The Discipleship Ministry of Scott Chafee
These are a few of the photos from my Alaska adventure in August 2015, on the ship, the Norwegian Jewel. We started in Seattle and traveled to Ketchikan, Juneau, Skagway, and Victoria (BC, Canada).
This was a glacier “drive by” when the captain did a 360 about a quarter mile from the glacier. Seriously, he rotated the ship in this narrow canyon!
This lesson is about how to welcome children into our adult discipleship ministry, and the importance of passing faith on to the next generation. Our passage today is Matthew 19:13-15, here we have the parallel passages in the synoptic gospels:
The purpose of this study is to develop an awareness of the spiritual receptivity of children and the tremendous opportunity to evangelize both the children and the parents by offering to pray a blessing over these little ones. Jesus commanded us to let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to me. Obedience to this command requires developing a tenderness toward children rather than seeing them as a problem or inconvenience to our adult discipleship program.
The chronology of the Harmony of the Gospels (in Matthew 19:13) appears to suggest that immediately after Jesus had finished teaching the Twelve about marriage, divorce, remarriage, and singleness (Matthew 19:13–12), another group of people came seeking his ministry. At that time some children were brought to him, doubtless by their parents. Both Mark and Luke use the imperfect tense, “they were bringing children,” indicating a continual process, likely over an extended period of time (Mark 10:13, Luke 18:15). When word spread that Jesus was in the area, parents were drawn to this teacher whose love of children have become known throughout Palestine, (Matthew 17:18, 18:2-3, John 4:50).
The commands in this section are: Matthew 19:14, let the children alone, do not hinder, Mark 10:14, permit, do not hinder, Luke 18:16, permit, stop hindering.
1. Where was Jesus when he gave this command? (Mark 10:1, 10, 17) Perea, a region east of the Jordan River and south of Galilee that factors prominently in the ministries of John the Baptist and Jesus. Perea was part of the kingdom of Herod the Great; after his death in 4 BC, it was given (along with Galilee) to Herod Antipas.
2. When were these children brought to Jesus? Matthews implies a close connection with the preceding event. Apparently, the children were brought to him personally while Jesus was in the house, (Mark 10:10) before beginning the journey mentioned in Mark 10:17.
3. Why do you think they were bringing children to Jesus? (Mark 10:13) This text says that, they were bringing children to him, and Luke 18:15 says, they were bringing even their babies to him. The impersonal “they” probably included some fathers, or older sisters, or the mothers. In Mark 10:13, the word “them” is masculine and indicates that those bringing the children were not exclusively mothers.
4. How old were the children that were brought to Jesus? (Matthew 19:13, 15, Mark 10:13, Luke 18:15) The Greek word used here for children is a term referring to young children from infancy through perhaps toddler age. The word was used in Mark 5:39 of a slave girl 12 years old, but it generally referred to young children. The ages of the children no doubt varied, including some babies in their mother’s arms, (Luke 18:15). The verb “bringing” does not necessitate the view that the children were carried.
5. Why were the children being brought to Jesus? (Matthew 19:13, 15, Mark 10:13, Luke 18:15) Mark 10:13 says, so that he might touch them. Matthew’s statement interprets the character of this desire touched, so that they might lay his hands on them and pray, (Matthew 19:13). Jesus had just championed the sanctity of marriage and the home, now those bringing their children wanted this great teacher to pronounce his benediction and blessing upon their children. Clearly, his demeanor had strengthened this desire. There is no warrant for assuming any superstitious idea that this wonderworking touch would convey magical benefits.
6. What is significant about the laying on of hands in prayer by Jesus? (Mark 10:16) The text clearly identifies that the kind of touch and prayer that these parents were seeking from Jesus was a blessing for their children. The text says, and they took them in his arms and again blessing them, laying his hands on them.
The Greek form behind the word “blessing” is intensive, occurring only here in the New Testament. It indicates a passionate fervency, expressing the earnestness of Christ’s emotion, better understood as, he “fervently blessed” these children. Jesus must have smiled with infinite kindness as he looked into the faces of those tiny children. We do not know the specific nature of the blessing, but we can assume that he promised the provision of God on their behalf and the care of God over each one of them.
The Talmud taught Jewish parents to bring their children to respected Rabbis for blessings in prayer. A father would customarily bring his infant child to the synagogue and pray for the child himself. He would then hand the child to the elders, who would each hold the baby and pray for God’s blessing on the young life. Many churches today follow a somewhat similar pattern in prayerfully dedicating small children to the Lord.
This is very similar to the practice that came out of the patriarchal period, (Genesis 48:13–16). Following in this tradition, those Jewish parents in Perea brought their children to Jesus to be blessed. He was not only a popular (if not controversial) Rabbi known for his miracle working power, but was also known for his compassion and his willingness to meet the needs of even the lowliest and most helpless people of society. If he were indeed the Messiah, as he claimed to be, those parents saw a marvelous opportunity to have their children blessed by the Lord own anointed one, the deliverer of Israel.
Because Jesus did not rebuke the parents or resist blessing their children, it is obvious that their motives were pure. They did not understand Jesus’ true greatness, and probably few, if any, of them had put their trust in him as Savior and Lord, but they recognized him as a genuine teacher from God who loved them and who cared for their precious children. They therefore sought his intercession with God on their children’s behalf, in the hope that they might grow up as the Talmud admonished: strong in the law, faithful and marriage, and known by good works.
7. What are some practical suggestions when people praying a blessing upon a Child? In the book, the family blessing by Roth Garborg, he makes the following suggestions,
1) Explain that you are planning to do and why is important for the child
2) Hold a child in your arms when you bless him
3) Place your hand or hands on the head of the child
4) Always include in your blessing an invocation of the name of God.
Mark 10:16 illustrates this when Jesus took them in his arms and begin laying his hands on them. Mark 10:13 and Luke 18:15 also stress the value of touch, and Matthew 19:13 stresses the prayer component of the blessing.
8. How did the disciples respond to these children coming to Jesus? (Matthew 19:13, Mark 10:13, Luke 18:15) The disciples who were outside the house were intent on protecting Jesus from what they considered an unnecessary and perhaps undignified intrusion upon his time and energy. Clearly the disciples did not make access to Jesus and easy matter. They acted in a bossy sense of their own importance as his protectors.
The verb “rebuked” indicates that they provoked or censored the action with the intention of bringing it to an end. The Greek verb behind “rebuke” carries the idea of threatening, and being in the perfect tense suggest that the rebuke was a continuous as the bringing. As more and more parents brought their children to Jesus, the disciples continue to try to rebuke them. Obviously the Twelve, who had spent almost 18 months living with Jesus and his “come and be with me” phase of discipleship and heard every word he spoke and observe everything he did, still didn’t fully share his mind and heartbeat. The disciples felt that Jesus had more important matters to deal with than to spend his time on the little children.
Earlier Jesus had taken a young child in his arms in the disciples’ presence. Specifically for the sake of the disciples, who are in the midst of a dispute about who was the greatest in the kingdom, he declared, whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, (Matthew 18:1–4). No doubt a countless other times the disciples had witnessed similar expressions of Jesus’ tenderness and gentleness and his great patience with those who came to him for help. Had they remembered his teaching concerning children in Capernaum, (Mark 9:36–37, Matthew 18:2–14) they could hardly have objected now.
9. How would you have felt if it was your child who was turned away?
10. How did Jesus emotionally respond when he saw children being rebuked? (Mark 10:14) The text says, when Jesus saw this, he was indignant. When Jesus noticed from inside the house what was going on outside the house, he was filled with righteous anger, (Hebrews 4:15, 1 Peter 1:19). His short response was prompted by what he saw.
The verb, “was indignant” is used of Jesus only here. It is a term of strong emotion, but denotes his pained, angry reaction to what was going on. He was deeply displeased that the very men whom he had so explicitly taught, so grievously misunderstood the basic principle of what was involved.
11. What to commands did Jesus give his disciples? (Matthew 19:15, Mark 10:14, Luke 18:16) Jesus said, let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to me. This double command at the end put an end to the interference of the disciples. The aorist imperative, “let the children alone” denotes urgency. Mark uses a different first command to correct his disciples’ behavior, permit the children to come to me, (Mark 10:14). The imperative “permit or allow” was a command demanding that they permit the children at once, to have continued access to him. The command sees the children themselves being hindered, rather than their parents being hindered, perhaps they had eagerly run toward Jesus on their own. The present tense of the second imperative is more literally translated “stop hindering them.” The disciples had put out restraining hands, but they were told to cease their interference.
12. Was Jesus saying by the phrase, “for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these” that all children are saved? (Matthew 19:15, Mark 10:14, Luke 18:16) Jesus was not naïvely sentimental about children. Having created them, he knew they were born with a sinful nature. Children have a certain innocence, but they are not sinless. He knew that they did not have to be taught to do wrong, that their little hearts were naturally bent toward evil, but he loved them with a special compassion. Because of their natural openness and trustfulness, he held them up as examples of the attitude required for kingdom citizenship, (Matthew 18:3–5). The phrase “to such as” denotes those who have certain definite qualities or characteristics. Jesus was not thinking of children exclusively but of them as representative of the spirit of receptivity, dependence, and trustfulness. It is simple that counts and not tender years.
13. What is the reason Jesus gives for permitting the children to have access to him? (Matthew 19:14, Mark 10:14, Luke 18:16) The reason Jesus wants children to have access to him is found in the words, “for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
14. How can we hinder her children from coming to Jesus today?
1) Abortion
2) Not providing transportation to Sunday school or church
3) Handling children in small groups as an inconvenience
4) Living hypocritical lives – Timothy grew up in a home with a mother and grandmother who had and authentic faith, (2 Timothy 1:5) and shared the Scriptures with him throughout his childhood, (2 Timothy 3:15).
15. How do Mark 10:15 and Luke 18:17 expanded his reason for allowing the children access to him? Jesus added, truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all. The point of comparison is not the innocence of children, (for they have a sinful nature and are not innocent) but their attitude of receptiveness and willingness to depend upon others for what they need. The verb “receive” stresses that excepting eternal life as a gift from God is a definite act, it is not a human achievement. Entrance into the kingdom can never be obtained on the basis of human merit. Just as a child receives a gift from a loved one in gentleness and trustfulness, so the kingdom of God must be received as God’s gift in simple, trusting faith. Here is the essence of the doctrine of justification by faith, (Romans 5:17).
The phrase, “will not enter it at all” is a strong double negative in the Greek that categorically excludes any other way of entry. Use of the word, “enter” pictures the kingdom of God as a society under his sovereign rule, where an individual becomes a member by subjected himself to the divine authority. Refusing to receive the kingdom as a gift excludes one from sharing in its blessings and responsibilities.
This is why children need access to Jesus. Even though they naturally possess the traits needed to become a child of God, they still need to personally receive them. Jesus wanted every boy and girl to experience the promised blessings of Abraham, (Galatians 3:8–9). Jesus wanted his Father’s face to shine on these little ones. Jesus knew that children are far more receptive than adults. The older people get, the more set they become in their ways. Their conscience often becomes seared, (1 Timothy 4:2) and they suppress the truth in unrighteousness, (Romans 1:18).
16. How did Jesus respond to the disciples’ actions and attitudes toward children? (Mark 10:14). From Mark we learn that Jesus was greatly indignant with his disciples. They frequently frustrated and disappointed Jesus by their insensitivity and selfishness, but this is one of only two or three occasions on which he actually became angry with them.
It is likely there were a number of reasons why he was angry with them. He was angry because he loves little children with great affection. He also no doubt felt special compassion for them because of the sinful, painful, corrupt world into which they have been born and whose evils they would progressively have to face as they grew up. He was angry because he loved parents and understood the special longings and anxieties they have for their children. He realized that loving little children was a way to their parents’ hearts. He was angry because no one, not even the tiniest infant, is outside the care and love of God. He was angry because of the disciples’ persistent spiritual dullness and hardness. He doubtlessly was angry because the disciples presumed to determine who could and could not approach him, the Christ and the son of God. It was neither within their prerogative nor their competency to make such choices. It was presumption for them to hinder the parents and their children from coming to Jesus. Specifically, he was angry because the kingdom of heaven belongs to, encompasses and is characterized by children such as these.
