Tag Archives: Matthew 18:12

Romans, Part 62

Posted on by

As I continue to consider Rejoice in hope, endure in suffering, persist in prayer,[1] as a description of love rather than as rules to obey, I want to look at some more truth that love rejoices in along with some more ἀδικία that it does not.  What Luke called a parable (παραβολὴν, a form of παραβολή) Matthew presented as a rhetorical question in a discourse about child-rearing: If someone owns a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for the one that went astray?[2]

Matthew

Luke
See that you do not disdain one of these little ones.  For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven.

Matthew 18:10 (NET)

 So Jesus told them this parable:

Luke 15:3 (NET)
What do you think?  If someone owns a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for the one that went astray?  And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice (χαίρει, a form of χαίρω) more over it than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray.

Matthew 18:12, 13 (NET)

 “Which one of you, if he has a hundred sheep and loses one of them, would not leave the ninety-nine in the open pasture and go look for the one that is lost until he finds it?  Then when he has found it, he places it on his shoulders, rejoicing (χαίρων, another form of χαίρω).  Returning home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, telling them, ‘Rejoice with me, because I have found my sheep that was lost.’

Luke 15:4-6 (NET)
In the same way, your Father in heaven is not willing that one of these little ones be lost.

Matthew 18:14 (NET)

 I tell you, in the same way there will be more joy (χαρὰ) in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need to repent.

Luke 15:7 (NET)

I should back up a bit and look at more of the context of Matthew’s Gospel narrative.  Jesus’ disciples had asked him, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?[3]

He called a child, had him stand among them, and said, “I tell you the truth, unless you turn around and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven!  Whoever then humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.  And whoever welcomes a child like this in my name welcomes me.”[4]

Then He began what I am calling a discourse about child-rearing: But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a huge millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the open sea.[5]  The Greek word translated causes…to sin is σκανδαλίσῃ (a form of σκανδαλίζω).  The definition in the NET reads as follows:

1) to put a stumbling block or impediment in the way, upon which another may trip and fall, metaph. to offend 1a) to entice to sin 1b) to cause a person to begin to distrust and desert one whom he ought to trust and obey 1b1) to cause to fall away 1b2) to be offended in one, i.e. to see in another what I disapprove of and what hinders me from acknowledging his authority 1b3) to cause one to judge unfavourably or unjustly of another 1c) since one who stumbles or whose foot gets entangled feels annoyed 1c1) to cause one displeasure at a thing 1c2) to make indignant 1c3) to be displeased, indignant

It comes from σκάνδαλον a snare or trap, translated stumbling blocks in the next verse: Woe to the world because of stumbling blocks (σκανδάλων, a form of σκάνδαλον)!  It is necessary that stumbling blocks (σκάνδαλα, another form of σκάνδαλον) come, but woe to the person through whom they (σκάνδαλον) come.”[6]  The necessity (ἀνάγκη, a form of ἀναγκή) of stumbling blocks is part of the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God,[7] how God has consigned all people to disobedience so that he may show mercy to them all.[8]  As I write this my daughter is essentially a witch, a neo-pagan.  My part in her defection from Christ was a decision made during my divorce from her mother.

My children wanted to stay with me rather than their mother.  I went along with it, hoping their mother would see reason.  She called my bluff and asked for money (to which she was entitled) to leave.  My biggest concern at that moment was the family’s financial survival.  I traveled for a living and would need to hire someone to care for them while I was away.  I had no legal rights to my children.  (I married into them and hadn’t adopted them because their biological father was still living.)  And there were a few more things.

Her care for those children had saved their mother from many (though not all) misguided mistakes.  To take that from her seemed dangerous and cruel.  Add to that, I was crushed in my own soul to be rejected again by yet another woman.  I had serious doubts that I could be a single parent of two teenage children.  Did I even want to be a single parent of two teenage children?  I wanted to make movies.

I decided that I could walk away with nothing but a paycheck, start over again and still help the family financially, and my wife could not.  And so I rejected and abandoned my daughter.

I’m grateful to Stephenie Meyer, Melissa Rosenberg, Catherine Hardwicke and Kristen Stewart for giving me two hours to be a teenage girl in love.  Randy Brown, Robert Lorenz, Clint Eastwood and Amy Adams have also helped me immensely in a more didactic way.  But both “Twilight” and “Trouble with the Curve” came too late to save me from making potentially the worst decision of a lifetime of bad decisions (Matthew 18:8, 9 NET).

If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.  And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away.  It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into fiery hell.

If what I do with my hands, if where I go with my feet, if what I see with my eyes causes me to sin?

Causes you to sin has proven to be the worst of all possible translations of σκανδαλίζει (another form of σκανδαλίζω) for me.  It turns my thoughts inward to my sins.  My sins are forgiven!  Young’s Literal Translation—cause thee to stumble—allows me to see that Jesus was still talking about my real bumbling and stumbling, causing my daughter—one of those little ones who believed in Him—to sin, becoming a stumbling block to her, causing her to desert one whom she ought to trust.

Having watched her struggle through two drug-related psychotic breaks and a stroke, I agree with Jesus that it would have been better for me to kill myself.[9]  It is better for her, however, that I believe that I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me.  So the life I now live in the body, I live because of the faithfulness of the Son of God…[10]  And I continue to pray that his love, his joy, his peace, his patience, his kindness, his goodness, his faithfulness, his gentleness, and his firm control[11] are all she sees from me from now on, because if I cannot be forgiven…

And by forgiven I mean:  though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.[12]  An eternity in a fiery hell seems like overkill to me for masturbation or premarital sex or even stealing a gazillion dollars.  But if my daughter cannot be found again by the Lord Jesus, if I have condemned her to an eternity in hell, I’m not entirely convinced one eternity in one fiery hell will be sufficient for me.

