best interests; it's talking about someone getting you to do something through coercion.

You may have heard that this verse is talking specifically about the Roman practice of forcing local people to act as porters or guides. That is in fact the case; I'm told that the same word is used to describe Simon of Cyrene's enforced carrying of the cross for Jesus, and that it is a technical term for this conduct. So this isn't simply someone forcing you to do something; it's someone forcing you to do something using an unjust law to do it, who is your enemy (I mean, the forcing thing might have given that away) and they are forcing you to do something that you may have a conscientious objection to. That is a rather big deal. Jesus says do it twice.

I will at least point out that forcing here is pretty tough forcing. This isn't saying go and volunteer. It's also interesting to think about something in my current situation, like a bribe. Bribes are unjust, especially when coercion on the part of the bribee is involved - that's less bribery and more extortion. If someone extorts money out of me through force - say a police officer - should I give them double? At least bribery (and extortion) are illegal, whereas the angareuo of the Roman times was perfectly legal if just not really fair.

The closest parallel I can think of is the enforcement of intellectual property law. If someone forces me to do some act in keeping with IP law, then perhaps I should do it twice. But still, no need to volunteer. And before you jump on your high horse and get all judgy, read Proverbs 6:30-31.

Also, the KJV says "twain". Hah.

v42

How hard is this verse in modern times? We cling pretty tightly to our money, and so when people ask for something, we don't think we should just give it or loan it. As a matter of fact, I've had a number of well-meaning Christians tell me to do just the opposite, and to be shrewd, cunning and trustless with people asking me for money. Quite often the instructions to not give people money is thought to be in their best interests - we shouldn't give handouts, we should give empowerment. Fair enough, but then why not give loans? They're mentioned in this passage right next to giving. I'm not saying that it's easy, and I'm not saying I've always done it, but I can at least say I've tried.

v43

In case you can't tell from your translation, the "hate your enemy" part is not a direct quote from anywhere in the Bible. No doubt you could make parts of the Bible say it, but it would really be about as responsible as using this verse to argue the point itself.

v44

So when Jesus counters here with a directly contradictory command, it's not contradictory to scripture, merely to interpretation. This is the hard love of the gospel that we know so well. It's not exactly new to the Bible either: David spends a number of psalms praying for his persecutors. Jesus is here merely reiterating stuff that happens in other parts of the Bible.

v45

Wow. This verse is an absolute killer. We should treat everyone with basic common dignity and good - no, more than that, we should love them and treat them with more than just a basic common good - because they are people, and because that's what God does. God does not punish the sinner and the wicked in all times and in all ways. He still makes it rain where they will benefit; he still lets them see the sun. "Basic" should perhaps be replaced with "fundamental" to represent the huge importance of what God gives to every person regardless of their relationship with him.

v46-47

And now we see that Jesus is acknowledging that what he's asking of people is not normal. The normal stuff is people already do. You don't get a reward for doing normal stuff; it's its own reward! You're already doing it for some reason you can fathom, understand and accept, if not downright appreciate.

Just a word on v47 and the greeting thing: greetings are a much bigger deal here in Namibia. If you snub someone on a greeting, that is noticed, and it is a mark of disrespect, even if you're a newbie  and you don't mean it.

v48

And here's the final punch in the crotch: be perfect, just as God is perfect. If this doesn't make it clear that the standard is utterly unattainable, then nothing will. We aren't perfect. We can't be perfect. This is the standard though. This is the standard God holds us to, holds everyone to. We need to respect that. It's not half-arsed. We need to understand it too, because without that we might think that perhaps we could keep the 10 commandments, or the commands of Jesus. Even when they get boiled down to two, we still fail terribly.

And it's not even as if this is the end. There will be yet more incredibly hard teachings to come in the next chapter.

Matthew 5

v31

Wow, this chapter just keeps on going, doesn't it?

I find it interesting that first of all, the Deuteronomical law doesn't actually have anything to say about the way certificates of divorce work. It's just assumed that there's this system of divorce in place. Deuteronomy 24:1-4, which Jesus is referring to here, is not a commandment about certificates; rather, it is a section about how if you do divorce someone you can't marry them again if they get married in between. I've honestly no idea why this is the case, but I assume it's more than a simple "you've had your chance" thing. Perhaps it's a purity thing, or an inheritance thing, or it could even be a way of protecting women from frivolous divorces (it does give divorce a certain finality). All I know is that Moses says it is detestable in God's eyes. I would take an odds-on bet that it has to do with sex, due to the reference to 'defiled'.

Anyway, my point is that when we read the next verse, we have to have Deuteronomy 24 in mind, rather than just have our 21st century marriage radar on.

v32

Without the context of the previous verse and its (most likely sexual) reference to Deuteronomy, this verse is actually very, very weird. After all, how does divorce automatically make someone the victim of adultery? Because you remarry and have sex with your new spouse, of course. And how does marrying a divorced woman make you guilty of adultery? Again, sex. Jesus doesn't say that, but he doesn't need to.

Or  does he? The alternative - which I will point out isn't pants-on-head crazy given verses 27 and 28 previously - is that the divorce/marriage itself is adulterous, regardless of whether you get it on in any way.

What's the difference? Well, in my mind I'd say that the first is simply making commentary about the activities of the recently divorced (which would mean sending a woman away with a divorce certificate is not adultery if you remain otherwise unmarried), while the second is saying that the act of divorce itself is inherently sinful in most cases (note it provides an out in cases of sexual immorality - by the way, does that include any sexual immorality, or only adultery?).