17. Can young children be genuinely saved? When children can knowingly sin they can knowingly be saved. People often talk in terms of the age of accountability. This age may differ from child to child but when a child has the capacity to grasp the basic concepts of sin and forgiveness, God can illuminate his understanding of what it means to trust in Jesus as their Lord and Savior, and he or she can experience personal saving faith that is required to enter the kingdom of God.
The implication of “such as these” is that for those who, because of young age or mental deficiency, are incapable of exercising saving faith, God grants them, in the event of death, entrance into the kingdom by the sovereign operation of his grace. These children die before they reach the age of decision, they go into the presence of Jesus Christ, because they are under the special protection of the sovereign King.
It was that comforting truth that David expressed when he lost his infant son born to Bathsheba. “I shall go to him,” David said, “but he will not return to me” (2 Samuel 12:23). While the statement may indicate little more than a resignation to their both entering the realm of the dead, a personal pronoun such as “I” and “him,” as well as David’s confident belief in the life to come, lend support to the idea that he was confident of personal consciousness and identity in the life to come. David knew that he belonged to God and would one day into his presence, and he had equal confidence that when he entered into the Lord’s presence that he would meet the little son who had preceded him.
It is not that small children are regenerate and then lose their salvation if they do not later receive Christ as Lord and Savior. It is rather that his atoning death is applied on their behalf if they die before they are able to choose on their own. It may be that the infant mortality rate is so high in many countries where the gospel has not yet been penetrated because the Lord is taking those little ones to himself before they can grow up in a culture where it is so difficult to encounter the gospel and believe.
What an awesome responsibility faces Christian parents to make sure that their children are taught about Christ and are led to receive him as Savior when they were able to exercise saving faith.
18. Who will make up the population of the kingdom of heaven? (Luke 18:17). Luke’s parallel passage reports that Jesus then declared, as he had a short while earlier, “truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it at all” (Matthew 18:3). In other words the kingdom is populated by only two kinds of subjects, those who die while little children and those who come in the trusting and humble attitude of a little child. Only those that come to him in the simplicity, openness, dependency, lack of pretension, and the lack of hypocrisy of little children will enter the kingdom of heaven. This is the requirement for kingdom citizenship.
19. How can we understand this teaching in light of Paul telling us to put away childish things? (1 Corinthians 13:11) The impatience of the disciples (Mark 10:13) is perhaps more understandable given the apparently ceaseless demands made upon Jesus and the Twelve by people, and given the general attitude of the time that children, while important and loved by parents, were nevertheless very definitely “to be seen and not heard.” Paul’s contrast between a mere child, who “as long as [he] is a child, he is no different from a slave,” and an adult in Galatians 4:1–3. On the other hand, Jesus’ welcoming of the children (Mark 10:16) is another example of his positive attitude toward those who did not have important social status, such as tax gatherers (Mark 2:13–17) or women (Mark 10:1–12).
In 1 Corinthians 13:11-12, in the context of chapters 12-14, Paul offers a dramatic metaphor in regard to the putting aside of childish ways. Immaturity gives way to maturity, so that a childish concern with flamboyant gifts should run its course and end with the advent of a mature concern for love. The pattern of Paul’s logic is the contrast of lesser with greater, so that through these images he admonishes the Corinthians to have less concern for spectacular spiritual gifts and a greater concern for the reality of love, God’s own love.
So, the point is that all living things grow, children into adults, and immaturity into maturity. Therefore we must come to Christ with the faith of a child, but we do not continue to hold on to childish things.
20. What does the Bible say about the evangelization of children? 1
Jesus’ desire is that “repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations” (Luke 24:47). The mission field is “all nations.” There are no geographical restrictions to the gospel, no cultural restrictions, and no age restrictions. Everyone needs to repent and be forgiven, including the children of “all nations.” Children, therefore, should be evangelized.
The Bible says that children are a blessing from God (Psalm 127:3). They are in need of instruction (Proverbs 8:32–33) and are quite able to learn. Timothy was a student of the Word at a very young age. He knew the Holy Scriptures “from infancy” (2 Timothy 3:15), having been taught by his godly mother and grandmother (2 Timothy 1:5).
Children are fully able to praise God. In celebrating the Lord’s majestic name, the psalmist sings, “Through the praise of children and infants you have established a stronghold against your enemies” (Psalm 8:2). Praise is not something children must wait until they’re older to do—it is their joyful task now. When Jesus arrived in the temple, the chief priests were aloof and reproachful, but not the kids. The children were “shouting in the temple courts, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David’” (Matthew 21:15).
In our passage today, Jesus used the occasion of blessing the children to point out the need for faith. The kingdom must be received “like a little child” (Mark 10:15). Children do not strive to earn the kingdom of God but trust Him to give it to them. Theirs is a simple faith. Jesus declared that whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child, with simple trust and dependence on God, cannot enter. Only those with a childlike trust in God can be saved.
Elsewhere, Jesus directs our attention to a child to illustrate true humility and the relationship God wants with all of us. The disciples had asked the Lord about who would be the “greatest” in heaven. In response, “He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. And he said: ‘Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me’” (Matthew 18:2–5).
In the next verse, Jesus strongly advocates for the protection of children: “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matthew 18:6). Jesus specifies that these children are among “those who believe in me.” This plainly indicates that children can believe in Jesus! If they can believe in Jesus, then we must evangelize them.
We must also never cause a believing child to stumble. “Cause to stumble” means “to entrap, trip up or entice to sin.” How does one cause believing children to stumble? Probably when we reject or ignore them—this would be the opposite of welcoming them (Matthew 18:5)—or when we lead them into sin.
Ephesians is a letter addressed to “God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 1:1). Paul describes them as having redemption through the blood of Christ and forgiveness of sins (Ephesians 1:7). Therefore, the original recipients of this epistle were believers in Christ. Toward the end of the letter, Paul addresses different groups of believers and instructs them on how they can walk in a way worthy of their calling. Children are commanded to obey (in the Lord) their parents (Ephesians 6:1). The fact that Paul addresses children implies that they were saints—part of “God’s holy people in Ephesus.” Children today can and should also trust in Christ, just as the children in Ephesus did.
In the letter to Titus, the qualifications for elders are laid out (Titus 1:6–9): being above reproach, being the husband of one wife, etc. In the list of qualifications is having “children who believe.” If they believe, they must have been evangelized.
In the Old Testament, there was an emphasis on transmitting God’s Law to the next generation so that they, too, would fear the LORD and obey His Word. Moses reminded the people of Israel to obey God’s laws in Deuteronomy 6:1–9. The command was not only for the present generation but also for their children and grandchildren (Deuteronomy 6:1–2). The first priority of parents was their own obedience; God’s Word was to be in their hearts (Deuteronomy 6:5–6), and then they were to teach it to their children (Deuteronomy 6:7). These same principles are applicable to Christian parents today.
If we fail to share the gospel with the next generation, we risk repeating Israel’s mistake in Judges 2:10–11, “After that whole generation had been gathered to their ancestors, another generation grew up who knew neither the Lord nor what he had done for Israel. Then the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord and served the Baals.” What is needed in every nation, every day, is the transforming power of the gospel of Christ. Sharing the gospel with children is commanded and blessed by God.
Sources:
[print_link] [email_link] [Based on my classes with Richard D. Leineweber, Jr. c. 2000]
1 www.gotquestions.org
Today’s passage is all about the topic of divorce and the positive and effective use of one’s singleness, taken from Matthew 19:1-12. Our command passage is in Matthew 19:12 (“let him except it” – present imperative).
Opener Questions:
1. What was (or would be) Mom’s advice to you about marriage? What was Dad’s?
2. Who has the best marriage you have ever seen? Why is it so special?
Purpose of This Study: To teach that God intended marriage to last a lifetime and those with the gift of singleness ought to embrace that wholeheartedly in order to advance the kingdom of God.
Historical Background: As Jesus continues to make his way toward Jerusalem, the crowds get larger. The Pharisees, always lurking in the background, come to the front with a question. They aren’t looking for an answer but an opportunity. They want to trip Jesus up with a difficult question of divorce. It was as much of a hot button back then as it is today. Everyone stops and listens; all eyes are on Jesus. His words are typically stunning. He applies to men, for the first time, the same absolute restrictions on divorce that had always applied to women. This offers women unparalleled protection from the ravages of men who, like these Pharisees, want to have their cake and eat it too.
Since His second year of ministry, every time Jesus attracts a crowd He also attracts Pharisees. They are not disciples; they are informants’ obvious enemies. This is even more true since the Sanhedrin openly plotted to kill Jesus (John 11:53) and put out a “warrant” for his arrest not more than a month earlier (John 11:57). That’s what sent Jesus to this area in the first place (John 11:54; Luke 17:11). Their question is designed to trap Jesus (Matthew 16:1; Mark 10:2; Luke 11:53). Divorce was a raging debate.
Discussion Questions:
1. Geographically, where was Jesus when the Pharisees tested Him? (Matthew 19:1-2) “When Jesus had finished these words, He departed from Galilee and came into the region of Judea beyond the Jordan.”
2. What were the Pharisees hoping to accomplish by testing Jesus? The Pharisees wanted to ultimately destroy Jesus. The clever Pharisees were well aware that Perea, where Jesus now ministered, was under the rule of Herod Antipas. He was the tetrarch who had John the Baptist imprisoned and eventually beheaded for condemning his unlawful marriage to Herodias, whom he had seduced away from his brother Philip (see Matthew 14:3-12). No doubt the Pharisees hoped that, by denouncing divorce for any cause at all, Jesus would thereby publicly condemn Herod’s adulterous relationship just as John had done and suffer John’s fate.
Two Rabbinical Schools of Thought on Divorce:
The School of Shammai: This school taught that the sole ground of divorce was mentioned in Deuteronomy 24:1- “some indecency in her” [Hebrew literally is “nakedness”]. The School of Shammai applied this expression only to moral transgressions, and exclusively to adultery. It was declared that if a woman were as mischievous as the wife of Ahab (Jezebel, 1 Kings 16:31; 18:4-19; 19:1,2; 21:5-25; 2 Kings 9) or (according to tradition) as the wife of Korah, it were well that her husband should not divorce her, except it be on the grounds of adultery.
The School of Hillel: This school took the words “some indecency in her” (Deuteronomy 24:1) in the widest possible sense, and taught that a man could divorce his wife for the most trivial of reasons, for such things as taking her hair down in public, or talking to other men, and even for burning the bread, or putting too much salt in the food. For her to speak ill of her mother-in-law or to be infertile were more than sufficient grounds for divorce. Rabbi Akiba (early second century) thought, that the words, if “she finds no favor in his eyes” implied that it was sufficient if a man had found another woman more attractive than his wife. The words “some indecency” are translated in the Talmud as “obnoxious.” Josephus would fall into this school of thought, he was deserted by one wife, divorced his second wife being displeased with her behavior… afterwards he married a woman of Jewish extraction who had settled in Crete.
3. What rabbinical school of thought on divorce did the Pharisees’ question represent? (Matthew 19:3) “Some Pharisees came to Jesus….” These Pharisees are probably from the stricter rabbinical school of Shammai. They are basically asking Jesus, “do you think the laxer rabbinical school of Hillel has the correct interpretation of Deuteronomy 24?” Their exact words, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” They hope He sides with them and says something that would get him in trouble with Herod Antipas or say something contradictory to the Law of Moses so the people would reject Him.
4. In what way was Jesus sarcastic in answering the Pharisee’s attack? (Matthew 19:4a) Jesus asked the Pharisees, “Have you not read…?” and then quoted Genesis 1:27, 2:24. This was an insult since the Pharisees claimed to be scholars and experts of the Law of Moses (The Pentateuch). Jesus says, “Are you not aware of what God Himself declared from the beginning of creation, (Mark 10:6)? Don’t you know the very first thing God said about marriage?