And though I write like this I still have hope.  “I’ll always be here as your daughter,” she texted me as I thought and wrote about these things.  She has forgiven me, but not Jesus—not yet.  “Your sacrifice has made my education possible and I can never repay you but with love,” she texted.  Since faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word (ρήματος, a form of ῥῆμα) of God,[13] I pray that He will speak that word, “hear,” to her heart, so she will know Jesus and his Father who has given her so much more than a few dollars.  Now this is eternal life, Jesus prayed to his Father, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you sent.[14]

I didn’t intend this essay to be so confessional.  I intended to write about an incident in the history of Israel, when a Levite…acquired a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah.[15]  Actually, I wanted to write about what happened on their journey home, after she got angry at him and went home to her father’s house in Bethlehem in Judah,[16] after he retrieved her from there.  But in the KJV she didn’t get angry, she played the whore against him.  The note in the NET reads: “Or ‘was unfaithful to him.’ Many have understood the Hebrew verb וַתִּזְנֶה (vattizneh) as being from זָנָה (zanah, “to be a prostitute”), but it may be derived from a root meaning “to be angry; to hate” attested in Akkadian (see HALOT 275 s.v. II זנה).”

Ken Stone wrote in the Jewish Women’s Archive online:

The Hebrew text states that the woman “prostituted herself against” the Levite (19:2). Thus, it has often been assumed that she was sexually unfaithful to him. Certain Greek translations, however, state that she “became angry” with him. The latter interpretation is accepted by a number of commentators and modern English translations, including the NRSV, since the woman goes to her father’s house rather than the house of a male lover. It is also possible that the woman’s “prostitution” does not refer to literal sexual infidelity but is a sort of metaphor for the fact that she leaves her husband. The act of leaving one’s husband is quite unusual in the Hebrew Bible, and the harsh language used to describe it could result from the fact that it was viewed in a very negative light.

And though Mr. Stone mentioned “Certain Greek translations,” the Septuagint reads simply καὶ ἐπορεύθη ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἡ παλλακὴ αὐτοῦ (literally: “and went from him the concubine of his”).

I won’t comment about a Levite with a concubine, except to say that the Hebrew word pı̂ylegesh (פילגש), translated concubine, does not occur in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers or Deuteronomy.  It occurs in Genesis before God’s law was given and again after in Judges, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Esther, Song of Solomon and Ezekiel.  But the concubine is a foreign custom to God’s law.

The Levite and his concubine spent the night in Gibeah, in the land of the Benjamites, with an old man from the Ephraimite hill country, the place to which the Levite and his concubine were returning.  I made the following table to compare and contrast what happened next to the incident in Sodom the night before it was destroyed.

Judges, the Levite and his concubine

Genesis, Lot and the visitors
They were having a good time, when suddenly some men of the city, some good-for-nothings, surrounded the house and kept beating on the door.

Judges 19:22a (NET)

 Before they could lie down to sleep, all the men – both young and old, from every part of the city of Sodom – surrounded the house.

Genesis 19:4 (NET)

The note on good-for-nothings in the NET reads: “‘the men of the city, men, the sons of wickedness.’ The phrases are in apposition; the last phrase specifies what type of men they were. It is not certain if all the men of the city are in view, or just a group of troublemakers. In 20:5 the town leaders are implicated in the crime, suggesting that all the men of the city were involved. If so, the implication is that the entire male population of the town were good-for-nothings.”  The text is clearer regarding Sodom: Now the people of Sodom were extremely wicked rebels against the Lord (yehôvâh).[17]

Judges, the Levite and his concubine

Genesis, Lot and the visitors
They said to the old man who owned the house, “Send out the man who came to visit you so we can have sex with him.”

Judges 19:22b (NET)

 They shouted to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight?  Bring them out to us so we can have sex with them!”

Genesis 19:5 (NET)
The man who owned the house went outside and said to them, “No, my brothers!  Don’t do this wicked thing!  After all, this man is a guest in my house.  Don’t do such a disgraceful thing!

Judges 19:23 (NET)

 Lot went outside to them, shutting the door behind him.  He said, “No, my brothers!  Don’t act so wickedly!

Genesis 19:6, 7 (NET)
Here are my virgin daughter and my guest’s concubine.  I will send them out and you can abuse them and do to them whatever you like.  But don’t do such a disgraceful thing to this man!”

Judges 19:24 (NET)

 Look, I have two daughters who have never had sexual relations with a man.  Let me bring them out to you, and you can do to them whatever you please.  Only don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”

Genesis 19:8 (NET)

Chivalry as a moral code was invented much later.

Judges, the Levite and his concubine

Genesis, Lot and the visitors
The men refused to listen to him…

Judges 19:25a (NET)

 

 “Out of our way!” they cried, and “This man came to live here as a foreigner, and now he dares to judge (Septuagint: κρίσιν κρίνειν) us!  We’ll do more harm to you than to them!”  They kept pressing in on Lot until they were close enough to break down the door.

Genesis 19:9 (NET)
…so the Levite grabbed his concubine and made her go outside.

Judges 19:25b (NET)

 So the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house as they shut the door.  Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, from the youngest to the oldest, with blindness.

Genesis 19:10, 11a (NET)
They raped her and abused her all night long until morning.  They let her go at dawn.

Judges 19:25c (NET)

 The men outside wore themselves out trying to find the door.

Genesis 19:11b (NET)

The Benjamites who did this were not “godless Sodomites,” extremely wicked rebels against the Lord (yehôvâh, ליהוה), but sons of Israel living in the promised land.