The wording of these two verses is actually really quite sloppy - but only if you think of it as a listing of rules that we must follow. If you think of it in the context in which it is given (a sermon on the nature of God, his laws, his perfectness and expectations) then all of a sudden this looks a lot more like a summary line, an example, an illustration that provides fodder for the big picture of the sermon: namely that God's standards are higher than you've ever imagined, and the petty rule-making that you have engaged in is not what he respects or expects. It will not work to make you acceptable to him.

I'm not saying we shouldn't strive to meet the (essentially unobtainable) measures of perfection listed in the sermon on the mount. We should. That's the Christian life. But we should also read them in the context of forgiveness that the gospels are built around. Just because "forgive" doesn't appear /n doesn't mean that we shouldn't remember it.

v33

Leviticus 5 makes it clear that making an oath and then failing to follow through is a sin. I say "clear"... honestly, these laws are almost as badly drafted as anti-terrorism legislation - it's more about what sacrifices to make than how oaths work. Numbers 30 is a little clearer, although it's still really more about relationships between women and others in terms of oath-making. Oaths, it seems, are something that people just generally understand. Deuteronomy, meanwhile, tells Israel twice that they should only take oaths in God's name.

Just as an aside, most of the times the word "oath" comes out in the Pentateuch, it's referring to God's oath to his people about the promised land.

v34

Jesus says don't make oaths at all. His reasons are interesting: first of all, he says don't swear by heaven, because that's God's and not yours. It's unlikely to cost you much.

v35

Don't swear by the earth either; funnily enough, that belongs to God too. So does Jerusalem. Why are you making all these oaths on things that aren't yours? "I swear on my grandmother's grave" has always struck me as this kind of oath. What's going to happen to her if you break this oath? Does she come back to life to berate you for being a liar?

At least the (often desperate) oath of "I swear on my child's life" is rather more serious, although in modern times it's unlikely that someone will actually call someone on it and kill their child, so it's also pretty toothless (barring superstitious beliefs I guess). I've heard drug addicts and wife-beaters use this one to make their spurious claims sound more believable. It's still usually bollocks.

v36

Even your head, which is yours, is not really something that you have a lot of control over. You can't change the colour of your hair (permanently anyway). I love how it refers to white and black - the two hair colour options of Jesus' day. Brown, blonde, red, auburn - these are not options to your average 1st century Middle Eastern Jew.

v37

Here's the thing about oaths: they are basically a way of making a promise that you'll actually do something. When you're a lawyer, or just a sneaky person, you instantly see that this kind of system means that any statements made about doing things that are not done with an oath can just be broken. And that is a stunning dissimulation! Jesus says, "Just do what you say all the time. Be trustworthy because you are, not because you promised to be on pain of some supernatural consequence". Sounds good to me.

v38

The NIV footnotes tell me this verse is repeated three times in the OT. Nasty. But not unfair. In fact, you'll see lots of people suddenly want this when something bad happens. There's some sort of inbuilt justice in equality of retribution that appeals to people (when it's not happening to them or their loved ones anyway).

Just as an aside, did you notice that several times Jesus has said, "You have heard that it was said"? He keeps saying it too. This is just a gentle reminder that although the Jews did have a pretty good literacy rate for their time period, most people still relied on others reading out scripture (and interpreting it, a la the Pharisees, teachers of the law etc) to hear from God. There's nothing wrong with this, just some context. It could actually also help explain why Jesus feels the need to provide teaching on these things: as a corrective against the incorrect interpretations being proffered by Jewish leaders.

v39

Oh man, turn the other cheek. What a passage this is. People will often say that Jesus preached this but didn't actually do it, referring to things like his storming the temple and overturning tables in anger. But this verse isn't about anger, it's about retribution, justice even. And both God and Jesus turn the hell out of their cheeks when we sin against them. Sin is the equivalent of a slap in God's face. What's his response? Send Jesus. God is very patient with our sin. Lightning rarely hits people the moment sinful thoughts enter their minds. I am regularly reminded of this.

v40

Interesting that this example is all about a lawsuit. It's not a thief taking your shirt, it's someone who seeks recompense for something done. Now, it's assumed that their suit isn't genuine, because the last verse makes it clear we're talking about "resisting evil person(s)". Not everyone who brings a lawsuit is evil, by the way. This little verse implies that Jesus knows full well that people abuse the justice system (a system built on "eye for an eye", by the way). It's not justice that's the problem, it's people. It's always people.

Matthew 5

v21

Starting right here with the word "murder" or "kill", from the Hebrew "ratsach" (because the first is a quote from Exodus, the 10 commandments in fact). From what I've read, "murder" is the more correct word to use here - it is a specific act, not an accident or something done in service to a cause.

v22

The real lesson is here: Jesus is equating anger, a simple rudeness and dismissal of another, will be held to the same standard. Imagine if you were taken to court for calling someone a fool - everyone in Australia would be in jail! Jesus even mentions hell!