5. Which Rabbinical school of thought did Jesus side with? (Matthew 19:4-6) When the Pharisees tried to get Jesus to side with one of the rabbinical schools of thought on divorce, Jesus rejected both schools (Matthew 19:3-10). Both Rabbinical schools were based on Deuteronomy 24:1-4. Jesus didn’t side with either interpretation but instead went back to Genesis and re-emphasized God’s original creation order in which there was no divorce. He even added a warning to it. “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
6. What verses does Jesus use in reaffirming God’s law against divorce? (Matthew 19:4-6) Jesus quotes Genesis 1:27, 2:24 “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24).
7. What was God’s intention in creating only one man and one woman? (Matthew 19:4) The distinction of the sexes, established at creation, underlies the institution of marriage and is the foundational for the human family and well-being of society. “Male” and “female” are without an article and singular, “a male and a female” indicating that the reference is to a single pair, Adam and Eve. God did not make provision for either polygamy or divorce by making more men than women or more women than men, nor did He make provision for a homosexual or lesbian couple.
8. What four reasons does Jesus give to show why it is not lawful to divorce? (Matthew 19:4-6)
First, Jesus said, God “MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE.” In the Hebrew text of Genesis 1:27, both “male” and “female” are in the emphatic position, giving the sense of “the one male and the one female.” In other words, God did not create a group of males and females who could pick and choose mates as it suited them. There were no spares or options. (There was no provision, or even possibility, for multiple or alternate spouses. There were only one man and one woman in the beginning, and for that very obvious reason, divorce and remarriage was not an option).
Second, Jesus said, “FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE.” Since Adam and Eve had no parents to leave, the leaving of father and mother was a principle to be projected into and applied to all future generations. The Hebrew word translated “joined” or “cleave” refers to a strong bonding together of objects and often was used to represent gluing or cementing.
The third reason Jesus gives for divorce not being in God’s plan is that, in marriage, “THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH.” As Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 7:4, spouses belong to each other in the physical relationship of marriage: “The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.” Consequently, Jesus said, when a man and woman are joined in marriage they are no longer two, but one flesh. They are therefore indivisible and inseparable, except through death. One is the smallest indivisible unit. God’s marriage equation is not 1 + 1 = 2 but 1 + 1 = 1. In God’s eyes a couple becomes the total possession of each other, one in mind and spirit, in goals and direction, in emotion and will. When they have a child it becomes the perfect emblem and demonstration of their oneness, because that child is a unique product of the fusion of two people into one flesh and carries the combined traits of both parents.
The fourth reason Jesus gives for divorce not being in God’s perfect design is that, in the creative sense, every marriage is made in heaven. From the very first marriage of Adam and Eve, God has joined together every husband and wife. Marriage is first of all God’s institution and God’s doing, regardless of how men may corrupt it and deny or disregard His part in it. Whether it is between faithful believers or between pagans or atheists, or whether it was arranged by the parents or by the mutual desire and consent of the bride and groom, marriage as a general social relationship is above all the plan and work of God for the procreation, pleasure, and preservation of the human race. Whether it is entered into wisely or foolishly, sincerely or insincerely, selfishly or unselfishly, with great or little commitment, God’s design for every marriage is that it be permanent until the death of one of the spouses.
9. Did Moses give a command to divorce in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 as the Pharisees insisted? If not, what did he legislate? (Matthew 19:7) Jesus rejected the teaching on Deuteronomy 24:1-4 that had been passed down to the Jews of His day. In His Sermon on the Mount Jesus said, “It was said, ‘WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE’; 32 but I say to you…” (Matthew 5:31,32a). The very word structure emphasizes that His teaching is in sharp contrast to what they had heard. The words “LET HIM GIVE” is a single Greek verb that is an aorist imperative. The Pharisees had turned this into a command, but the legislation of Deuteronomy 24 doesn’t start until verse 4.
The Deuteronomy 24 passage, upon which “marital unfaithfulness” is based, is designed to regulate an existing condition not to condone divorce. Verses 1 through 3 contain a series of conditional clauses “if” in the original Hebrew that establish a case situation. If this case situation existed then the legislation (command or prohibition) of verse 4 applies.
“When [if] a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that [if] she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and [if] he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, 2 and [if] she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife, 3 and if the latter husband turns against her and [if he] writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, 4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.”
The Pharisees that came to Jesus said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND HER AWAY?” 8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives…” God never commanded that people get a divorce, He hates divorce (Malachi 2:16).
Furthermore, the Deuteronomy 24 passage cannot be construed to include “some uncleanness” after the marriage has been in existence for any length of time. Provisions had just been given two chapters previously for a man to contest the marriage at the beginning if he believed his wife was not a virgin (Deuteronomy 22:13-21).
10. Why did Moses allow for divorce? (Matthew 19:8) Jesus said, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives.” The word “hardness” describes a heart dried up, hard and tough.
11. What is the difference between immorality and adultery? (Matthew 19:9; 15:19) Immorality is violating God’s moral law before marriage and adultery is violating God’s moral law while married. Matthew 15:19 says, “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries [Gr. moichos], fornications [Gr. porneia], thefts, false witness, slanders.” This verse demonstrates that Matthew didn’t use these two words interchangeably as mere synonyms but saw them as distinctly two precisely different sins.
12. Does immorality or adultery cause divorce? (Matthew 19:9) The text says that immorality [Gr. porneia] causes divorce, not adultery [Gr. moichos]. To teach that divorce is permissible on the grounds of “marital unfaithfulness” [Gr. moichos] is to build a doctrine on one word using the wrong translation for the word! The word fornication [Gr. porneia] cannot be restricted to “marital unfaithfulness.” The word adultery [Gr. moichos] would have been used if Jesus meant only “marital unfaithfulness.”
13. What does remarriage cause a person to become? (Matthew 19:9; Mark 10:11-12; Romans 7:2-3) The Bible teaches that when a divorced person remarries they become an adulterer or adulterous. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife…, and marries another woman commits adultery'” (Matthew 19:9). “And He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; 12 and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery'” (Mark 10:11-12). “For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man” (Romans 7:2-3).
14. What does the “exception clause” mean? (Matthew 5:32; 19:9) Jesus said the only cause for divorce is porneia, which means:
1) Incestuous marriage – the man in the Corinthian church who married his father’s wife was condemned by Paul for his incestuous marriage). His sin is named as “immorality” [Gr. porneia] in 1 Corinthians 5:1. Incestuous marriages are condemned in Leviticus 18.
2) Sodomite marriage – a “marriage” between two men or two women was also condemned in Leviticus 18:22. The word “fornication” [Gr. ekpomeuo] is used for sodomy in Jude 1:7.
3) Betrothal unfaithfulness – if a man found that his wife was not a virgin at the time he married her, he was given the option in Deuteronomy 22:13-21 to divorce her. Matthew alone has the “exception clause” (Matthew 5:32; 19:9) because only a Jewish audience understand the betrothal period. This situation was illustrated in Matthew 1:19.
CULTURAL ASPECTS OF JOSEPH AND MARY’S ENGAGEMENT AND MARRIAGE
A MAIDEN, A VIRGIN: Joseph’s father, Eli, probably made the decision and choice of Mary to be his son’s wife. A father could make this decision alone (Genesis 38:6) but a mother could play a role (Genesis 21:21; 27:46) though it was not essential, the bride’s consent was at times asked for (Genesis 24:5,58). Romance was involved in some of the matches (Genesis 29:20; Judges 14:1-3; 1 Samuel 18:20, cp. Song of Solomon). The text is silent concerning how Joseph and Mary were matched. It only reveals that Mary was a virgin (Matthew 1:23,25, Isaiah 7:14).
DOWRY NEGOTIATED: Joseph the son of Eli traveled to the home of his prospective bride. Mary’s father then negotiated with Joseph. A price was negotiated which had to be paid to purchase his bride. Once again the text is silent concerning these details. Note: In Genesis 34:12, Shechem is willing to pay any bridal payment (dowry) for Dinah. In Exodus 22:16-17 one who has seduced an unbetrothed virgin has to pay a dowry. In 1 Samuel 18:25 Saul demands a dowry of a “hundred foreskins of the Philistines” for his daughter. Instead of silver or goods, an act of valor or of service was at-times performed to win a bride (Genesis 29; Joshua 15:16-17; 1 Samuel 17:25).
COVENANT ESTABLISHED: When Joseph paid the purchase price, the marriage covenant was thereby established. At that point Joseph and Mary were regarded to be husband and wife, even though no physical union had taken place. The paying of the dowry created a legally binding relationship. Even before his marriage to Mary, Joseph was called her husband (Matthew 1:19). Note: Before marriage Jacob called Rachel “my wife” Genesis 29:21, cp. Deuteronomy 22:23-24: “his neighbor’s wife” cp. 2 Samuel 3:14 “give me my wife Michal, to whom I was betrothed.”
BETROTHAL BENEDICTION: The moment the covenant was established, Mary was declared to be set apart exclusively for Joseph. Then Joseph and Mary drank from a cup over which the betrothal benediction had been pronounced. This symbolized that the covenant relationship had been established.
BETROTHAL PERIOD: After the marriage covenant was in effect, Joseph left Mary’s house and returned to his father’s house. He remained there for a period of twelve months, separated from his bride. During this period of separation, Mary gathered her wardrobe and prepared for married life. Joseph was busy preparing living accommodations in his father’s house for his bride. Matthew 1:18 states that “Mary had been betrothed to Joseph.” The verb “betrothed” in the active voice would signify to woo a woman and ask for her hand in marriage. But the verb here and also in Luke 1:27, 2:5 is in the passive voice, describing this period of being set apart and promised in marriage, (“espoused” KJV).
15. Does Scripture illustrate a just divorce consistent with the “exception clause”? (Matthew 1:18-20; John 8:41,48) Matthew 1:18-20 says, “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. 19 And Joseph her husband , being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away [Gr. apolusai =divorce] secretly. 20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.”‘ Joseph was considering divorcing Mary when he became aware of her pregnancy. Despite the apparent betrothal unfaithfulness he did not want to disgrace her publicly but was intending to divorce her privately. A writing of divorce was required to break this covenant arrangement. The angelic messenger from the Lord changed Joseph’s mind and he “took Mary as his wife” (Matthew 1:24).
The Pharisees some 33 years later falsely accused Jesus of being illegitimate and the product of Mary’s unfaithfulness to Joseph during their betrothal period. Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles in John 8:39-41 was questioning the Pharisees as to whether they were truly descendants of Abraham. The text says, “They answered and said to Him, ‘Abraham is our father’ Jesus said to them, ‘If you are Abraham’s children, do the deeds of Abraham.’ 40 ‘But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do.’ 41 ‘You are doing the deeds of your father’ They said to Him, ‘We were not born of fornication [Gr. porneia]; we have one Father: God.'” In John 8:41 they Pharisees sarcastically lash out and imply that He was the product of betrothal unfaithfulness and in John 8:48 they accuse Him of being a “Samaritan.'” They called the Holy Son of God an illegitimate bastard who had a demon and was the product Mary’s promiscuous behavior with some Gentile. If this had been true, Joseph had every right to divorce Mary.
16. How did the disciples react to Jesus’ teaching on divorce? (Matthew 19:10) The response of the disciples indicates that Jesus’ interpretation of Old Testament Scripture on divorce was much stricter than what they had imagined. The disciples were aware of the rabbinical schools. Their astonishment at Christ’s teaching would hardly be in order if He simply said, “You can only divorce for marital unfaithfulness.”
17. Why does Jesus use this occasion to address the topic of singleness? (Matthew 19:10-11; Genesis 2:18; 1 Corinthians 7:7-9; 9:5) Based on the disciples’ response in Matthew 19:10, it appears that the disciples were considering a life of singleness if divorce wasn’t an option. Jesus used this occasion to address singleness because the general rule is that “it is not good for man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). Although the disciples concluded, “it is better not to marry,” Jesus said, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.” The Apostle Paul talked about being given “the gift of singleness” or “celibacy” in 1 Corinthians 7:7-9 “For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. 8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; 9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” Although the disciples boasted of remaining single they all married except Barnabas and Paul (1 Corinthians 9:5-6 cp. Mark 1:30).