Judges, the Levite and his concubine

Genesis, Lot and the visitors
The woman arrived back at daybreak and was sprawled out on the doorstep of the house where her master was staying until it became light.  When her master got up in the morning, opened the doors of the house, and went outside to start on his journey, there was the woman, his concubine, sprawled out on the doorstep of the house with her hands on the threshold.

Judges 19:26, 27 (NET)

 Then the two visitors said to Lot, “Who else do you have here?  Do you have any sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or other relatives in the city?  Get them out of this place because we are about to destroy it.  The outcry against this place is so great before the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) that he (yehôvâh, יהוה) has sent us to destroy it.”

Genesis 19:12, 13 (NET)

The woman was dead.  Dear God, I hope she was dead (Judges 19:29, 30 NET):

When he got home, [the Levite] took a knife, grabbed his concubine, and carved her up into twelve pieces.  Then he sent the pieces throughout Israel.  Everyone who saw the sight said, “Nothing like this has happened or been witnessed during the entire time since the Israelites left the land of Egypt!  Take careful note of it!  Discuss it and speak!”

Romans, Part 63

Back to Romans, Part 64

[1] Romans 12:12 (NET)

[2] Matthew 18:12 (NET)

[3] Matthew 18:1b (NET)

[4] Matthew 18:2-5 (NET)

[5] Matthew 18:6 (NET)

[6] Matthew 18:7 (NET)

[7] Romans 11:33a (NET)

[8] Romans 11:32 (NET)

[9] Matthew 18:6b (NET)

[10] Galatians 2:20a (NET)

[11] Galatians 5:22, 23 (NET)

[12] Isaiah 1:18b (NKJV) Table

[13] Romans 10:17 (NKJV)

[14] John 17:3 (NET)

[15] Judges 19:1b (NET)

[16] Judges 19:2a (NET)

[17] Genesis 13:13 (NET)

Jesus the Leg-breaker, Part 1

Posted on by

“Jesus the leg-breaker” is a more persistent tale than I expected.  I decided not to give it short shrift.

I am the beautiful shepherd,[1] Jesus said.  Did He mean to turn my attention to Him or to human shepherds?  Do I know Him through the Bible?  Or should I study shepherd lore and apply it to Him?  In a blog titled “The Good Shepherd Breaks Their Legs,” Pastor Robin Weinstein quoted the following story from another blog:

According to the story, if a lamb has a tendency to wander off, the shepherd will actually break one of its legs. He then tends the broken leg – puts a splint on it and binds it up. Then while the leg is mending, he carries it on his shoulder. According to the anecdote, once the sheep heals, it will follow the shepherd, close at his side, the rest of its life. Never again go astray [because now it knows the voice and guidance of its shepherd].

“But, this story is not in the Bible, you say,” was the apparently grudging admission, followed by a Bible verse “that runs parallel” to the story.

How enviable is the man whom God corrects. Oh, do not despise the chastening of the Lord when you sin. For though he wounds, he binds and heals once again. Job 5:17,18

The reasoning here goes something like this: The word of God is true.  The Bible is the word of God.  Job 5:17 and 18 are in the Bible, so they are true and the word of God.  It is a compelling argument and does seem to correspond to the shepherd story.  But in the book of Job in the Bible these words are not the word of yehôvâh:  “How enviable is the man whom God corrects.  Oh, do not despise the chastening of the Lord when you sin.  For though he wounds, he binds and heals once again,” are the words of Eliphaz the Temanite.  In the book of Job yehôvâh spoke the following to Eliphaz the Temanite about Eliphaz’s words (Job 42:7 NET).

After the Lord (yehôvâh) had spoken (dâbar, דבר; Septuagint: λαλῆσαι) these things to Job, he (yehôvâh [added again for emphasis, I assume]) said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My anger is stirred up against you and your two friends, because you have not spoken (dâbar,  דברתם; Septuagint: ἐλαλήσατε) about me what is right, as my servant Job has.”

On my way back from atheism, as I essentially rejected the Gospel thinking of it as a second chance to do righteousness by obeying the Bible as rules, I met a man who wanted to produce the book of Job as a play.  I don’t remember now if he asked me to set it to music or if I had the competing idea to write it as an opera.  As I studied, intending to make the book of Job the libretto for an opera, I was perplexed by what fault God found with the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite.

I could see that their empathy for Job might have been off a bit, but their words seemed more or less like the religious teaching I had heard my whole life.  Wishing that yehôvâh had been more specific, I abandoned the project.  Even now, given this lack of specificity, I am not wise enough to quote anything Eliphaz said as proof of anything in the light of yehôvâh’s anger (Job 42:8 NET):

So now take seven bulls and seven rams [yehôvâh, speaking to Eliphaz, continued] and go to my servant Job and offer a burnt offering for yourselves.  And my servant Job will intercede for you, and I will respect him, so that I do not deal with you according to your folly, because you have not spoken (dâbar,  דברתם; Septuagint: ἐλαλήσατε) about me what is right, as my servant Job has.