I tell you, it's really interesting living in a country where, although people are not arrested for anger, it is taken very seriously for the damage it does to relationships. There are lots of things to get angry with here too - bureaucracy is so frustrating sometimes I feel like I might die - but showing even disappointment does not help your cause. This is one of those commands of Christ that we tend to undersell in the west I think, while we focus more heavily on sex.

v23

Not that you have something against them. This is you proactively taking the problem you've caused back to the person you wronged. We really do know that we've wronged people so often. Even in my marriage there are times I know I did the wrong thing, and stepping up to apologise can be very difficult.

v24

We don't view gifts the same way, and I'll bet many churches today would struggle to preach telling people not to give if they aren't right with others around them. But we have to remember that providing gifts to the temple was a much bigger deal, played a much bigger role in the culture of the time. Not doing it, waiting to do it, is a sacrifice that needs to be made. Not that I'm saying the more common application of "this is a religious thing that is before God so be right with people before you come to God" is wrong; we need to remember both.

v25

Long before official negotiations were a thing in the west, Jesus is here talking about settling matters outside of court. Again, relationship is the thing that is being protected. Or is it? Because the warning is not "you will ruin a relationship", but "you might lose and end up in prison". In fact, this could be a place where Jesus is bringing the mundane into the supernatural, talking about our relationship with God in heaven. After all, that's kind of the whole point of his sermon here: that we are to live the way God wants us. And God wants us to mend bridges with others as a reflection of the fact that he calls us to do the same thing before we end up in hell.

v26

Note here that either the assumption is that you are actually either owing something - so you are in the wrong - or that you aren't in the wrong but get found wanting by the judge anyway. I think the former makes more sense, anticipating that the listeners are in the wrong somewhere.

v27

Pretty straightforward. Or at least you'd think so...

v28

Does adultery require marriage in some part? Are two people who are not married having sex committing adultery? We would tend to treat it like that now, but I'm not sure if it's that then. Remember, adultery is punished by death - Jesus in fact stopped the stoning of a woman for adultery (where was the man? Nevermind, I'm not writing about John here). The idea that two young unmarrieds having sex would get stoned to death seems far-fetched. Certainly the Old Testament does not treat them that way (eg Exodus 22:16-17). But I'm honestly not sure. Certainly there's a good argument that the term "sexual immorality" in the New Testament refers to sex between unmarrieds among other things.

I'm quite happy with this passage being specific to adultery, given that contextually most people were married as a matter of cultural course, and even it this passage is exclusive to adultery, there are other passages elsewhere that talk about how marriage is a substitute for sexual immorality.

v29

The point this verse makes though is that this isn't really about adultery. It's about sin. It's about living a life that takes sin so seriously you'd be prepared to lose an eye if it meant stopping yourself from being sinful. God takes sin seriously. Sin's consequence is hell.

v30

Now of course we can't stop ourselves from going to hell, even if we cut all our bits off. So we do have to take these instructions with a grain of salt. Because if we could stop ourselves from sinning by cutting off legs and cutting out eyes, we wouldn't need Jesus' atoning sacrifice. But we do. So what then is the purpose of these passages? As I say: take sin seriously. Aim for a life that respects God and his ways, but don't lose sight of salvation coming from Christ alone.

I should address a common position that is stated amongst churchgoers when it comes to sin - particularly in sins involving young people. They will often take these verses and say, "If your music is a bad influence, you should cut it out of your life. If playing computer games distracts you from your homework, you should stop playing them altogether. After all, Jesus says "better to pluck out your eye than to sin". I feel I need to point out that Jesus says we should pluck out our eyes if they cause us to sin, but NO-ONE suggests that we should actually pluck out our eyes. While I have no problem with people suggesting that you should avoid temptation (there are great verses for this - 1 Cor 6:18 and 10:13 for instance; and all the verses about marriage being a foil to immorality too), this verse is not a pinch hitter for this idea (am I using that term right? I don't care). If it is, start removing your eyes, because I think if you start applying this verse selectively in that way, you're doing it a grave disservice. There really is only so much you can do to remove sinfulness from your life. If we aren't prepared to pluck out eyes, I think there are probably some other things that we don't need to remove either. Common sense and wisdom should probably prevail.

Matthew 5

v11

For some reason in the NIV, vs3-10 are indented like a poem or a saying, but v11 is not. Not sure why, because v11 and 12 seems to fit in pretty well with the rest.

Note that the persecution is not for the sake of justice or even for other kinds of injustice (eg political opinions, being ugly) - it's because of Christ. It can be easy for Christians to play the persecution card, especially in the west where the persecutions don't actually look too bad (I'm not devaluing them, because in all sufferings we have to realise that they are subjectively borne), but that undercuts the value of what's being said here. The blessing isn't persecution itself; it is persecution in the name of Christ.

v12

Persecution for the sake of God's message and his service is as old as the hills really. It's a longstanding situation, and so we shouldn't be surprised. Instead, we should look back at those heroes of the faith and be glad that we share the same struggles they did. It means we're like them, both in service to God and hopefully in relationship with God. How many times have people said, "I wish I heard from God like Moses did"? Well, live the life of devotion to God that Moses did, and then you can suffer like he did.

v13

The NASB and KJV add the pretty unnecessary "of men". It's probably in the Greek. I don't think the NIV's loss of it damages the meaning.

I've often heard the story about salt in NT times being mixed with dirt so that you had a bowl of it on your table, and you would pinch it between fingers and grind it so that the salt would fall and the dirt stays in your fingers. I've no idea if that's true. What is true is that if salt loses its flavour, it is just a white powder that is pretty much worthless. We are that flavour of God in the world. I'm not sure that we are actually all that flavourful at times. How often do people desire what we offer? Our lives need to be so obviously better that people want what we have in their own lives. And I don't just mean rich - that is so painfully obviously how it seems to work here, and that's sad, especially in the context of Jesus' previous words about the poor in spirit.

v14

Again, our light should be so bright that we can't hide it, that it's obvious to anyone looking or even glancing in our directions. How do we do this? I think this actually sets up the hard teachings of Jesus that will come subsequent in the sermon on the mount.

v15

This is more than just chance seeing now, Jesus is talking about motive. We need to be active in not just being lamps, but being put on lampstands.

v16

Jesus directly explains it. Our lives shouldn't just stand out, we should be bold in making sure we're in the world where people can see us. Behind closed doors is not where the gospel shines. How can we ignore that?

v17

There is a difference between abolishing a law and fulfilling it. In both instances they are done away with, but one is done away with because it has become or perhaps always was wrong (eg abolishing slavery); the other is fulfilled because its good purpose is complete (eg laws about the actions of barber surgeons are no longer needed, because we now have hospitals and proper surgeons).