18. What three categories of singleness does Jesus mention in Matthew 19:12? “For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mothers womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven…'”
19. What does Jesus command a person to do with the gift of singleness? (Matthew 19:12) Jesus said “He who is able to accept this, let him accept it (present imperative).” Totally embrace it and continually use it to advance the kingdom. The word “accept” has the basic idea of making room or space for something. Metaphorically it means to completely embrace an idea or principle with the heart and mind so that it becomes part of one’s very nature. Singleness cannot be wholeheartedly accepted simply by human willpower or sincerity. Nor can it be successfully lived out simply by applying the right biblical principles. Celibate singleness is a kind of spiritual gift (1 Corinthians 7:7) and only those to whom it has been given can hope to spiritually survive in it, much less find happiness and be effective in the Lord’s service.
20. What is this gift to be exclusively used for? (Matthew 19:12; 1 Corinthians 7:32-35) 1 Corinthians 7:32-35 says, “But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33 but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband. 35 This I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is appropriate and to secure undistracted devotion to the Lord.”
21. What areas of compatibility are non-negotiable when evaluating a potential marriage partner? (1 Corinthians 7:39; 9:5; 2 Corinthians 6:14; Amos 3:3) Spiritual compatibility is a non-negotiable for a Christian single looking for a mate. When Christians marry unbelievers they forfeit a common treasure found in a relationship with Christ, they also miss out on a common blueprint (the Bible), common strength, and common values. The following verses require a believer to marry a believer.
The answers to the questions above have been drawn from the following resources:
On Divorce: 1
Matthew 19:7–10 / If divorce runs counter to the divine intention, then why, asked the Pharisees, did Moses give the law allowing a man to give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away? Is Moses guilty of writing laws that run counter to the mind of God? Such an idea would be blasphemous in the religious culture of first-century Judaism. Jesus answers that Moses’ injunction regarding divorce came as a result of their hardness of heart. Williams translates, “It was because of your moral perversity that Moses allowed you to divorce” (Matthew 19:8). But that was not what was intended in the beginning. Actually, the requirement of a written notice of divorce made the process more difficult. Prior to that time a marriage could be dissolved by the man simply declaring it to be so. A written notice would give time for anger to dissipate and common sense to regain control.
Jesus continues by pointing out that whoever divorces his wife for any cause other than marital infidelity and marries another is guilty of adultery (Matthew 19:9). In the parallel passage in Matthew 5:32, divorce is said to cause the woman who is put away to commit adultery. In the culture of that day a divorced woman would very easily find herself trapped into a life of prostitution. In the present passage it is the man who commits adultery by remarriage. The point is that in God’s sight the man who divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness is still married to her.
If that’s the case between a man and his wife, respond the disciples, then it would be better not to marry at all. The difficulty of achieving a perfect marriage becomes an argument against marriage itself.
On Singleness: 2
Matthew 19:11–12 / Jesus’ response to his disciples’ conclusion about marriage is that not all men are able to accept, “to make room,” thus, in a mental sense, “to comprehend or accept,” BAGD, p. 890) this saying, but only those “who have the gift.” Commentators differ as to what this teaching refers to. Some take it as a response to the disciples’ saying in the previous verse. For example, Knox translates, “That conclusion … cannot be taken in by everybody.” The problem here, however, is that God is held as agreeing with the disciples’ conclusion that it is better not to marry (Matthew 19:10). This runs counter to the divine intention in creation (Genesis 1:28).
It is better to take Jesus’ statement in Matthew 19:11 as referring to his teaching on divorce and remarriage in Matthew 19:3–9. Not everyone is able to accept his strict position on the subject, but only those to whom it [the ability to accept] has been given. It is not a question of whether or not a person should refrain from marriage for the sake of evangelism or because the end of all things is not far off. The issue has to do with true disciples who have had to divorce their wives for immorality and “out of obedience to Christ’s law concerning divorce they do not remarry” (Gundry, pp. 381–82). Those who cannot or do not accept the teaching are non-disciples and false disciples.
There are several reasons why men do not marry (or are unsuited for marriage). Some have been disabled from birth. Others were made that way by men (Matthew 19:12). It was not uncommon for servants in the royal harems to be castrated in order to protect the women. Also, in certain Mediterranean cults priests dedicated themselves to a mother goddess by self-emasculation (Beare, p. 391). Origen, one of the most influential thinkers of the early church, castrated himself, although in time he came to realize his error.
A third type of eunuch is the man who has renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. This is voluntary celibacy, and, if one follows Gundry’s argument, these are those who “live as eunuchs after they have had to divorce their wives for immorality” (p. 382). So Jesus concludes, The one who can accept this (teaching on divorce and remarriage) should accept it. It is the mark of a true disciple to live in obedience to God’s best intention for human beings.
1 Mounce, R. H. (2011). Matthew (p. 181). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
2 Mounce, R. H. (2011). Matthew (pp. 181–182). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
Question: “Is remarriage after divorce always adultery?” 3
Before we even begin to answer this question, let us reiterate, “God hates divorce” (Malachi 2:16). The pain, confusion, and frustration most people experience after a divorce are surely part of the reason that God hates divorce. Even more difficult, biblically, than the question of divorce, is the question of remarriage. The vast majority of people who divorce either remarry or consider getting remarried. What does the Bible say about this?
Matthew 19:9 says, “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.” See also Matthew 5:32. These Scriptures clearly state that remarriage after a divorce is adultery, except in the instance of “marital unfaithfulness.”
It is our view that there are certain instances in which divorce and remarriage are permitted without the remarriage being considered adultery. These instances would include unrepentant adultery, physical abuse of spouse or children, and abandonment of a believing spouse by an unbelieving spouse. We are not saying that a person under such circumstances should remarry. The Bible definitely encourages remaining single or reconciliation over remarriage (1 Corinthians 7:11). At the same time, it is our view that God offers His mercy and grace to the innocent party in a divorce and allows that person to remarry without it being considered adultery.
A person who gets a divorce for a reason other than the reasons listed above, and then gets remarried has committed adultery (Luke 16:18). The question then becomes, is this remarriage an “act” of adultery, or a “state” of adultery. The present tense of the Greek in Matthew 5:32; 19:9; and Luke 16:18 can indicate a continuous state of adultery. At the same time, the present tense in Greek does not always indicate continuous action. Sometimes it simply means that something occurred (Aoristic, Punctiliar, or Gnomic present). For example, the word “divorces” in Matthew 5:32 is present tense, but divorcing is not a continual action. It is our view that remarriage, no matter the circumstances, is not a continual state of adultery. Only the act of getting remarried itself is adultery.
In the Old Testament Law, the punishment for adultery was death (Leviticus 20:10). At the same time, Deuteronomy 24:1-4 mentions remarriage after a divorce, does not call it adultery, and does not demand the death penalty for the remarried spouse. The Bible explicitly says that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16), but nowhere explicitly states that God hates remarriage. The Bible nowhere commands a remarried couple to divorce. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 does not describe the remarriage as invalid. Ending a remarriage through divorce would be just as sinful as ending a first marriage through divorce. Both would include the breaking of vows before God, between the couple, and in front of witnesses.
No matter the circumstances, once a couple is remarried, they should strive to live out their married lives in fidelity, in a God-honoring way, with Christ at the center of their marriage. A marriage is a marriage. God does not view the new marriage as invalid or adulterous. A remarried couple should devote themselves to God, and to each other – and honor Him by making their new marriage a lasting and Christ-centered one (Ephesians 5:22-33).
[ gotquetions.org ]
[Based on my classes with Richard D. Leineweber, Jr. c. 2000]
While the title indicate our desire to experience forgiveness, the point is how to release those who have offended us. Our passage is from Luke 17:1-10, and the key verses are Luke 17:3, 10.
Purpose of This Study: The purpose of this study is to determine our willingness to grant forgiveness to an offending brother who repents. God wants us to forgive as He has so graciously forgiven us. The commands of Christ in this passage are found in Luke 17:3 – “Be on your guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.” Obedience to this command requires a forgiving heart that is willing to restore relationships that have been broken by sin.
Historical Background: Jesus spoke these scathing words in His denunciation of the attitudes of the Pharisees, but a word of caution to the disciples was necessary so that they would not despise the Pharisees themselves. They could hate Pharisaism without hating the Pharisees. In order to teach the disciples this lesson, Jesus warned them that it would be easy for them to give offense by their attitude toward people. He said that it would be better for them to die physically than to repel some from coming to Him because they had shown the wrong attitude toward those who are coming. The “little ones” to whom the Lord referred would be those who were forsaking Pharisaism and coming to Christ. If the disciples looked down on such ones because they were so slow in coming to a decision concerning the person of Christ, they might be turned away from Him. Therefore, Christ commanded the disciples to be careful about their attitudes so that those who desired to come to Him may not be tripped up. (Pentecost)
The disciples might not only cause a hindrance for those coming to Christ but also toward other believers in Christ. When a believer is sinned against, and the sinning brother requests forgiveness, it is the duty of the disciple of Christ to forgive him.
Other passages to consider: Mark 11:25 (Forgive), Luke 17:3 (be on your guard, forgive), Luke 17:4 (forgive), Acts 7:60, 2 Corinthians 2:7, 10, Ephesians 4:32, Colossians 3:13.
Discussion Questions:
1. What is a stumbling block? (Luke 17:1-2) A “stumbling block” (scandalon) literally referred to a “trap or snare” used to catch animals but symbolically whatever causes people to be tripped up and fall into sin. The text says, “It is inevitable” that these stumbling blocks will come. The word inevitable means unavoidable. It is impossible that these offenses won’t come but Jesus says make sure they don’t come through you.
2. What are the consequences for placing a stumbling block in front of one of these little ones? (Luke 17:1-2) The consequences are not stated but contrasted to a better way to end one’s life. Jesus warns that it would be better to take your own life than be judged for this offense. He is not suggesting suicide but sternly warns everyone with the word WOE to stay clear of tripping up one of these “little ones,” who seem to be either young or new believers coming to Christ or people of whom the world takes little notice. In the story it probably refers to those who were forsaking Pharisaism and coming to Christ. A “millstone” was a heavy stone that rotated in a mill for grinding grain.
3. Does every sin against us have to be rebuked and forgiven? (Proverbs 10:12; 17:9; 19:11; 1 Corinthians 13:7; Colossians 3:13; 1 Peter 4:8) The Bible teaches “it is his glory to overlook a transgression” (Proverbs 19:11). If we had to confront every sin against us we would have little time for anything else.
If you are sinned against and cannot let it go (forbear, cover, overlook) then you are commanded to rebuke (confront) the sinning brother. If the sin is small enough to remember, it is big enough to confront.
4. What are the three commands of Christ in Luke 17:3? We are commanded to 1) “Be on your guard” (present imperative); 2) “rebuke’ (aorist imperative); and 3) “forgive” (aorist imperative).
5. Why does Jesus say “Be on your guard?” (Luke 17:3) Jesus warns: “Be careful of yourselves.” This warning is necessary because there are many ways to err about forgiveness. The warning is pertinent to many Christians who are caught up in the easy rationalizations by which they try to excuse themselves from the obligation to forgive their brothers.
6. What does it mean to rebuke our brother? The word “rebuke” means to “adjudge, to find fault with, rebuke; hence to charge, or rather, to charge strictly.” An offended brother must approach the offender and seek to bring him to repentance and attempt to bring about reconciliation. It’s much easier to keep still when someone sins against us, and to try to hide the pain. We sometimes even think we’re being “spiritual” by trying to ignore the wrong, but failure to be honest, trying to give the “outward show” of nothing wrong when there is something wrong, isn’t God’s way. The loving thing to do is to rebuke the person who sins against you, for he needs the cleansing that forgiveness can bring as much as you need the barrier of hurt removed. So Jesus said, “Rebuke him.”
7. What does Jesus command His disciples to do when a sinning brother repents? (Luke 17:3) Luke 17:3 says, “forgive (aorist imperative) him.” The aorist tense denotes urgency. We must not withhold forgiveness or delay in granting it. This is often easier said than done. Our old self dwells on slights and hurts and takes a perverse pleasure in self-pity and in “righteous indignation.”