“God will chasten and correct us,” the writer of the original blog continued.  So far, so good: For whom the Lord loves He chastens (παιδεύει, a form of παιδεύω), And scourges (μαστιγοῖ, a form of μαστιγόω) every son whom He receives.[2]  But the writer of the original blog added, “if we stray.”  And that is probably the reason he quoted Eliphaz the Temanite from the book of Job rather than the writer of the book of Hebrews.  The writer of the book of Hebrews wasn’t writing to those who strayed but to those who were tempted to stray because of the opposition or contradiction, the ἀντιλογίαν (a form of ἀντιλογία; literally, “to speak against”) of sinners that they encountered while trusting Christ (Hebrews 12:5-7a NET):

And have you forgotten the exhortation addressed to you as sons?  “My son, do not scorn the Lord’s discipline (παιδείας, a form of παιδεία) or give up when he corrects you.  “For the Lord disciplines the one he loves and chastises every son he accepts.”  Endure your suffering as discipline (παιδείαν, a form of παιδεία) …

The faithful, as opposed to those who stray, are called to endure the ἀντιλογίαν of sinners as God’s παιδείαν (a form of παιδεία).  Currently in the U.S. this ἀντιλογίαν is mostly ridicule and rarely μαστιγόω as was common in the first century (and beyond).  But it is fairly clear that the faithful should perceive and receive the ἀντιλογίαν of sinners in whatever form as παιδείαν from God (Hebrews 12:7b, 8 NET):

God is treating you as sons.  For what son is there that a father does not discipline (παιδεύει, a form of παιδεύω)?  But if you do not experience discipline (παιδείας, another form of παιδεία), something all sons have shared in, then you are illegitimate and are not sons.

A comparison and contrast follow between earthly fathers and the Father of spirits which might be confusing if not treated carefully:

Comparison

Contrast
Besides, we have experienced discipline (παιδευτὰς, a form of παιδευτής) from our earthly fathers and we respected them; shall we not submit ourselves all the more to the Father of spirits and receive life?

Hebrews 12:9 (NET)

 For they [earthly fathers] disciplined (ἐπαίδευον, another form of παιδεύω) us for a little while as seemed good to them, but he [the Father of spirits] does so for our benefit, that we may share his holiness.

Hebrews 12:10 (NET)

If the παιδεία of one’s father consisted mostly of punishment for doing wrong it is easy to mistake punishment for the Father of spirits’ παιδεία.  But the παιδεία of the Father of spirits comes at the mouth (and possibly at the hands) of sinners for doing right rather than wrong.  The writer of the book of Hebrews continued (Hebrews 12:11-13 NET):

Now all discipline (παιδεία) [whether for doing wrong or for doing right] seems painful at the time, not joyful. But later it [the παιδεία from the Father of spirits for doing right] produces the fruit of peace and righteousness for those trained by it.  Therefore, strengthen your listless hands and your weak knees, and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint but be healed.

This is the experience of the faithful, not the unfaithful, and not a word about breaking legs.  But Deacon Del Gibbs, the original blogger, wrote:

God will chasten and correct us if we stray. You say yep, I could write the book? Been there, done that?  But it is for our good. And trust me, the pain is better than the alternative – becoming lamb chops on Satan’s dinner table. 

Is this his personal experience of Jesus?

No.  He never strayed.  “You see,” he wrote, “I had not been saved out of sin but God saved me from going into it.”  In Romans 1 people who did not glorify…God or give him thanks, who exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles, were given over by God in the desires of their hearts to impurity, to dishonor their bodies among themselves.[3]  The implication here is that apart from this God would keep them from this sin.

People who exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, were given over by God to dishonorable passions.[4]  Again the implication is that apart from this God would keep them from this sin.  Likewise people who did not see fit to acknowledge God, were given over by God to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done.[5]  Once again the implication is that apart from this God would keep them from these sins.  Mr. Gibbs continued:

I can testify of God’s strength that helps me live victoriously.  Of his patience and forgiveness for the times I’m slow to catch on.  And when I stub my toe and fall on my face, I can tell how He reaches out and helps me to my feet once again.

That sounds so much better to me as something to say to one who has strayed than threats about Jesus the leg-breaker.  You see, I have strayed.  You might say I went looking for the smiting, leg-breaking Jesus I was taught about, at least I dared Him to act.  And I became an atheist when He refused to live up to his bad press.

The good thing about becoming an atheist, however, is that I couldn’t blame God for my problems any more.  They were definitely my problems, brought about by the sins that I thought were my freedom, even my right, the very things Paul called the wrath of God…revealed from heaven,[6] the things I couldn’t quit even after I began to want to quit them.

The kicker here is that Mr. Gibbs’ father, raised on a sheep ranch in Montana, couldn’t even confirm the alleged shepherd lore: “My Dad says he didn’t do it,” his blog post began.  “He just got out the 22, and that night they had mutton stew.”  The reasoning here goes something like this: Jesus the leg-breaker would be better than Del’s father the killer and eater.

But that unmasks the whole thing, doesn’t it?  Why does a human shepherd care for the flock at all?  Is it not so the flock is available to be fleeced, milked and eaten?  Is that what Jesus meant when He called Himself the beautiful shepherd?  Is this, too, part of the shepherd lore I should apply to Him?  Jesus said:

Matthew

Luke
What do you think?  If someone owns a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for the one that went astray?

Matthew 18:12 (NET)

 So Jesus told them this parable: “Which one of you, if he has a hundred sheep and loses one of them, would not leave the ninety-nine in the open pasture and go look for the one that is lost until he finds it?

Luke 15:3, 4 (NET)

Frankly, I think I might write-off the one who strayed rather than risk the others.  But then, I’m not a shepherd.  I don’t really know the value of a sheep.  (And  I’m not omnipresent.)  So I must take Jesus at his word here.

Matthew

Luke
And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice more over it than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray.

 Matthew 18:13 (NET)

 “Then when he has found it, he places it on his shoulders, rejoicing.  Returning home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, telling them, ‘Rejoice with me, because I have found my sheep that was lost.’

Luke 15:5, 6 (NET)

Again, I have no direct way to corroborate this, but must take Jesus at his word.

Matthew

Luke
In the same way, your Father in heaven is not willing that one of these little ones be lost.

 Matthew 18:14 (NET)

 “I tell you, in the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need to repent.”