That can be confusing for some people, and the role of the OT is regularly one of difficulty. It's historical difficulty in interpretation and application has created huge problems; South Africa is a great example, and if you don't know what I mean just read a little about the Calvinism of the Trekboers.

v18

I would argue that what is accomplished is primarily the death and resurrection of Christ, but I think you could also persuasively argue that the accomplishments are on a sliding scale from that to eternal glory, and as such the laws of God decrease as grace increases. That does fit in with the "heaven and earth passing away" language of Christ too.

v19

Reading this passage on its own makes it sound like we're still completely under the law. But that's a very irresponsible reading. You need to read it in the context of other things Jesus says about the Sabbath, about food laws, about tithing...

v20

These laws serve a purpose in the new age of Christ's coming, but not in the brutally legalistic way that the Pharisees and teachers of the law put it forward. Relationship is key. Yes, God is holy and pure and powerful, and that can be scary. But he is also loving and kind and forgiving, and we should relate to him on both bases. Dogs are scary, but we have them as pets. Of course, God is not a dog - good dogs are just a fantastic example of how we should live. We don't tame God, he is domesticating us in a way. But instead of turning us into simple servants, like the modern world has done with pets he is turning us into members of his family.

This is complicated and difficult, and I don't think we should expect anything less from dealing with God. Again, it seems clear to me that this is a message that is being set up to show the quality of the life that a Christian should lead. It should be more righteous than a Pharisee - but perhaps not because we are more pedantic about law-keeping; rather because we do so in an attitude of love and service to God through Christ.

Matthew 5

v1

Getting into the brass tacks now, as we turn a corner into the sermon on the mount. It's interesting that Jesus sat down. I think he is mostly pictured as standing to teach in the sermon on the mount. I'm not sure just how mountainous a mountainside is, but when you look at the pictures Penny brought back from Israel, it's pretty hilly to say the least. It could be for the purpose of a natural ampitheatre sort of thing.

v2

Did he ever teach them. These could be some of the best known words of the best known lesson ever.

Interestingly, the non NIV translations have the words "he opened his mouth and taught them". I mean, that's probably more literal, but seemingly unnecessary to me. I don't think anyone is arguing he taught in sign language or interpretive dance.

v3

There is an interesting divide here between Matthew and Luke: Luke only says "poor", but Matthew adds "in spirit". The Lucan is pretty simple and clear, unless we are meant to read 'poor' with some sort of underlying metaphorical significance. But 'poor in spirit' is a much more nebulous term, especially when the blessing they receive is considered. It could be a jibe at the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, and be referring to those who look poor in spiritual actions. That seems a bit of a long bow to me. But the NASB has a note saying, "That is, those who are spiritually arrogant." So I guess it's a legit direction to take it.

Can it mean that those who are far from God will come to him and inherit the kingdom? Certainly that is the case. That is a pretty strong message to, say, gentiles too. I think it would be too much to say that there is a pattern of opposites in the beatitudes, but there are certainly multiple lines that simply report that these people will inherit the kingdom.

v4

Some people read these blessings as non-exclusive - so this one doesn't say that it is particularly blessed to be mourning if it means a heavenly comfort; more that this is just an expansion of the normal blessings that we know. This is in contradistinction to a more exclusive interpretation, that says that these are the real eternal blessings, and that other blessings (like being rich or happy in this life) are fleeting. This is backed up by other scripture (eg Luke 16:25). Hard to say. I guess I tend to fall on the latter simply because these are hard teachings, and I think they're meant to be that way - they're meant to turn the world upside-down.

v5

This is a great example of the flipping of the natural order. The meek are not usually the ones in power or the ones to receive the big benefit. That is a heavenly thing, not an earthly thing.

v6

Not all of these are doing that world-flipping though; some just seem to point out, like this one, that the right thing will be rewarded, will come out on top eventually. Doing the wrong thing does not pay long-term dividends.

v7

Of course, you could take exclusiveness too far. There are plenty of people who lacked mercy who will be shown mercy by God (which is I think what this is talking about, rather than just a sort of prid pro quo wisdom saying). But I guess even then they should show mercy once they've received the mercy.

v8

Are the pure in heart the only ones to see God? Certainly not if history has anything to say about it. But I guess if there is a non-exclusive element to this teaching, Jesus doesn't do much to imply it. Not here, at least.

v9

Doesn't really say by whom they will be called this. I assume the only person it really matters to be from though is God.

v10

And another claiming of the kingdom, this time for the persecuted. Again, there are a number of verses that make it pretty clear that the path of Christianity is a path of persecution. If someone is really living the Christian life, then persecution should really follow in some form. Sure, there are people who make deathbed choices and stuff; but this is a general rule rather than a slavish one, I think. They probably all are.