8. What is forgiveness? (Jeremiah 31:34) Bill Gothard defines forgiveness as “healing others by using their offenses as a means of expressing to them Christ’s love.” When Christ granted forgiveness in the Gospels He realized He was going to have to pay for these sins on the cross. When we forgive others we have to pay for their sins not in a redemptive sense but in a practical sense. When we forgive a gossiper who has marred our reputation, his slanderous words can never be retrieved so we chose to pay for his sinful talk in a practical sense.
Jeremiah 31:34 says, “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.” Based on this verse “Forgiveness” could be defined as “a promise not to bring the sin up to the offender, tell others about it, and not dwell on it ourselves.”
There are two Greek words in the New Testament for forgiveness.
9. Does the word “if” in Luke 17:3 make granting forgiveness conditional? The word “if” makes granting forgiveness conditional on repentance. Jesus taught that you forgive when a brother repents. In the same way before we came to faith in Christ, Jesus doesn’t forgive us until we repented of our sins and accepted the free gift of eternal life (Luke 24:47).
10. Does withholding forgiveness from an unrepentant brother give us the right to be full of bitterness and malice? (Ephesians 4:31) This verse says, “Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice.”
11. Are we to withhold forgiveness from unbelievers who are not repentant? (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60) Luke 23:34 says, “But Jesus was saying, ‘Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.’ And they cast lots, dividing up His garments among themselves.” Acts 7:60 says, “Then falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them!’ Having said this, he fell asleep.”
12. How often are we responsible to forgive a brother who sins against us? (Luke 17:4; Matthew 18:21, 22) Jesus teaches us to forgive “seven times in a day.” The number “7” was not to set a limit on the number of times to forgive but precisely the opposite. Christ meant that forgiveness should be granted unendingly. Seven here signifies’ ‘times without number.” A believer is to put no limit on the forgiveness he extends to another believer who has injured him and then seeks forgiveness.
On an earlier occasion Peter’s question concerning the number of times we must forgive an offending brother brought Christ’s answer “seventy times seven.” Matthew 18:21-22 says, “Then Peter came and said to Him, ‘Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?’ 22 Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.'”
Peter suggested a limit of “seven times,” which was more than twice that allowed by Jewish tradition. Using references in the book of Amos (Amos 1:3, 6,9, 11, 13; and Job 33:29), the rabbis had taken a repeated statement by God against neighboring enemies of Israel and made it into a universal rule for limiting God’s forgiveness and, by extension, also man’s. If God forgives men only three times, they spuriously reasoned, it is unnecessary and even presumptuous for men to forgive each other more times than that.
Rabbi Jose ben Hanina said, “He who begs forgiveness from his neighbor must not do so more than three times.” Rabbi Jose ben Jehuda said, “If a man commits an offense once, they forgive him; if he commits an offense a second time, they forgive him; if he commits an offense a third time, they forgive him; the fourth time they do not forgive him.”
Peter probably thought Jesus would be impressed with the seemingly generous suggestion of “up to seven times.” Compared to Jewish tradition, it was generous and no doubt was based on Peter’s growing understanding of Jesus’ teaching and personal example of compassion and mercy. Realizing that the Lord’s graciousness was in marked contrast to the self-centered legalism of the scribes and Pharisees, Peter doubled their narrow limit for forgiveness and added one more time for good measure.
Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.” The Lord was not extending the legal limit of forgiveness. He was not speaking of law or limits at all. By seventy times seven He did not mean 490. He simply picked up on Peter’s number and multiplied it by itself and then by ten, indicating a number that, for all practical purposes, was beyond counting (MacArthur). If you took it to refer literally to 490 times a day, that would mean in a 16-hour day (waking hours) it would require forgiving every 1.9 minutes. The point is innumerable times.
13. Should there be the “fruit of repentance” before we forgive someone? (Luke 17:3-4) It is clear from the text that we must grant forgiveness merely on the basis of one’s statement that he repents. There could be no clear evidence of change within the hypothetical time period that Christ suggests: “seven times in the same day!” Indeed, if a brother does the same thing seven times in the same day, the only evidence that you could have would be entirely negative. Fruit takes time to grow. It also takes care and nourishment. A person unfamiliar with a citrus tree may be unable to identify it but if he waits long enough, he will know when the fruit appears whether it is an orange or … a lemon! By their fruit shall you know them, has nothing to do with the truth that is taught in Luke 17.
Jesus does not condition the granting of forgiveness upon the behavior of the offender after forgiveness, but rather hangs the granting of forgiveness upon the brother’s verbal testimony alone: “and seven times in a day should return to you saying, ‘I repent.”‘ It is the saying, not subsequent doing on his part that should activate the offended one to grant forgiveness. Jesus said he should grant that forgiveness even if it should be requested seven times in one day.
14. Why are sins sometimes so quickly repeated? There are several reasons sins are often so quickly repeated. First, it takes time to change. Second, forgiveness merely clears away the rubble so the relationship can be rebuilt. Jay Adams points out that “If a new relationship based upon biblical change and help is not established, then it is likely that one or more of the parties will revert to his old ways again. If so, again an unreconciled condition will develop. This failure frequently results in a kiss-and-make-up pattern. The same old problem is never really settled but becomes the reason for continued and repeated confrontation, confession, and forgiveness.”
15. How can the forgiven person help the forgiving person forget the sin? If forgetting in time does not follow forgiving it’s important to look for a reason. You may find that the offended party has been brooding over the offense in self-pity. Such brooding is decidedly unscriptural and does not fit into the biblical concept of forgiveness. Forgiveness means no longer continuing to dwell on the sin that was forgiven. Forgiveness is the promise not to raise the issue again to the offender, to others, or to himself. Brooding is a violation of the promise made in granting forgiveness.
The biblical concept of forgiving and forgetting often has been misrepresented. The Bible speaks of “fruit appropriate to repentance.” One forgives, but he does not immediately forget; rather, he remembers and looks for the fruit or the results that eventually accompany true repentance. It takes time for fruit to grow. When fruit is discerned, forgetting then becomes possible.
16. Does Scripture instruct a repentant brother to forgive himself? The Bible never teaches that we need to forgive ourselves. At times people complain over an inability to forgive themselves after having received forgiveness from God or others. The problem of continued guilt is not a question of inability to forgive oneself. To view it as such is to cloud the real issue and to miss the path that leads to a solution. The real difficulty usually stems from the fact that the person feels guilty because he knows that, although the sin has been forgiven, he is still the kind of person who did it. The guilt will not fully disappear until he knows that his old patterns of life have been destroyed and new habit patterns have been established.
17. Why should we be willing to forgive our brother? (Matthew 18:22-33) We should forgive our brother because of the great sin debt that we have been forgiven by Christ.
18. What happens when we refuse to forgive a brother from our hearts? (Matthew 18:34-35; 6:14-15; 2 Corinthians 2:7, 10-11) Three things occur when we are unwilling to grant forgiveness and hold a grudge.
19. What excuse do the disciples give for not being able to forgive? (Luke 17:5-6) Jesus addresses three excuses for not forgiving your brother.
At first the disciples’ request for greater faith sounds quite reasonable and even pious. The Lord took a dim view of their request and treated it as an excuse rather than as a sincere plea. The problem is not lack of faith as they alleged. It does not take much faith to do great things. Even a small amount (as small as a tiny mustard seed) could do wonders. What they needed was not more faith; they simply needed to exercise the faith that they had and stop making excuses.
In the Jewish idiom the phrase “as small as a mustard seed” represented the smallest conceivable amount of something.
20. What is the point of the story Jesus tells in Luke 17:7-10? The point of this parable is twofold:
The fourth command of Christ in this passage is the word “Say” in Luke 17:10. “So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say (present imperative), ‘We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.'” Forgiving someone is not something heroic, it is simply fulfilling our Christian duty. In the same way a slave discharges his duties whether he feels like it or not. The word “unworthy” is common in Greek literature, but in the N.T. only here and Matthew 25:30 where it means “useless” or “unprofitable.” The slave who only does what he is commanded by his master to do has gained no merit or credit. “The profit does not begin until the servant goes beyond his obligation” (Meyer).
21. Isn’t it hypocritical to forgive someone when you don’t feel like it? “But suppose I do not feel like forgiving my brother, am I supposed to do so anyhow? Won’t doing so without feeling forgiving make me a hypocrite?” This objection is frequently raised by sincere Christians who become perplexed over hypocrisy by wrongly equating hypocrisy with acting against one’s feelings. This objection also is used hypocritically by others who wish to excuse themselves from the hard (but Christian) duty of granting forgiveness.
Application:
Sources:
© Copyright 1994, Richard D. Leineweber Jr.
Additional Commentary: 1
This section consists of five units tied loosely together by the theme of faith:
When the concept is broadened in terms of faithfulness it becomes more apparent that the idea of faith runs throughout the section. Only the first six verses are paralleled in the other gospels (Matthew 18:6–7, 15, 21–22; 21:21; Mark 9:42; 11:22–23).
Luke 17:1–3a / Jesus turns his attention away from the Pharisees and speaks to his disciples. The first saying is a warning against causing one of these little ones (disciples) to sin (lit. “to stumble”). The idea is not simply to cause someone to sin, but rather to become less faithful disciples, or to stop following Jesus altogether. Jesus recognizes that such things will happen, but woe to that person through whom they come. In what sense is it terrible for the disciple who causes another to stumble? In Luke 17:2, Jesus states that it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one to stumble. Elsewhere Jesus states that it would be better to lose an eye or a limb in order to gain heaven than to go to hell (see Mark 9:43, 47). Although this language may be hyperbolic, Jesus warns of the danger of judgment upon anyone who would destroy the faith of the one who believes in him. The final warning of Luke 17:3a, so watch yourselves, probably concludes the stumbling-block saying and is not the introduction for the saying on forgiveness that follows (though it may have been intended as a transition linking the sayings.
Luke 17:3b–4 / This saying, coming as it does immediately after the frightening warning above, may point to the way out of some of the problems associated with causing someone to stumble. The person who is sinned against (offended, or possibly caused to stumble) is to forgive his errant brother. Even if he sins against you seven times in a day, he is to be forgiven. (See Matthew 18:22 where Jesus tells Peter to forgive the sinner seventy times seven. Although this saying is addressed apparently to the stronger disciple who does not falter in his faith on account of some offense, the idea of forgiveness is, nevertheless, relevant to the above warning against causing someone to stumble. But the saying also applies to the weaker disciple as well. God expects everyone to be forgiving toward another who repents.
Luke 17:5–6 / The faith that the disciples (or here, apostles) wish Jesus to increase is the kind of faith that will not waver in the face of opposition but is a faith that will expect great things from God (such examples can be seen in the Book of Acts). It may be that in light of the saying’s context, Luke understands this faith as the kind of faith that will not cause other disciples to falter (Luke 17:1–2), but it is a faith that will readily forgive those who sin and then repent (Luke 17:3b–4). What is curious is that Jesus does not actually grant the request of the apostles. They have asked for an increase in faith, but in response Jesus merely describes what great faith is. Even a little genuine faith can do mighty things (see Matthew 17:20). Jesus does not miraculously strengthen the faith of his disciples on the spot (which is clear by their fear, betrayal, and denial of Jesus when their master is arrested).
Luke 17:17:7–10 / This saying suggests that in serving God, God’s people have only done what is expected; just as a servant does not deserve thanks for doing his duty, so the disciples of Jesus should not expect special reward for being obedient. Jesus does not mean to rule out heavenly reward for faithful service, but he means only to instruct his disciples as to how they should think. The point of the saying is concerned with attitude. An arrogant attitude views God as fortunate for having people like us in his service (perhaps this was a Pharisaic attitude). The proper attitude, however, is thankfulness for having the privilege and opportunity to serve God. What reward we have for serving God is not earned, but is given because God is gracious. No Christian can boast before God (see Romans 3:27). Faithful servants understand this and go about their work for God, motivated by love for God and not by a sense of self-importance or by a sense of greed for reward.