Luke 15:7 (NET)

This is clearly beyond my experience.   I haven’t amounted to much, nothing that would cause anyone to say, “Ah, I understand why Jesus went out of his way to save him.”  But He did.  As far as I’m concerned, the only plausible explanation is to take Jesus at his word: your Father in heaven is not willing (θέλημα) that one of these little ones be lost.

[1] John 10:11 (NET)

[2] Hebrews 12:6 (KJV, DNT)

[3] Romans 1:21-24 (NET)

[4] Romans 1:25, 26a (NET)

[5] Romans 1:28 (NET)

[6] Romans 1:18a (NET)

Romans, Part 54

Posted on by

To continue my attempt to view—Do not lag in zeal, be enthusiastic in spirit, serve the Lord[1]—as a definition of love (ἀγάπη) rather than as rules, I’ll turn to the next item on the table I constructed: Love is…not self-serving[2] (οὐ ζητεῖ τὰ ἑαυτῆς; literally, “not seek itself”).

If someone owns a hundred sheep, Jesus said, and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for (ζητεῖ, a form of ζητέω) the one that went astray?[3] He made it clear He was not talking only about sheep and shepherds.  Looking at children, He added, In the same way, your Father in heaven is not (οὐκ, a form of οὐ; the absolute negation[4]) willing (θέλημα) that one of these little ones be lost[5] (ἀπόληται, a form of ἀπόλλυμι).  This is Jesus’ expression of David’s confidence, Surely your goodness and faithfulness will pursue me all my days…[6]

Still, I began to wonder in what sense the Father seeking his own was not self-serving or love seeking itself. I found a satisfying distinction in the story of Jesus feeding the five thousand men plus women and children.

Matthew

 Mark Luke

John
Now when Jesus heard [about John the Baptist’s death] he went away from there privately in a boat to an isolated place.

Matthew 14:13a (NET)

 Then the apostles gathered around Jesus and told him everything they had done and taught.  He said to them, “Come with me privately to an isolated place and rest a while” (for many were coming and going, and there was no time to eat).  So they went away by themselves in a boat to some remote place.

Mark 6:30-32 (NET)

 When the apostles returned, they told Jesus everything they had done.  Then he took them with him and they withdrew privately to a town called Bethsaida.[7]

Luke 9:10 (NET)

 After this Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee[8] (also called the Sea of Tiberias).

John 6:1 (NET)

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John took pains to place the story in space and time. In Matthew’s Gospel narrative Jesus went to an isolated place after He heard of John the Baptist’s death.[9] John’s disciples came and took the body and buried it and went and told Jesus.[10]  Mark pointed out that this coincided with the return of the twelve,[11] the apostles Jesus had sent out two by two.  The purpose of this trip was rest and relaxation for the twelve and perhaps a moment for Jesus to grieve over the beheading of his cousin.  Luke added the destination, Bethsaida, and John added the body of water traversed, the Sea of Galilee (also called the Sea of Tiberias).

John didn’t mention the apostles’ return (or that they were sent out for that matter). John didn’t make much of John the Baptist’s death.  He was still alive in chapter three[12] and spoken of in the past tense in chapter five.[13]  John set the story conceptually, if you will.

The fifth chapter of John’s Gospel account begins with a curious healing. A man lay by a pool in Jerusalem, believing apparently that if he were first to enter its waters after they were stirred up[14] (ταραχθῇ, a form of ταράσσω) he would be healed.  At least, that’s how his answer to Jesus question— Do you want to become well?[15]—sounds to me.[16]  Jesus healed him apparently by simple command (John 5:8, 9 NET):

Jesus said to him, “Stand up!  Pick up your mat and walk” [Table].  Immediately the man was healed, and he picked up his mat and started walking.  (Now that day was a Sabbath.)

Perhaps I should see this as a living expression of God’s grace as totally unmerited favor, but I can’t help but see Jesus as provocateur here, since the most important part of this story is the parenthetical—Now that day was a Sabbath.

When the religious leaders saw the man walking carrying his mat on the Sabbath, they said, “It is the Sabbath, and you are not permitted (οὐκ ἔξεστιν) to carry your mat.”[17]

“The man who made me well said to me, ‘Pick up your mat and walk.’”[18]

“Who is the man who said to you, ‘Pick up your mat and walk’?”[19]

The man didn’t know Jesus, nor could he point Him out, since He had slipped out[20] among the crowd gathered in Jerusalem for a Jewish feast.[21]  After this Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, “Look, you have become well. Don’t sin any more, lest anything worse happen to you.”  The man went away and informed the Jewish leaders that Jesus was the one who had made him well. Now because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began persecuting him [Table].[22]

John had a long lifetime to consider with the Holy Spirit what Jesus had said and done before he wrote his Gospel narrative. He related this story of the healing of a man by a command to break the Sabbath (as the religious authorities interpreted the Law) a man so ignorant of Jesus he could not even implicate Him when the religious authorities questioned him.  So Jesus met him again in the temple, all to orchestrate an opportunity for Jesus to say to the religious authorities, My Father is working until now, and I too am working.[23]

The religious authorities reacted exactly as one would expect religious authorities to react when confronted with a knowledge of God superior to their own, if the religious authorities in question were self-serving rather than God-serving: For this reason the Jewish leaders were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God.[24]

Jesus had a lot more to say to these religious authorities (John 5:19-23 NET):

I tell you the solemn truth, the Son can do nothing on his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing.  For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise.  For the Father loves the Son and shows him everything he does, and will show him greater deeds than these, so that you will be amazed.  For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes.  Furthermore, the Father does not judge (κρίνει, a form of κρίνω) anyone, but has assigned all judgment (κρίσιν, a form of κρίσις) to the Son, so that all people will honor the Son just as they honor the Father.  The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

I can do nothing more than listen to Yahweh come in human flesh speaking to religious authorities, THE religious authorities of the only religion ever authorized by the One living and true God (John 5:24-30 NET):

I tell you the solemn truth, the one who hears my message and believes the one who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned (εἰς κρίσιν οὐκ ἔρχεται; literally, “into judgment is not coming”), but has crossed over from death to life.  I tell you the solemn truth, a time is coming (ἔρχεται) – and is now here – when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.  For just as the Father has life in himself, thus he has granted the Son to have life in himself, and he has granted the Son authority to execute judgment (κρίσιν, a form of κρίσις), because he is the Son of Man.

Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming (ἔρχεται) when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and will come out – the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation (κρίσεως, a form of κρίσις, or, judgment).  I can do nothing on my own initiative.  Just as I hear, I judge (κρίνω), and my judgment (κρίσις) is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me.

Here is a powerful clue to the meaning of a love that is not self-seeking: I do not seek (ζητῶ, another form of ζητέω) my own will (θέλημα), but the will (θέλημα) of the one who sent me.  Jesus continued speaking to the religious authorities (John 5:31-40 NET):

If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true.  There is another who testifies about me [the Father, I assume], and I know the testimony he testifies about me is true.  You have sent to John [the Baptist], and he has testified to the truth [John 1:19-37].  (I do not accept human testimony, but I say this so that you may be saved.)  He was a lamp that was burning and shining, and you wanted to rejoice greatly for a short time in his light.

But I have a testimony greater than that from John.  For the deeds that the Father has assigned me to complete – the deeds I am now doing – testify about me that the Father has sent me.  And the Father who sent me has himself testified about me.  You people have never heard his voice[25] nor seen his form at any time, nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent.  You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me, but you are not willing to come to me so that you may have life.

I’ll take a moment to highlight what Jesus said about the authorities of the only God-ordained religion on the planet:

1) You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time, nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent.  Contrast this to his words to Philip, John 14:8-14.

2) You study the scriptures thoroughly…it is these same scriptures that testify about me, but you are not (οὐ, the absolute negation) willing (θέλετε, a form of θέλω) to come to me so that you may have life.  This is utterly self-serving. For ignoring the righteousness that comes from God, Paul wrote, and seeking instead to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit to God’s righteousness.[26]

Jesus concluded his discourse with the religious authorities (John 5:41-47 NET):

I do not accept praise from people, but I know you, that you do not have the love of God within you.  I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me.  If someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him.  How can you believe, if you accept praise from one another and don’t seek the praise that comes from the only God?

Do not suppose that I will accuse you before the Father.  The one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have placed your hope.  If you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me.  But if you do not believe what Moses wrote, how will you believe my words?

Here I’ll add a third item to the list:

3) If you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me.

In this light I’ll continue to look into the feeding of the five thousand men plus women and children in the next essay.

[1] Romans 12:11 (NET) Table

[2] 1 Corinthians 13:5 (NET)

[3] Matthew 18:12b (NET)

[4] I will leave it to others to debate whether the Father’s unwillingness was limited only to the children present at the time and place Jesus spoke.

[5] Matthew 18:14 (NET)

[6] Psalm 23:6a (NET)

[7] http://bibleatlas.org/bethsaida.htm

[8] http://www.bible-history.com/geography/ancient-israel/sea-of-galilee.html

[9] John 14:10, 11 (NET)

[10] Matthew 14:12 (NET)

[11] Mark 6:7-13 (NET)

[12] John 3:22-36 (NET)

[13] John 5:31-36 (NET)

[14] John 5:7 (NET)

[15] John 5:6 (NET)

[16] The explanation given in the KJV (John 5:4)—For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had—has been rejected as not original to the text by most contemporary Bible scholars.

[17] John 5:10 (NET) Table

[18] John 5:11 (NET) Table

[19] John 5:12 (NET) Table

[20] John 5:13 (NET)

[21] John 5:1 (NET)

[22] John 5:14-16 (NET)

[23] John 5:17 (NET) Table

[24] John 5:18 (NET)

[25] The Father’s voice, that is: Exodus 20:1, 19; Deuteronomy 4:12; 5:24.  I assume the voice they heard was Yahweh’s, the Son.

[26] Romans 10:3 (NET)

Romans, Part 53

Posted on by

So, how can I view—Do not lag in zeal, be enthusiastic in spirit, serve the Lord[1]—as a definition of love (ἀγάπη) rather than as rules?  Again, I’ve constructed the following table to help.

The Fruit of the Spirit

Galatians 5:22, 23 (NET)

love (ἀγάπη)
Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in the hope of God’s glory.  Not only this, but we also rejoice in sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance, character, and character, hope.  And hope does not disappoint, because the love (ἀγάπη) of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.[2] Love (ἀγάπη) does no wrong (κακὸν, a form of κακός) to a neighbor. Therefore love (ἀγάπη) is the fulfillment of the law.[3] Knowledge puffs up, but love (ἀγάπη) builds up.[4]
Love (ἀγάπη) is…

1 Corinthians 13:4-7 (NET)

 …not self-serving (οὐ ζητεῖ τὰ ἑαυτῆς; literally, “not seek itself”)…

1 Corinthians 13:5 (NET)
If someone owns a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for (ζητεῖ, a form of ζητέω) the one that went astray?[5]  But above all pursue (ζητεῖτε, another form of ζητέω) his kingdom and righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.[6]
This Love Without Hypocrisy…

Romans 12:9-21 (NET)

 Do not lag in zeal (σπουδῇ, a form of σπουδή), be enthusiastic (ζέοντες, a form of ζέω) in spirit…

Romans 12:11a (NET)

 …serve (δουλεύοντες, a form of δουλεύω) the Lord.