Matthew 4

v12

What an interesting verse. It seems to suggest that Jesus was not keen to be arrested, so he went rural. I've never heard that before (obviously I've read it here, but don't remember it). Jesus was clearly never in danger of being arrested "early", but perhaps didn't want to foment more trouble.

v13

It makes so much more sense when you know where these places are. Maps are good for that, as are visits to Israel.

v14

Now did Jesus move there to fulfill the prophecy, or did his movement just fulfill it?

v15

It's amazing to me that Galilee was called "of the Gentiles" even way back then. This prophecy was given like 700 years before Christ, and yet the place is still the same (or different, but the name still applies): it's a place where Gentiles live.

v16
Now it's unsure whether this verse is talking about the Gentiles living there, or the Jews living in a place of darkness because of the Gentiles. I think when I preached on this passage of Isaiah I said the second one primarily for that verse; I think I'd say the fulfillment of the prophecy is talking about everyone there, since the light is Jesus.

v17

This is the central message of Jesus' ministry. It's the same as John TB's, with the added "the kingdom is near".

v18

We're getting into M stuff here (ie stuff that is the same as Mark).

v19

There had to be more than that. You don't just follow a total stranger, for instance. Yet this is how Matthew paints it - not necessarily that they're strangers, but that it was as simple as Jesus coming up and saying, "Come, follow me." Had Jesus preached in a synagogue yet? I don't think so. Were these guys already disciples of John TB? Maybe. They might have seen Jesus' baptism (although remember that was at least 40 days before, if not longer!).

v20

It's even more amazing that he uses the words "at once" to show that this was an immediate thing. He didn't come ask them to follow him, and they packed stuff up, sorted out their families, their retirement plans, their income streams; they just went. Feels kind of familiar (note: we did spend like a year raising funds though; I know missionaries who would have said "I've been called" and just gone and trusted God to support them).

v21

The way this is painted is like it's on the same day, one right after the other. Maybe it was; they were all fisherman after all, all at the lake.

v22

These guys are there working in the family business, and they just skip off. This isn't skipping off for an early Friday or something; they are gone for three years (though 'gone' is a speculation; they do spend a fair bit of time in and around Galilee, so who knows if they didn't go back and visit). Matthew doesn't seem to feel it important to mention that they leave Zebedee with the hired men (as Mark does). Maybe he felt it was implied. But why not include it if you were working from a source similar to Mark? Maybe he didn't have it. This is all before Jesus has called Matthew, after all.

v23

And now Jesus' ministry starts. This is a pretty all-encompassing summary of that ministry.

v24

It's one thing to go around visiting places and speaking and having 'healings'. There are plenty of stories of pre-organised healing shows where people are actors or whatever. But for people to come from such a long way away, and for everyone to be healed, not just a select few... it's incredible. For people to be healed no matter their problem... that's phenomenal.

v25

It's little wonder so many people followed him. Why wouldn't you? Clearly something amazing is happening, and clearly the things he taught would have been incredibly entertaining and thought-provoking and meaningful. But that's not the end of the story, is it?

Matthew 4

v1

I'm not sure why this takes place in the desert. My imagination is that it's this big confrontation between two powerful people, and so it needs to take place in the middle of nowhere to save people from all the explosions.

v2

It's funny, but to me the preparation for facing a big challenge would not be to fast, it would be to do the opposite and make sure I was well fed and energised. But fasting is one of those things that people have oft used to focus themselves. I'm not sure exactly what kind of fasting it was they did back then. Thinking of it as 'no food or water' is not helpful, because it's rarely that (I think the thing the Jews wanting to kill Paul do is like that, but it's more a vow than a fast). But it does say "40 days and 40 nights", which discounts the sort of Ramadan fasting of only during the day.

The point is that Jesus is hungry. A pretty normal human emotion after fasting for 40 days.

v3

This first temptation seems to be related to questioning whether Jesus is really the son of God. How many people have said to me over the years, "If God is real, he should just prove it to me right now by doing X"? I hadn't realised till now that this is pretty much the exact same question that "the tempter" puts to Jesus here. It's also related to food, because as is stated before, Jesus is hungry.

v4

And I think the answer is actually the same now as it was then. It's not that bread isn't important, and it's not that proof isn't important too - Jesus does plenty of miracles, and actually becomes transfigured in front of the Three - but the important thing is what God says. God says Jesus is his son. That's what you should pay attention to. Yes, I know there are trust issues there for modern people that aren't there for the devil(he knows), but there is in my opinion more than sufficient evidence for the reliability and trustworthiness of the scriptures to scaffold a faith in God and his word. Rarely is someone's objection purely logical.

v5

I have often wondered if anyone saw Jesus standing on the top of the temple and they were like, "He's gunna jump!" I don't know. This could have all happened in Jesus' head for all I know.

v6

What is the temptation here? It's very similar. The question is once again "If you're the son of God". But now instead of relying on his own power to do things, it's relying on God's power to do things. Instead of, "If you're the son of God, do this," it's, "If you're the son of God, God will do this for you."

The way the devil twists the words of scripture is quite informative. For one, there's a big difference from doing something that needs to be done and being kept safe, and doing something unnecessarily reckless and being kept safe. The fact is that Jesus does throw himself off a metaphorical temple roof - he puts himself in the hands of God's enemies and is crucified and dies. And God does rescue him from that by raising him from the dead.

v7

There's also the obvious element of testing, which Jesus refers to here. If the only purpose of jumping off the temple is to see if God will fulfill his promise, then that's not really faithful. What kind of messiah wouldn't have faith in God to save him when he really needs it?

v8

This is what makes me think that it's in Jesus' head, because I'm pretty sure there is no mountain where you can see all the kingdoms of the world and their splendour. The argument about whether the devil showed Jesus in his mind or on big TV screens on the top of a mountain, or if they both used their superpowers, is pretty moot anyway I would hope.

v9

It's kind of strange that the devil offers this to Jesus. Firstly, can he even do this? I think the answer is yeah, kinda. After all, he is the ruler of the power of the air. I often get focused on comparing Satan's power to God's, which of course makes Satan look pretty pants. But he is still by no means powerless. He has been given authority over some things, so earthly kingdoms is a thing he could put Jesus in charge of. I think this is appealing to a human desire (who doesn't want to be lauded as royalty?), but also there is a godly desire here too: God really wants all the kingdoms of the earth to bow before him.

v10

But therein lies the rub: Satan's job is not to be bowed to. God alone is the one to be worshipped and served. This is most probably the most common temptation that we face today, and it's disturbing how often we all fail. But then, that's what Jesus came for.

v11

Satan is hence defeated by Jesus in their preliminary bout. Funnily enough, angels do come and attend him just as Satan promised in verse 6. God does have a sense of humour.