Luke 17:17:11–19 / Another aspect of faith, or faithfulness, is thankfulness. This idea is seen clearly in the episode of the cleansing of the ten lepers. In Luke 17:11, Luke notes that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem, traveling along the border between Samaria and Galilee. This introduction not only reminds the reader of the journey to Jerusalem, originally announced in Luke 9:51, but sets the stage for the appearance of the Samaritan leper. Jesus is met by ten men who had leprosy. According to custom and law they stood at a distance and cried out to Jesus for help. Jesus makes no pronouncement of healing, but commands them, “Go, show yourselves to the priests.” (Jesus had given the same command to the leper in Luke 5:14.) This command alludes to the wording of Leviticus 13:49 (see also Leviticus 14:2–4), where one whose leprosy or skin disease has cleared up must be inspected by a priest in order to be readmitted into society.
In obedience the ten lepers depart, but while going they discover that they had been cleansed (or had been healed. One of them returns praising God, and thanked Jesus.
Jesus’ first question (Were not all ten cleansed?) implies that there should be ten, not one, praising God and giving thanks.
His second question (Where are the other nine?) sets up the contrast between the one who returned, who was a Samaritan, and the nine (who presumably were Jews) who did not return to give praise and thanks.
Jesus’ third question (Was no one found to return and give praise to God except this foreigner?) implies that the least religious or, to put it differently, those presumably most deserving of judgment, are often the ones most thankful to God for his mercy (Luke 7:36–50). The Samaritan is a foreigner (lit. “a stranger”), one who is not a pure descendant of “Father Abraham” (as the rich man of Luke 16:19–31 had been). Jesus’ question summarizes one of the major themes of Luke–Acts. It is the Gentile, the Samaritan, the outcasts and sinners, who respond enthusiastically to the offer of the Good News. Unlike the religious and proud, who assume that their piety guarantees their salvation, the outcasts and sinners assume no such thing (see Luke 18:9–14) and eagerly accept God’s gracious invitation (see Luke 14:15–24).
The foreigner is the only one who came back to give thanks to God, because only he recognized his sin and his need to repent. Unlike others whose hearts are hardened (another theme in Luke–Acts; see Acts 28:25–28), the Samaritan is receptive. Jesus then pronounces that it is his faith that has made him well (lit. “has saved you”). Although the “salvation” here may refer to no more than the leper’s physical healing (which would then be true of the other nine lepers who had been healed), it is more likely that Jesus (or, if not Jesus, then very likely Luke) has understood his expression of gratitude as indicative of conversion. The leper has not only been healed from his dreaded leprosy, but he has gained entry into the kingdom of God.
1 Evans, C. A. (1990). Luke (pp. 253–256). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
[Questions and responses by Richard D. Leineweber, Jr. c. 2000]
Today we are on the topic of developing a compassionate heart, one that is concerned about others, primarily the salvation of lost people around us. The command is found in Luke 16:9, to Make Friends (aorist imperative). But, in order to understand Luke 16:1-13, we must go back to Luke 15:1-2.
Passage for Today: Luke 16:1-13 – which is all about stewardship. You will notice this is the parable of the unjust steward. The main question has to do with why the rich man would commend his dishonest manager. A second question has to do with why Jesus cites the actions of the dishonest manager with approval, using him as an example for his disciples. Let’s deal with these in the lesson
Group Question: When have you been let go from a job, or passed over for a job you wanted?
Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this study is to determine our willingness to invest our resources in light of eternity. God wants us to faithfully invest our time and financial resources to reach lost people. The command of Christ in this passage is that we “make friends for yourselves by means of the wealth of unrighteousness.” Obedience to this command requires the faithful stewardship of our money.
Historical Background: To understand the context of chapter 16, we must go back to 15:1-2. Jesus has surrounded himself with tax collectors and sinners. The Pharisees stand on the perimeter, criticizing that Jesus would spend time with lost people. Chapter 15 is a series of three parables directed toward the Pharisees. They teach that lost people matter to God, they deserve an all-out search and when they are found we ought to celebrate.
Luke 16 starts with a parable about “The Unrighteous Steward.” The parable and command is directed toward His disciples but the Pharisees are within hearing range of His teaching. The Pharisees’ reaction to His teaching is found in 16:14 — “Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, were listening to all these things and were scoffing at Him.” Jesus then addresses the Pharisees directly in 16:15 — “And He said to them, ‘You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God.'” Jesus accuses them of valuing (esteeming) the wrong things. Lost people matter to God and we ought to invest both time and money to reach them.
The Pharisees could not understand so Jesus then tells a true story of a real after death experience (unlike today these two men didn’t return to report what happened). The Story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is a true story because parables never use proper names. The Pharisees must have gasped as Jesus told the story of a fellow Pharisee that was unnamed but apparently easily identified by Jesus’ detailed description.
The main point of this story is that rich men who don’t come to God on his terms (Luke 16:29-31) and misuse the stewardship of their resources (a reflection of their unbelief) end up in Hell (Luke 16:19,22b,23-28).
Epistles address this theme as well: 1 Corinthians 4:12; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 4:10
Discussion Questions:
1. What three parables did Jesus tell the Pharisees in Luke 15? The parable of the “Lost Sheep” (Luke 15:1-7); the “Lost Coin” (Luke 15:8-10); and the “Lost Son” (Luke 15:11-32).
2. Why did He tell them these three parables? (Luke 15:12) Jesus taught these three parables to set the religious leaders straight once and for all. It really aggravated these spiritual leaders of the day that this man who claimed to be the “Son of God” would feel so comfortable socializing with riff-raft. The Pharisees (Luke 15:1-2) couldn’t understand how Jesus could eat with, socialize with, hang out with those whose lives were not submitted to God. What bothered Jesus was that these leaders had a list in their minds of who mattered to God and who didn’t. They had it all figured out that they mattered to God but these irreligious, Gentile, pagan, market place outsiders didn’t matter to God.
This is one of the only times in the teaching ministry of Jesus where He tells three parables back, to back, to back. It was normally Jesus teaching style to confront a problem by the telling of a parable, the explaining of a parable, and then moving along. But this time, it’s as though Jesus is saying “I want to straighten out the confusion in your minds, once and for all. I’m going to tell you not one, not two, but three stories. I’m going to rapid-fire truth into your minds so that you will never again be confused on the issue of who matters to God and who doesn’t.
3. Collectively, what are these three parables teaching? (Luke 15:6,9,24) All three parables teach that lost people matter to God, they deserve an all-out search and when they are found it demands a celebration.
4. In the third parable, whom does the older brother represent? (Luke 15:25-32) The older son represents the Pharisees who were “angry’ (Luke 15:28) because Jesus was spending time with lost people instead of them. They were the religious establishment; if Jesus was going to check in with anybody it should have been them. On an earlier occasion Jesus informed the Pharisees that His mission was targeted to reach the unrighteous and the spiritually sick people of this world. In Luke 5:30 the Pharisees asked Jesus the question: “Why do you eat and drink with the tax collectors and sinners?” Luke 5:31-32 says, “And Jesus answered and said to them, ‘It is not those who are well who need a physician, but those who are sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.'” Jesus’ suggestion was that he didn’t need to spend time with them because they were the healthy and the righteous was sarcasm. They were self-righteous and spiritually dead but couldn’t recognize it.
5. To whom does Jesus direct this parable? (Luke 16:1) It is clearly stated in Luke 16:1 that Jesus was directing this parable to his disciples. The word “also” seems to mean that at this same time, after speaking to the Pharisees (in Luke 15), Jesus proceeds to speak a parable to the disciples (Luke 16:1-13). it’s obvious from Luke 16:14 that the Pharisees hung around to see what He would say to his disciples.
6. When the Pharisees heard this command on stewardship, what did they do and why? (Luke 16:14) Luke 16:15 says, “Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, were listening to all these and were scoffing at Him.” The verb “scoffing” means “to turn out or up the nose at one, to sneer, to scoff.” The Pharisees being “lovers of money” rather than lovers of God precipitated this emotional response when Jesus commanded His disciples to invest their money to reach lost people.
7. What happened to one of the Pharisees’ friends who used his resources for himself alone? (Luke 16:19-31) This question suggests that the rich man who was “joyously living in splendor every day” (Luke 16:19) was a fellow Pharisee. The text seems to imply this when it describes the rich man in the story as dressing like a Pharisee and acting like one. The Pharisees (like this rich man) measured their spirituality by their wealth instead of their compassion for the poor.
They believed that financial prosperity was a sign of God’s blessing on their lives because they were righteous. In reality they were spiritually bankrupt. On more than one occasion Jesus reminded these Pharisees that they didn’t have the love of God in their hearts (John 5:42) or they would have reacted differently when Jesus helped the poor and the afflicted. The rich man in this text (all too familiar a story with a poor beggar named Lazarus laying outside of their friend’s home, dogs licking his sores, to be just a coincidence) died and immediately went to a place of torment (Luke 16:23) and agony (Luke 16:24,25) called Hades. This rich man should have sought God’s mercy (Luke 16:24) while he was alive. It was too late to seek God’s mercy after he died.
8. What is a manager? (Luke 16:1) A “manager” was an individual who had been entrusted with the stewardship of another person’s property: from oikos, (house), and nemo, (to distribute or dispense). So, one who assigns to the members of the household their several duties, and pays to each his wages. The paymaster. He kept the household stores under lock and seal, giving out what was required, and for this purpose received a signet ring from his master.
Vincent writes, “A manager was a trusted servant, usually someone born in the household, who was chief of the management and distribution of household provisions. He provided food for all the other servants, thus managing his master’s resources for the well-being of others. He acted as an agent for his master, with full authority to transact business in the master’s name.”
9. Are managers or stewards held accountable? (Luke 16:2) The verse says, “And he (rich man — owner) called him and said to him (manager),”What is this I hear about you? Give an accounting of your management, for you can no longer be manager.” The owner wanted a complete audit of the books. “Balance the books and show me how you have been running my business or household.” The “rich man” in this story is a picture of God who will hold every believer accountable at the Bema Seat of Christ as a servant & a steward (Romans 14:12; 1 Corinthians 3:10-15; 2 Corinthians 5:10). The rich man in verse 8 is called the “master” (Greek kyrios).
10. Why was the manager losing his job? (Luke 16:1) He had mismanaged the Masters resources. Luke 16:1 says, “…this manager was reported to him as squandering his possessions.” The word “squandering” means “wasted.” Since this man wasn’t arrested or punished for swindling or theft, it appears that the owner didn’t suspect the manager of dishonesty but thought that he had been irresponsible and extravagant.
11. What did this man do before he was removed from his stewardship? (Luke 16:3-7) The text says the manager asked himself, “What shall I do, since my master is taking the management away from me? I am not strong enough to dig; I am ashamed to beg” (Luke 16:3). Then the manager realized it wouldn’t be long before his employment would be terminated and he would be homeless. Then he got an idea how to be welcomed to stay with others. The verb “I know” in Luke 16:4 is better translated “I am resolved.” It is a burst of daylight to the puzzled, darkened man: We got it, I see into it now, a sudden solution. Cleverly, he arranged to give large discounts to his master’s debtors, which they would eagerly agree to pay. By reducing their debts to his master, he gained their indebtedness to him. The amounts owed were large; the wheat is said to be equal to the yield of about one hundred acres (Jeremias, Parables of Jesus, pg. 181). They would therefore be obligated to take him into their homes when he was put out of his master’s home.
12. Was the Master praising the manager for his unrighteousness? (Luke 16:4,8a) The master (rich man or owner) commended the unrighteous manager. He wasn’t applauding the man for unjust handling of the funds once he was notified that he was going to be dismissed but he was impressed with how shrewd he was about planning for his future.
13. Where does the parable end? (Luke 16:8) This parable ends in the middle of the verse. Jesus begins to draw a principle from the parable with these words — “for the sons of this age are more…”
14. How does Christ use this parable to contrast believers with unbelievers? (Luke 16:8b) Jesus said, “for the sons of this age are more shrewd in relation to their own kind than the sons of light.” It is more literally translated, “The sons of this age are more shrewd in their generation than the sons of light.” This means that ungodly, unregenerate men show more shrewdness or wisdom in providing for their future in this world than true believers show in laying up treasures in heaven. Unbelievers know how to manage their resources to prepare for the future and retirement. lf Christians were just as conscientious about preparing for heaven we would see many more people coming to Christ as we invest our resources in them.