Romans 12:11b (NET)
But as you excel in everything – in faith, in speech, in knowledge, and in all eagerness (σπουδῇ) and in the love from us that is in you – make sure that you excel in this act of kindness too.[7] Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, arrived in Ephesus.  He was an eloquent speaker, well-versed in the scriptures.  He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and with great enthusiasm (ζέων, another form of ζέω) he spoke and taught accurately the facts about Jesus (KJV: the Lord), although he knew only the baptism of John.[8] Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart as to Christ, not like those who do their work only when someone is watching – as people-pleasers – but as slaves of Christ doing the will of God from the heart.  Obey with enthusiasm (εὐνοίας, a form of εὔνοια), as though serving (δουλεύοντες) the Lord and not people, because you know that each person, whether slave or free, if he does something good (ἀγαθόν, a form of ἀγαθός), this will be rewarded by the Lord.[9]

In the previous essay it seemed to make intuitive sense to place cling to what is good[10]under that aspect of the fruit of the Spirit translated goodness.  Here it may seem like begging the question[11] to simply place—Do not lag in zeal, be enthusiastic in spirit, serve the Lord—under love.  In one sense love (ἀγάπη) is the master key that can stand for all aspects of the fruit of the Spirit.  I think John used ἀγάπη that way often, but I want to follow Paul’s thinking here.

Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith (πίστεως, a form of πίστις), he wrote.  By our own faith?  I think not, for πίστις[12] is an aspect of the fruit of the Spirit.  Since we have been declared righteous by faith we have peace (εἰρήνην, a form of εἰρήνη) with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.[13]  Again, peace (εἰρήνη) is an aspect of the fruit of his Spirit.  Through our Lord Jesus Christ we have also obtained access by faith (πίστει, another form of πίστις) into this grace (χάριν, a form of χάρις) in which we stand.  And by grace, though Paul may mean more, I think he cannot mean less than the credited righteousness of God, this very fruit of God’s Holy Spirit.  And we rejoice in the hope of our glory!  But that’s not what Paul wrote.  And we rejoice (καυχώμεθα, a form of καυχάομαι) in the hope of God’s glory.[14]

Though the NET translators chose rejoice for καυχώμεθα here and in the next verse, boast is a more obvious meaning.  I say again, let no one think that I am a fool.  But if you do, then at least accept me as a fool, so that I too may boast (καυχήσωμαι, another form of καυχάομαι) a little.  What I am saying with this boastful (καυχήσεως, a form of καύχησις) confidence I do not say the way the Lord would.  Instead it is, as it were, foolishness.  Since many are boasting (καυχῶνται, another form of καυχάομαι) according to human standards, I too will boast (καυχήσομαι, another form of καυχάομαι).[15]  By the way, according to human standards is κατὰ σάρκα in Greek, according to the flesh (NKJV).

It gives me the sense that Paul meant we boast in the hope of God’s glory.  We boast in the hope that God will be glorified by the lives we live in the flesh (not according to the flesh), crucified with Christ (it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me),[16] living by the Spirit,[17] not by the works of the flesh.[18]  Translated that way we might be less likely to gloss over it and boast in the hope of our own glory.  Not only this, Paul continued, but we also rejoice (καυχώμεθα, a form of καυχάομαι; or, boast) in sufferings.[19]  So where does Paul get off writing this wacko stuff?

If I must boast (καυχᾶσθαι, another form of καυχάομαι), I will boast (καυχήσομαι, another form of καυχάομαι) about the things that show my weakness (ἀσθενείας, a form of ἀσθένεια).[20]  There was method to Paul’s madness.  For the Lord said to him, “My grace is enough for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness (ἀσθενείᾳ).” So then, Paul concluded, I will boast (καυχήσομαι) most gladly about my weaknesses (ἀσθενείαις), so that the power of Christ may reside in me.[21]  And in Romans we find a similar method to his madness: we also rejoice (or, boast) in sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance, character, and character, hope.[22]  And here I get a beautiful glimmer of an understanding why the NET translators chose rejoice over boast.

We don’t rejoice or boast in our own suffering because of a rational understanding: knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance, character, and character, hope.  We can only rejoice or boast in our own suffering because we are filled with the joy (χαρὰ) of God, another aspect of the fruit of his Spirit.  And rejoice hearkens back to that fact better than boast ever could.  I am confident they chose rejoice for this reason because of a note on the next verse.

And hope does not disappoint, Paul concluded, because the love (ἀγάπη) of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.[23]  The note in the NET reads: “The phrase ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ (…‘the love of God’) could be interpreted as either an objective genitive (‘our love for God’), subjective genitive (‘God’s love for us’), or both (M. Zerwick’s ‘general’ genitive [Biblical Greek,§§36-39]; D. B. Wallace’s ‘plenary’ genitive [ExSyn 119-21]). The immediate context, which discusses what God has done for believers, favors a subjective genitive, but the fact that this love is poured out within the hearts of believers implies that it may be the source for believers’ love for God; consequently an objective genitive cannot be ruled out. It is possible that both these ideas are meant in the text and that this is a plenary genitive: ‘The love that comes from God and that produces our love for God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us’ (ExSyn 121).”