Matthew 3

v1

I wonder how soon before Jesus John TB started preaching in the wilderness. We're not told, but you may recall from the recounting in Luke that John TB and Jesus were cousins, and only born a few months apart. So if John started his ministry when he turned 30, he'd only have been baptising people for a few months. I get the feeling that it was longer, but who knows. You could argue that it would be hard for him to have the following he did in just a few months, but Jesus only had a following for three years before he died and now has a global church, so go figure.

v2

John TB's message was about repentance. I think repentance often gets a single-sided focus: either you're focused on purity (get your life straightened up) or apology (being sorry for what you've done wrong). It is of course both: you acknowledge your wrongdoing and seek to change.

v3

Again this is the sort of prophetical exegesis I wouldn't necessarily agree with were it not being done in scripture itself. Look this passage up in Isaiah, and you'll see it gets translated more or less the same, but the commas and quote marks are in different spots, lending a different emphasis to the words "in the wilderness". Now you can't make too much of that - there are no quote marks in the Hebrew or the Greek. The truth is that the Isaiah verse at the very least can be translated both ways (the NIV has a footnote to that effect). There isn't one for this verse; I wonder why.

My point being that changing the focus of "in the wilderness" from the speaker to those listening is a change of meaning. Now all of Matthew's messianic prophecies are going to be a change of meaning, aren't they? Part of the nature of prophecy is a dual meaning. But I wouldn't be comfortable making that change myself, or at the very least I'd be very cautious.

At the end of the day though, the message is more or less the same: Israel is being called to prepare the way for the good news about God's coming to them. In Isaiah it was (I think) a message to Israel that God would bring them home from their second 'wilderness' experience (the exile), having just prophesied that Babylon was going to come take them away. Now it's the coming of Jesus to them.

v4

He dressed a bit strangely is the connotation. He's doing weird things, like the prophets did. In fact, the reference to a leather belt and a hair garment is from 2 Kings 1:8 and is about Elijah. Definitely a style choice there.

I heard someone one say that locusts are not the insect but a type of fruit which also goes by this name. This goes against the Greek though: unless you think that God bombards the earth with fruit in Revelation 9.

v5

As I said earlier, lots of people went to John TB. There was an obvious thirst for the message he had. People have described John TB as a rock star, and I don't think that's too far off. Remember, preaching was a form of entertainment as well as information distribution, even rough sermons like John's about the need for repentance.

v6

Baptism was not something that made up the religious ordinances of Israel, and so it's free here to have a meaning put upon it by John TB. Clearly it's a baptism linked to repentance - not necessarily forgiveness at this point, although if it were that would be in keeping with the OT message anyway.

v7

It's good to know that Jesus' attitude to the Pharisees was not lonely. John TB (no doubt through the spirit's leading) felt the same way about them. If there's one thing that gets the sharp end of the stick in the gospels, it's always hypocrisy and failures of leadership.

v8

But even then the message is the same: it's not enough to say you repent, you need to produce fruit in keeping with it.

v9

Because this was the kind of thing they would say (and in fact did say to Jesus). Reliance on historical relationships to God is important but not sufficient - never has been, never will be. You need to relate to God yourself, in the present. That's how God relates to us: both historically and in the moment.

v10

God is a winnower, he is a decision-maker. A time of decision comes. God is slow in it sometimes (the OT attests to that readily!) but it does always come. It's never a good idea to wait. In fact, the attitude of waiting shows that you don't understand anyway, because this isn't a game where you can stave off having to fulfill responsibilities till the last moment; this is where you have a moment by moment and ongoing relationship of love that you always want to be involved in (imagine a man who continues to enjoy prostitutes until his wedding night - that would not be cool!).

v11

John TB makes it clear that his baptism is merely symbolic and holds no special power beyond the announcement by the person that they accept the need for repentance and do so. The one John TB is expecting is Jesus, who will baptise with the Holy Spirit and fire. Now I'm not quite sure what he means by "and fire".

v12

Oh wait, yes I am. it's clear that the baptism of fire is not a good one. Either you receive the Holy Spirit and become a Christian, or you receive the fire and it destroys you (I'm not preaching annihilationism here, although you have to admit the picture of a burning fire burning stuff up is pretty destructive). It certainly isn't some sort of purgatorial picture.

v13

This is pretty awkward. I should point out that in my understanding geographically John is near Jerusalem (see v5, although that's not conclusive). The fact is though that even v5 shows that people came from everywhere in Judea to get baptised. So Jesus coming from Galilee could well be a very long way.

v14

But John TB isn't disturbed by the distance, but by the fact that Jesus is here asking for his entirely inconsequential baptism, when Jesus is the one who will baptise with the Holy Spirit and fire! If you've ever had to give a sermon in a room full of Bible college lecturers, then you know how easy it is to feel inadequate in the face of someone way better than you. I imagine it would be similar to building the house of a famous architect or something.

v15

But Jesus assures him that this is the way to fulfill righteousness, and when Jesus does that, can you really argue? I'm not sure why it needed to be this way. It could be that by Jesus being baptised here, it gives creedence to the preaching of John TB.

v16

And of course this descent of the Holy Spirit onto Jesus is what gives that tick of approval from God himself, both onto Jesus and onto John's baptism in a way.

v17

The voice from heaven doesn't have anything to say about John TB's baptism; something a little more important is happening here. God is stating in a way that no-one who was there would be able to deny that Jesus is his son, loved by and pleasing to God. This is not the kind of voice you would ignore, although I'm sure many did.