15. What does Jesus command His disciples to do in Luke 16:9? “And I say to you, make friends (aorist imperative) for yourselves by means of the wealth of unrighteousness, so that when it fails, they will receive you into the eternal dwellings.” The aorist imperative “make friends” denotes urgency. In the phrase, “Wealth of unrighteousness,” Christ commands His disciples to use not only their time but also their money to build redemptive friendships.
We should use money and other material things in such a way as to form friendships that potentially could endure throughout eternity. Money can be used to buy Bibles, Christian books, tracts, message tapes, dinners out, tickets to a concert or sporting event, sacrificial gifts that could help our lost friends with pressing needs all this with the goal of reaching a lost friend for Christ.
The unrighteous manager used his master’s money to buy earthly friends; believers are to use their Master’s money in a way that will accrue friends for eternity. The unrighteous manager anticipated being welcomed into the homes (Luke 16:4) of those for whom he had reduced the debt. In a similar manner, those who make an investment to help their lost friends come to Christ will be welcomed into their “dwellings” in heaven. What a reception in heaven that will be for those who make the maximum investment of their lives and possessions down here on earth.
The word “welcome” and “receive” (same Greek word) in Luke 16:4,9 echoes back to a previous occurrence of the word in Luke 15:2. If we receive (“to receive by deliberate and ready reception” Vines) lost people like Jesus did and invest our resources to see them come to Christ, they will receive us into their eternal dwellings in heaven. Note that eventually our money will “fail” us because it cannot be taken to heaven, but our lost friends who trust Christ can be taken and even precede us if they die first.
16. What is unrighteous mammon? (Luke 16:9) Christ did not commend the man’s dishonesty; He specifically called him “unrighteous” or “unjust” (Luke 16:8). He only used him as an illustration to show that even the most wicked sons of this world are shrewd enough to provide for themselves against coming evil. Believers ought to be more shrewd, because they are concerned with eternal matters, not just earthly ones.
17. If we use our resources to reach our unbelieving friends, what can we anticipate when we get to heaven? (Luke 16:9) The following verses show that the steward was not at all commended for his crookedness, but rather for his foresight. He had acted prudently. He looked to the future, and made provision for it. He sacrificed present gain for future reward. In applying this to our own lives, we must be very clear; the future of the child of God is not on this earth but in heaven. Just as the steward took steps to insure that he would have friends during his retirement here below, so the Christian should use his Master’s goods in such a way as to insure a welcoming party when he gets to heaven.
18. How do you know what a person values? (Matthew 6:21) A person invests his time, treasure, and talent into whatever he values. Jesus said, “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
19. According to Jesus, how important is it to be faithful as a steward? (Luke 16:10-13) If we are “faithful in” our stewardship of “a very little thing,” then we will be “faithful” in handling “much” (spiritual treasures). On the other hand, if a man has “not been faithful in the use of unrighteous wealth,” why would God trust him when bigger considerations of eternal value are at stake? The relative unimportance of money is emphasized by the expression “a very little thing.”
20. What are the “true riches” in Luke 16:11? These refer to the souls of men. If God cannot trust us with unrighteous money, which is of a temporal nature, why would he entrust into our care new converts that are of an etemal nature?
21. Can a disciple of Christ love money and God at the same time? (Luke 16:13) No! “You cannot serve God and mammon.” It is utterly impossible to live for things and for God at the same time. If we are mastered by money, we cannot really be serving the Lord. It is a matter of divided loyalty. Motives are mixed. Decisions are not impartial.
Sources:
Copyright 2001, Richard D. Leineweber, Jr.
Additional Commentary: 1
Back to our original questions, why the rich man would commend his dishonest manager? and why did Jesus cite the actions of the dishonest manager with approval, using him as an example for his disciples.
The first question may be answered only when the actual action of the dishonest manager is fully understood. An old interpretation of this parable held that the rich man was impressed with the shrewdness of the manager because the latter, after being served notice of dismissal, dishonestly reduced the bills owed the rich man so as to ingratiate himself with these various clients and business associations. Although the rich man has been cheated yet again by the scoundrel, he is, nevertheless, impressed with his manager’s cleverness. Related to this interpretation is the suggestion that the manager has eliminated the interest part of the bill in conformity to the Old Testament’s law against usury (Deuteronomy 15:7–8; 23:20–21). So, the idea is that the dishonest manager has finally done a proper, biblical thing. This approach to the parable, however, is not satisfying. Why should the master praise the dishonest manager? Would he have anything good to say about someone who had not only wasted his money (Luke 16:1), but then after being fired (Luke 16:2) further cheated him? This seems highly unlikely.
More plausible is the suggestion of Derrett and Fitzmyer, that what the dishonest manager has done is to cancel out the profit that was due him (sort of a commission). By canceling the commissions, the debts were reduced, an action that would no doubt result in future kindness being shown the dishonest manager. So, the rich man has not at all been cheated by this final action of the fired manager. The master is still owed what is due him, while his former employee, by foregoing a few commissions, now has a brighter future. Having understood the parable this way, it is now much easier to understand why Jesus sees in the action of the dishonest manager a worthy example for his disciples. They, like the dishonest manager, should be able to recognize the advantage in giving up a little now so that some day in the future they may receive much more.
The main point in the lesson above is that Jesus (or Luke) is not urging his disciples to acquire wealth dishonestly but to make good use of the resources (particularly financial resources) of this world. Jesus is not recommending compromise and he is certainly not recommending dishonesty, but he is urging his followers not to overlook opportunities and resources that will sustain his people and advance the Christian mission. By using the resources of this world wisely, Christians can be assured that when it is gone they will be welcomed into eternal dwellings. While Jesus’ followers are on earth they should make use of the world’s available resources in order to maintain themselves and the work of the church. When, however, these resources are exhausted and life’s work is finished, the followers of Christ can look forward to entering a home that is eternal, not temporary, a home whose resources will never give out.
A second lesson is drawn from Luke 16:10-12. The principle of Luke 16:10 is that by the way a person handles himself with very little it is evident how such a person handles himself with much. We come to what for Luke is probably the heart of the matter in Luke 16:11. If the followers of Jesus cannot properly handle worldly wealth, then they cannot expect to be trusted with true riches. For us, if Christians cannot manage their money, property, and other possessions properly (such as supporting the poor and the ministry), they cannot expect to be entrusted with the rewards and wealth that last forever (Matthew 6:25–34). Implicitly, one’s stewardship in this life will form the basis for future reward and responsibility in heaven (Matthew 25:14–30). Luke 16:12 adds a new thought to this second lesson: if Jesus’ disciples have not been trustworthy with someone else’s property (like God’s “property”), who (God) will give them property (rewards) of their own?
Luke 16:13 provides a third lesson drawn from this parable. In Matthew this verse occurs in a much fuller context (Matthew 6:24) concerning the need to be loyal to God over against the things of the world. Here in Luke the saying brings out one more truth with respect to wealth that every follower of Jesus should know, a truth that has been presupposed in Luke 16:9–12. Christians owe their total allegiance to God and not to money. This saying prevents us from misunderstanding Luke 16:8–9. Whereas Christians are to put wealth to good purposes, they are not to become enslaved to it. Herein lies a grave danger for many Christians. What often passes for “good stewardship” or “God’s blessing” is really nothing short of greed and materialism.
1 Evans, C. A. (1990). Luke (p. 240). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
[Questions and responses by Richard D. Leineweber, Jr. c. 2000]
Perhaps you have asked yourself questions like these: What does God want from me? How does he want me to live? I remember my early days as a believer, and I would often ask God to show me his will, reveal what he wanted from me. I remember finding verses like Micah 6:8, “He has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” or 1 Thessalonians 4:3, “For this is the will of God, your sanctification;” or Romans 8:29, “For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son…” The goal back then was to be the best Christian I could be, walking in faith, walking in the light, walking in purity, but notice that the emphasis was always on ME.
But there are much bigger questions that believers must wrestle with. What is God’s global purpose and how do I fit into that? How does God expect me to do the work of evangelism? How am I making disciples? The preacher is always talking about the Great Commission and the need and responsibility that we believers have to be an intentional witness for the risen Savior Jesus Christ. I’m no Peter or Paul or Timothy; I’m just an average Joe who believes the story of Jesus, his work on the cross, and have put my trust in him alone for my salvation. I’m not ambitious enough to think that I can change the world, nor clever enough that God would use a person like me to make a difference. So, where do I fit in the Kingdom of God? How will I find my place in the Kingdom, which is our theme for 2015?
Perhaps you have been watching the NBC series on Sunday night called AD, the Bible Continues. While there are some portions embellished for story sake, the main story of the early days of the Christian church is great to watch. Those people had to stand up for what they believed in while the threats of imprisonment and death were constantly on their minds. God can’t expect us to live that way in this modern society.
Today, we seek out every possible way to be free from discomfort, and when we sense the need to go deeper with God, we use phrases like, “getting out of our comfort zone” or “if you want to walk on water, you’ve got to get out of the boat” or we read books like “radical.” In actuality, we are NOT called to be RADICAL, but rather “radical” is a term that should describe the NORMAL Christian life. When we are not radically sold out to Jesus, we are living out some other gospel, not one that we read about in the New Testament.
Let’s get into First Thessalonians:
The first thing I want you to see in this passage is that Paul brought to the church a message with kingdom authority.
For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain, 2 but after we had already suffered and been mistreated in Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel of God amid much opposition. 3 For our exhortation does not come from error or impurity or by way of deceit; 4 but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who examines our hearts.
The first thing I want you to see in these verses is…
The Manner of Paul’s Ministry (1 Thessalonians 2:1-2, 4)
The people had no less than three charges against Paul. Let’s take a look at…
The Message of Paul’s Ministry (1 Thessalonians 2:3a). Paul’s message did not come from error; it was true and contained no deceit. This message came directly from God. People would accuse him of being mad, a crazy man, like…
We need to have the same burning passion of constantly talking about Jesus, what he has done for us, and sharing what we know and have experienced.
The Motive of Paul’s Ministry (1 Thessalonians 2:3b). Another accusation came that Paul was preaching with impure motives. It is possible to preach the right message with the wrong motives. The early church had a practice of what is called “agape meals” which had been called “love Feasts” according to Jude 1:12. You can imagine how critics could take that term and reduce it toward something immoral, but Paul’s motivation was clean; it was pure.
The Method of Paul’s Ministry (1 Thessalonians 2:3c). There was no guile or trickery to win converts to faith in Jesus. The word has an image of “baiting a hook;” yet Paul did not trap people with cleaver salesmanship. Salvation does not come at the end of some cleaver argument or subtle presentation, salvation is the result of God’s Word connecting with the power of the Holy Spirit … for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. (1 Thessalonians 1:5). In this passage, we see there was no deceit in Paul’s method.
His message of kingdom authority came out of his kingdom authenticity.
5 For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness— 6 nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority.
First Thessalonians tells us that Paul invested his life into this community, and made a difference. People knew the truth of his word and his words. He was not a cheap peddler of elixir, or a feel-good gospel, or a prosperity gospel. People accused him of flattery speech and being greedy, but Paul’s readers knew that he told the truth, just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you (1 Thessalonians 1:5).
Paul also appealed to the witness of God (1 Thessalonians 2:5, 10) and to their witness as well (1 Thessalonians 2:11). A person with flattery speech will manipulate rather than communicate. In America, we are getting used to being manipulated and lied to, especially during an election year. We see this regularly happening today in the mainstream media, if you repeat a lie often enough, and loudly enough, it will be accepted as the truth.
Authenticity means being who you claim to be as well as being who you ought to be. This is a challenge for all of us. There has to be authenticity in our pulpit ministry, corporate worship life, and in our individual and family lives, too.
Paul had kingdom authority and lived his life with kingdom authenticity; which could only happened while possessing a kingdom attitude.