Here is one place I can say with confidence the NET translators really got what Paul was saying.  This love (ἀγάπη), which has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us, does no wrong (κακὸν) to a neighbor.  Therefore love (ἀγάπη) is the fulfillment (πλήρωμα) of the law.[24]  Pouring this love out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us is what Jesus meant when He said: Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.  I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill (πληρῶσαι, a form of πληρόω, the verb from which the noun πλήρωμα is derived) them.[25]

I want to spend some time with κακὸν (a form of κακός) since this ἀγάπη does (or, works) no wrong (or, harm) to a neighbor.  The first time κακὸν occurs in the New Testament was from the mouth of the Roman governor.  Pilate said to them, “Then what should I do with Jesus who is called the Christ?”  They all said, “Crucify him!”  He asked, “Why? What wrong (κακὸν) has he done?” But they shouted more insistently, “Crucify him!”[26]  Though Pilate found no κακὸν in Him under Roman law the chief priests and elders of Israel had accused Him of many things: “Don’t you hear how many charges they are bringing against you?”[27] Pilate asked.  When Jesus was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he did not respond.[28]

Now, with 20-20 hindsight I can see Jesus consciously fulfilling Scripture: He was treated harshly and afflicted, but he did not even open his mouth.  Like a lamb led to the slaughtering block, like a sheep silent before her shearers, he did not even open his mouth.[29]  At the time in the moment, however, He appeared obstinate, belligerent and disdainful of authority.  Consider his teaching (Matthew 23:1-12 NET).

Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The experts in the law and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat.  Therefore pay attention to what they tell you and do it.  But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they teach.  They tie up heavy loads, hard to carry, and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing even to lift a finger to move them.  They do all their deeds to be seen by people, for they make their phylacteries wide and their tassels long.  They love the place of honor at banquets and the best seats in the synagogues and elaborate greetings in the marketplaces, and to have people call them ‘Rabbi.’  But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher and you are all brothers.  And call no one your ‘father’ on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.  Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one teacher, the Christ.  The greatest among you will be your servant.  And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

Even here there is a very rough edge that is disdainful of human authority.  More to the point, perhaps, Jesus did nothing that would inhibit his progress toward the cross.  My commandment (ἐντολὴ, a form of ἐντολή) is this, He also said, to love (ἀγαπᾶτε, a form of ἀγαπάω) one another just as I have loved (ἠγάπησα, another form of ἀγαπάω) you.  No one has greater love (ἀγάπην, a form of ἀγάπη) than this – that one lays down his life for his friends.  You are my friends if you do what I command (ἐντέλλομαι) you.[30]  Hanging on the cross, after thirty plus years of human experience, eating it, drinking it, pissing and shitting it, Jesus prayed what I consider the real prayer of salvation: Father, forgive them, for they don’t know what they are doing.[31]

My point here, I suppose, is that the love that does (or, works) no wrong (or, harm) to a neighbor may not always appear to all the people all the time to be doing or working no wrong or harm to a neighbor.  By his own admission Jesus’ death on a cross was not his will but his Father’s.[32]  Like most human beings Jesus wanted to live; whoever is among the living has hope; a live dog is better than a dead lion.[33]  Perhaps I’ve overstated the case.  Jesus was not suicidal as He hung on the cross.

I want to follow this just a bit farther (Luke 16:25 NET).

Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things (ἀγαθά, another form of ἀγαθός) and Lazarus likewise bad things (κακά, another form of κακός), but now he is comforted here and you are in anguish.’

When I considered this in the light of the gospel I gleaned from my religion,[34] Abraham’s words seemed like karmic nonsense.  But in the light of the knowledge of God I’m compelled to reconsider.  God is love (ἀγάπη).[35]  Love (ἀγάπη) does no wrong (κακὸν, a form of κακός) to a neighbor.[36]  (And this is οὐκ the absolute negation, modifying ἐργάζεται [a form of ἐργάζομαι] apparently not κακὸν.)  So while I might be intellectually stimulated to wonder what role God’s love played in Lazarus’ life, the Holy Spirit reminds me that Knowledge puffs up, but love (ἀγάπη) builds up.[37]  All in all it is simpler then to assume that God’s love was revealed after Lazarus’ death.  This is in accord with Jesus’ knowledge of God: he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live before him.[38]  And it is prudent to accept that I do not dictate when God reveals his love to anyone (or, in anyone for that matter).

I’ll continue looking into—Do not lag in zeal, be enthusiastic in spirit, serve the Lord—as a definition of love rather than as rules in the next essay.

[1] Romans 12:11 (NET) Table

[2] Romans 5:1-5 (NET)

[3] Romans 13:10 (NET)

[4] 1 Corinthians 8:1b (NET)

[5] Matthew 18:12b (NET)

[6] Matthew 6:33 (NET)

[7] 2 Corinthians 8:7 (NET)

[8] Acts 18:24, 25 (NET) Table

[9] Ephesians 6:5-8 (NET)

[10] Romans 12:9b (NET)

[11] Fallacy: Begging the Question

[12] Galatians 5:22 (NET) translated faithfulness

[13] Romans 5:1 (NET)

[14] Romans 5:2 (NET)

[15] 2 Corinthians 11:16-18 (NET)

[16] Galatians 2:20 (NET)

[17] Galatians 5:16 (NET)

[18] Galatians 5:19 (NET)

[19] Romans 5:3a (NET)

[20] 2 Corinthians 11:30 (NET)

[21] 2 Corinthians 12:9 (NET)

[22] Romans 5:3, 4 (NET)

[23] Romans 5:5 (NET)

[24] Romans 13:10 (NET)

[25] Matthew 5:17 (NET)

[26] Matthew 27:22, 23 (NET)

[27] Matthew 27:13 (NET)

[28] Matthew 27:12 (NET)

[29] Isaiah 53:7 (NET)

[30] John 15:12-14 (NET)

[31] Luke 23:34a (NET) Table

[32] Luke 22:42 (NET)

[33] Ecclesiastes 9:4 (NET)

[34] “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ before you die or burn in hell for all eternity.”

[35] 1 John 4:8, 16 (NET) Table

[36] Romans 13:10a (NET)

[37] 1 Corinthians 8:1b (NET)

[38] Luke 20:38 (NET)