Matthew 2

v13

If I were writing this and wanted to make it suspenseful, I'd have had the Herod story first then the fleeing story. But Matthew probably doesn't want to make it suspenseful. I think he wants to make it clear, and perhaps even knows that this might be read a lot and so wants it to serve that purpose instead.

Interesting that the dream comes to Joseph. I guess, again, he's the husband, so he's the one that will need convincing.

v14

And again Joseph is obedient. Good on him. Egypt is a long way to go!

v15

This is one of those prophetic exegeses that I would not countenance if anyone else made it; but when you find it in scripture, you are kind of bound by it.

v16

This is terrible violence, but not altogether uncommon from royalty of the time unfortunately. For instance, Herod got into an argument with the Hasmoneans, and so gave an order that all their male inheritors should be killed. Politics was a bloody business.

This is one of the things that bring praise for democracy - plurality of power increases stability and apathy, reducing these kinds of violence.

Also it's clear that the time between Jesus birth, the magis' visit, and Herod realising that they had not returned to him, is around two years.

v17

It just strikes me at this moment that if you asked me to independently point to all those passages of scripture that align neatly enough with Christ's life and death that they could be prophecies, I'd be rubbish at it. The knowledge of scripture of the Jewish people at the time must have been amazing. Besides, what else did they have to read? Scripture was knowledge, education, entertainment and culture. It's true that our increase in media distracts us from knowing God's word - even Christian media. I'm not sure what the answer to that is though. Be all the more thankful for people who study it full-time and share their knowledge with us!

v18

And so Christ's birth was celebrated by magi, and by shepherds, and mourned by so many mothers whose children were lost in an attempt to kill him. Christ's arrival is a source of joy, but also causes human terror.

v19

So Joseph didn't even have to wait for a report from travellers - he got a dream that was essentially a newspaper article.

v20

I assume that the dream was to assure him that the danger was gone and to also encourage him to head back to Judea, since it would have been easy to stay in Egypt, but that would have made for quite a different Christian story!

v21

Once again, Joseph was obedient, and I think there's a difference between the obedience of following instructions that take your family out of harm's way, and the obedience of putting your family in harm's way. Both are important, but one is easier.

v22

And there was danger - Archelaus was Herod's son (known also as Herod Archelaus, so he's another Herod), and upon his father's death killed 3000 people in Jerusalem for arguing with him about a justice matter. This is not the kind of person you want to be King of the Jews near. And so that is why Jesus was born in Bethlehem, became a refugee in Egypt, and then grew up a Galilean.

v23

And he lived in a place called Nazareth, which was yet another fulfillment of prophecy. "Nazarene" later came to refer to a sect of Jews who followed the teachings of a man from Nazareth called Jesus. In fact, Christians in some Middle Eastern countries are still called Nazarenes - you might recall that when those ISIS losers took over parts of Syria and Iraq to play at being rulers, they painted an Arabic ن (the letter N) on the houses of Christians to mark them out: N for Nazarene.

Matthew 2

v1

"King Herod" sets a time period. Seriously, there is so much historical stuff in the gospels that to claim Jesus never existed is such bollocks.

The KJV uses the old-fashioned "wise men", the NASB uses "magi" and the NIV interestingly uses "Magi" with a capital M. Not sure what the idea is there.

v2

The magi's question is so amazing, "Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him." I love that line in Life of Brian where Brian's mum asks what star sign he is (Capricorn) and what they're like, and their response is, "He is the Son of God, the Messiah, king of the Jews!" "So that's Capricorn, is it?" "No, no, that's just him." The reason I refer to that is that it's not like there is a prophecy in scripture that talks about a star rising to establish when the Messiah will be born - if there was, it would be very likely Matthew would have included it in his gospel. This means God not only honoured the beliefs of the eastern magi so that their idea of what the star would mean was right, but he used it to communicate the coming of the Messiah in the east, but not in Jerusalem! (Save for Joseph; and Mary and the shepherds, but that's a different gospel.)

v3

The first time that Jerusalem hears of the birth of the Messiah is from some eastern magi. No wonder they were disturbed. It's like it happened without any fanfare - for them, anyway.

v4

The Jews were looking out for a Messiah. I don't mean they had active Messiah Patrol or something necessarily, but the fact is that Herod knew that the Bible had word that there was to be a Messiah, and he expects the Bible to have answers about where that Messiah would be born. Note also that when the magi turn up and ask about the "King of the Jews", Herod instantly translates this as "Messiah". They weren't messing around here.

v5-6

And there is indeed an answer - Bethlehem. Here is Matthew once again pointing to scripture as prophecying Jesus' coming. The Jews don't get told when, but they do get told where.  This is why I say they didn't necessarily have a Messiah Patrol; if they did, you'd assume someone would have heard about Jesus' birth and asked the question, "Could this be the Messiah?"

v7

Uh-oh. We all know how this story ends, but honestly, what noble reason would there be to know when he was born?

v8

See, this command would have been just as legit without verse 7's little investigation. But at least he does tell them where to go.

v9

This is no ordinary star. This is not just astrology. This star moves. It stops moving. There's something special about it. What was it? What did it look like? No idea. Doesn't say, doesn't matter. The point is that it guided them to where they were going - and it had to be a guidance more specific than "here's Bethlehem" because they already knew that bit from Herod.

v10

I think part of their overjoyment was the fact of the star's specialness itself. This is an obviously special thing. They had come all this way for something special, and they were not disappointed.

v11

They worshipped him. That doesn't mean they necessarily accepted him to be God; there is plenty of attestation of the Greek word προσκυνέω as simply meaning to give someone the appropriate homage or respect due to their superior rank over you. This was at the very least a king; you bow to kings. Of course, it doesn't mean they didn't think he was God too. Just saying. I mean, the whole star thing might happen when God has his Messiah born; but it's pretty darn special.

v12

And I imagine the dream fed into that too; that's also fairly special. They certainly took it to heart, because they followed its warning. Again, this doesn't mean the magi instantly associated Jesus with God - although the whole virgin birth story, which they would no doubt have heard upon turning up on Mary's doorstep, is a really strong contender there, even if you're not looking for the Isaiah prophecy.

Matthew 1

v18

The comparisons of the translations in this passage are hilarious. On the one hand the birth of Jesus "came about" (NIV), "was as follows" (NASB) and "was on this wise" (KJV); Mary "was pledged to be married" (NIV), "had been betrothed" (NASB) and "was espoused" (KJV); was "found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit" (NIV), "found to be with child by the Holy Spirit" (NASB) and "found with child of the Holy Ghost" (KJV). On the other hand, "before they came together" (NIV), "before they came together" (NASB) and "before they came together" (KJV).

Now I get it. The word is συνέρχομαι, it means "to come together or accompany", so it gets used in Mark 3 to describe the crowd assembling for example - and that's pretty much exclusively how it is read throughout the NT. So it could refer to the time before Mary and Joseph having assembled as husband and wife. I'm not suggesting that it should be translated "bumped uglies" or anything (although it could be a reason why translators have been so reticent to clarify). I'm just surprised that this language has remained so constant when almost everything else in the verse has changed.

We often, perhaps almost exclusively, think of this early Christmas-y narrative synergistically - putting the bits from the different gospels together. So we read Matthew and think, "Yes, Mary had that whole encounter with the angel and stuff." But that information is not important to Matthew. It just says here, "She was found to be preggers before her and Joseph had 'come together' (aka gotten their freak on)." So the focus here isn't on Mary and her situation, but on Joseph.

v19

And the point is that Joseph, coming across this situation, is a pretty cool dude. Sure, he's not going to just accept that his new wife is up the duff with some unknown baby, but he's not going to ruin her because of it either. The verse goes so far as to point out that this is not because he has feelings for her, or because it costs him nothing; it's because it's the righteous thing to do.

v20

I love this bit, because honestly there is no other way that Joseph is going to be reasonably convinced of what's happened here without an angel appearing. If Mary were to say, "God told me that this baby is from him," Joseph would be pretty gormless if he said, "Oh, okay. That's totally not an excuse a girl in our society would try on to avoid endless shame and negative consequences."

Moreover, Joseph made a righteous decision! If you read the NIV's primary translation, he did what was right in the eyes of the law. But sometimes God breaks the rules, and what would ordinarily be absolutely godly to do suddenly becomes wrong, and you have to change your plan to remain obedient to God. But when God is going to do something that really throws a spanner in the works, he will let you know. It won't always be an angel - in fairness, this is Jesus being born, so it is worthy of a heavenly singing telegram, but most things that happen in our lives aren't that.

v21

And Joseph doesn't need this extra bit of info either. He could have just been told, "This is God's will, so get onto it, mate." But God brings Joseph in on the secret, because Joseph is going to be a big part of this. He's the adopted dad of Jesus the Messiah. That's a big deal.

v22

The NIV separates this from the angel's speaking with a paragraph break; the others use the word "Now" which is probably included in the Greek. So this is Matthew breaking down the prophecy fulfillment for us. You have to wonder if the Jews were actively looking for this prophecy to be fulfilled, or if it was just sort of sitting on a shelf somewhere with people thinking, "Yeah, that could happen." I don't know the answer to that.

v23
What I do know is that it is a pretty kick-ass prophecy. Whatever it meant to Ahaz back in the day (I can't imagine it meant much beyond that God had plans that involved peace and being with his people), the whole virgin birth thing is a big deal as a fulfillment of a prophecy that is utterly God-worked. Sure, it could have just meant "young woman" in Isaiah, and I'm cool with that. But God picks the harder version for his son's birth, and rightly so.

v24

And imagine how grateful Mary must have been - to God and to Joseph - for doing it this way. Jesus could have been born to a single mum. But instead God wanted Jesus to be born in a family of mum and dad, and also for that dad to have a lineage that went back to David. There is talk about Mary also having that lineage, but let's face it: without a dad, even an adopted dad, he was always just going to be a bastard, because it's not like angels were going to appear to everyone who met him to give them the same heads up as they gave Joseph.

v25

Just in case you were wondering if they did the nasty while Mary was pregnant. Maybe this is to prove that Jesus isn't Joseph's biological kid (although I would think the understanding of pregnancy is once you're preggers, you can't get pregnant again from doing the nasty). I think as much as anything this is about confirming that they were married, even though the marriage wasn't consummated on the wedding night as was tradition (and yes, people probably checked; there are still plenty of cultures where this happens). This actually means a fair bit to those cultures who think that marriage isn't marriage if you didn't do any horizontal mambo. We in the west definitely know full well that sex doesn't equal marriage. But I think even in the west we still perhaps need to learn that marriage doesn't always equal sex. And I'm not saying it never does or anything - the Bible makes it clear that kids are generally born in marriages, and that sex is generally done in them too. But marriage is bigger than those things.