7 But we proved to be gentle among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children. 8 Having so fond an affection for you, we were well-pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become very dear to us. 9 For you recall, brethren, our labor and hardship, how working night and day so as not to be a burden to any of you, we proclaimed to you the gospel of God. 10 You are witnesses, and so is God, how devoutly and uprightly and blamelessly we behaved toward you believers; 11 just as you know how we were exhorting and encouraging and imploring each one of you as a father would his own children,
This section begins and ends with two great illustrations: he behaved as a mother with her child and a father with his children. This reveals the care and concern that parents have for their kids, and as kingdom people, we should have toward those inside and outside of the faith. A kingdom attitude understands that we do not live only for ourselves. The church does not exist for itself. The church is probably the only organization that exists solely for the benefit of those who are not members.
Think about how Jesus treated his disciples. He lived among them, coached them, taught them, challenged them, encouraged them, all these things are done in close proximity, as the body of faith. Babies are not birthed only to let them fend for themselves; neither are we to do the same with the children of God.
Believers in Jesus Christ must invest their lives into the next generation; it is imperative for human families, it is essential with our spiritual family. We must be of the same attitude, to work day and night, proclaiming the good news of Christ (1 Thessalonians 2:9). This type of investment of life and involvement in the lives of other people is different than church business as usual.
Paul had kingdom authority and lived his life with kingdom authenticity; which could only happened while possessing a kingdom attitude; so to make this happen, we need a kingdom approach.
12 so that you would walk in a manner worthy of the God who calls you into His own kingdom and glory.
This verse tells us that the way in which we walk (meaning, the way we live our lives) must be in a manner worthy of God. The old approach is that we simply believe in the facts about Jesus whether we end up living according to that standard or not. It was all about right belief and praying a prayer of salvation. This approach has led us to the point we find the church today.
Think about the evangelism of the past, we were taught to go to strangers, knock on doors, or go to the unchurched people you know to make sure they hear a clear presentation of the gospel. We want them saved, to believe in the resurrected Jesus, the only way to the Father (John 14:6). That may be well and good, but I question the effectiveness of this approach. A kingdom approach involves living our lives in a manner worthy of the God who calls you into his kingdom.
I’m not talking about lifestyle evangelism, which is generally translated as, “I won’t speak up and say anything about Jesus, I just let my life speak for me; after all, my actions will speak louder than my words.” The problem is that no one is perfect and lost people will be disappointed in other human beings in the long run.
While it is true that Jesus said to let your light shine before me so they will glorify the Father in heaven (Matthew 5:16), Paul said in Romans 10:17, that faith comes from hearing. People need to hear you putting in a good word for Jesus. Lifestyle alone is not sufficient.
St. Francis of Assisi once said, “Preach the gospel at all times, and if necessary, use words.” It sounds good on the surface but let’s think about this logically. Doing acts of kindness for others will not invite them to fall on their knees and repent, it takes our speaking up so they can HEAR the gospel and follow Jesus. As an example of the importance of action, consider this, “Feed the hungry at all times, and if necessary, use food.” Being an advocate for hunger issues is different from feeding hungry people. How will people taste of the Bread of Life if we don’t provide the necessary food?
So, this new approach is all about getting involved in our community and impacting our circles of influence, more than creating the next great event designed to attract people to our church in hopes they hear the gospel from a professional pastor. In this attractional model, evangelism has become synonymous with an invitation to church.
So finally, Paul had kingdom authority and lived his life with kingdom authenticity; which could only happened when possessing a kingdom attitude; employing a kingdom approach, and being involved in kingdom activity.
13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe. 14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews,
Paul sums up this entire section by thanking God that the Thessalonians received his message and accepted the message for what it was, the Word of God, and not the word of men. The challenge he has in this section comes right out of verse 14, that they would become imitators of the churches in Judea (1 Thessalonians 2:14). So, what is the church supposed to be doing?
One of the best places in Scripture to read about the activities of the early church is in the book of Acts 2:42-47. Back in April I was able to preach about Praying for the Church’s MVPs (the church’s Mission, Vision, and Proclamation) so I won’t revisit that today, but the point is, we are to be on mission in this life. The church must be active and on the move, we have marching orders, and HIS last command needs to be OUR first concern.
We have been entrusted with the gospel, and we must be good stewards of that which the Father has given to us. We are gifted in various areas, different people are able to serve in different capacities. It is important to find a place to give back, make a difference, and impact the kingdom of God.
We have kingdom authority and are challenged to live with kingdom authenticity; which can only happened when we have a kingdom attitude, employing a kingdom approach, and being involved in kingdom activity. This is how we make a difference in the lives of others, for the kingdom’s sake. These five things really are the keys to the kingdom.
Next Steps:
In what ways can you BLESS your neighbors and co-workers each week? Remember this means to
How can you make sure that you are trying to please God rather than trying to please yourself or other people?
Into whom, and how, are you imparting the gospel of God and your own life to others (1 Thessalonians 2:8-9)?
What is the difference between accepting a message as the Word of God and responding to it? (1 Thessalonians 2:13-14)
[print_link] [email_link]
The idea of living the Christian life is to impact those around you for the kingdom of God. Check out this challenging word from Rick Warren, based on Romans 12:16.
Everybody’s looking for a true friend — not just acquaintances but people who are there with you when you need them most. God wants you to build true friendships with the people that are already in your life so that you can share the gospel with them. God has put these people — your co-workers and classmates, neighbors and teammates — in your life specifically so you can share with them about the most important decision they will ever make. If you don’t tell them about what Christ has done for them, then who will?
The Bible says to “Live in harmony with each other. Don’t be too proud to enjoy the company of ordinary people. And don’t think you know it all!” (Romans 12:16 NLT)
Christians tend to fall into one of two extremes: isolation or imitation. Some Christians say, “I don’t want to get polluted by the world. I’m just going to isolate myself. I’ll build a wall and my own little culture.” Isolation doesn’t work! How are you going to build any friendships that way?
The other extreme is imitation, which says, “Let’s be just like the world. We’ll dress like the latest pop star. We’ll say whatever we want about other people. We’ll have whatever values and goals popular culture tells us we should have. We’ll be no different from the world.” That’s not what God wants you to be, either. He doesn’t want you to give in to the lowest common denominators of society.
The answer is not isolation or imitation. It’s insulation and infiltration. The Bible says you’re to be salt and light in the world. You’re to penetrate the world with God’s goodness.
When I go out to dinner and order sea bass, the first thing I have to do before I can eat it is put salt on it. That fish has lived its entire life in salt water, yet I have to put salt on it. What’s going on? That fish is insulated. If God can take a fish and keep it in salt water its entire life and not have the salt permeate the fish, then certainly God can take any believer, put us in the world, and keep us from being corrupted by the wrong values.
God wants you to be holy and secure in your faith. He also wants you to walk out your door into the world and get to know the people he’s placed in your life. As you build relationships with people around you and share Truth with them, you are to be in the world but not of the world.
“The Holy Spirit, God’s gift, does not want you to be afraid of people but to be wise and strong and to love them and enjoy being with them” (2 Timothy 1:7 TLB).
Talk It Over:
[print_link] [email_link]
Every generation creates a new set of prime values to uphold and live out. The millennial generation (born 1980-2000) is now coming to adulthood and leadership. Here are three brief observations about working and meeting with millennials:
1. Don’t waste their time: Millennials value action, productivity, and efficiency above all else. With instant information and communication, the world’s problems are always in their faces. They perceive “to much to do and too little time.” Make sure you have a clear plan of action for every meeting.
2. Embrace flexibility: Google Docs, Skype, the GroupMe app, Facetime, GoToMeeting… all these help to decentralize workplaces and meeting environments. They allow for mobile presence. They have, of course, some inherent dangers, but it’s fruitless to fight the inevitable. Utilize mobile meetings.
3. Always answer the WHY: Millennials want to belong to something bigger than themselves, to be part of a movement. Tap into that desire, and they will give their lives for the cause. You will need to make an extra effort to communicate “why” you are doing something, always pointing back to the foundational example of Jesus.
[print_link] [email_link]
Written by Austin Maxheimer (Director of Groups for One Life Church, Indiana & Western Kentucky)
Today we are looking into Luke 11:1-13 and Matthew 6:1-14. Between chapters 10 and 11, there is a time interval which is covered in John 9:1–10:21. 1
Luke 11 can be summarized by generosity: If Jesus, John the Baptist, and the Twelve all needed to pray, how much more do we need to pray! We must put God’s concerns first (Luke 11:2-4) because prayer is based on sonship, not friendship. God is a loving Father, not a grouchy neighbor; He gives us what we need. He neither slumbers nor sleeps; and He doesn’t become irritated when we ask for help (James 1:5). 2
Outline:
Overview:
This prayer passage fits in with Luke’s purpose in presenting Christ as the Son of Man, ever dependent upon God His Father. The disciples sensed that prayer was a real and vital force in the life of Jesus. As they heard Him pray, it made them want to pray too. And so one of His disciples asked that He would teach them to pray. He did not say, “Teach us how to pray,” but “Teach us to pray.” However, the request certainly includes both the fact and the method.
This study is designed to develop the character quality of persistence in prayer. Jesus warned that without prayer believers we will become faint-hearted (Luke 18:1). When you don’t persist in prayer you become ignorant of God’s will and stubborn to do your own will. God wants us to be persistent and passionate in seeking His face. Jesus in this passage gives three commands on how to be persistent in our prayers. We are to habitually and continuously keep on asking, seeking, and knocking.
Historical Background:
Throughout Jesus’ ministry starting with His baptism (Luke 3:21) Jesus practiced the presence of God by communing with the Father through prayer.
These are the same words that Jesus uses when teaching His disciples in Luke 11 one year later. They are now personally interested in learning how to pray.
Discussion:
1. What motivated the disciples to ask Jesus to teach them how to pray? (Luke 11: 1) The disciples were motivated to pray because Jesus had taught them by example. Prayer is better caught than taught. They were not ready to learn how to pray until now. Their readiness to enter the school of prayer was precipitated by the realization that if God the Son was desperate to receive direction from the Father, how much more did they need to seek His face through prayer. Jesus’ prayer life communicated that He believed there is no direction without connection.
2. If prayer was so important, why is it that Jesus was so relaxed about His disciple’s prayer lives? (Luke 5:33-35) When Jesus’ disciples were talking with him they were talking with the second person of the Godhead. Prayer is really nothing more than a conversation with God. So the disciples were in essence praying every day as they walked and talked with Jesus. But there was coming a day when Jesus would return to the Father and it would be essential that his disciples used the discipline of fasting and prayer to maintain contact with God.
3. How have churched unbelievers misused this prayer? (Matthew 6:7, 8) Prayers are not to be merely recited, nor are our words to be repeated thoughtlessly, or as if they were automatic formulas. But this is not a prohibition against persistence in pray. This practice was common in many pagan religions of that day, as it is in many religions today, including some branches of Christianity. The word translated “meaningless repetition” refers to idle, thoughtless chatter, mimicking the sounds of meaningless babble.
John MacArthur writes ”The Jews had picked up the practice from the Gentiles, who believed that the value of prayer was largely a matter of quantity. The longer the better. ‘They suppose they will be heard for their many words’ (Matthew 6:7), Jesus explained. Those who prayed to pagan gods thought their deities first had to be aroused, then cajoled, intimidated, and badgered into listening and answering – just as the prophets of Baal did on Mt. Carmel (1 Kings 18:26-29). In the New Testament we see a similar practice. Aroused against Paul and his companions by Demetrius and other silversmiths of Ephesus, a great crowd began chanting, ‘Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!’ and continued incessantly for two hours (Acts 19:24-34).
Many Buddhists spin wheels containing written prayers, believing that each turn of the wheel sends that prayer to their god. Roman Catholics light prayer candles in the belief that their requests will continue to ascend to God as long as the candle is lit. Rosaries are used to count off repeated prayers of Hail Mary and Our Father, the rosary itself coming to Catholicism from Buddhism by way of the Spanish Muslims during the Middle Ages. Certain charismatic groups in our own day repeat the same words or phrases over and over until the speaking degenerates to unintelligible confusion” (Matthew by: John A. Broadus, Judson, 1886, pg.130).
4. If God knows what we need before we ever pray, why pray? (Matthew 6:8) God does not have to be badgered into submission, our Father knows what we need, before we ask Him. Martin Luther said, “By our praying… we are instructing ourselves more than we are him.” The purpose of prayer is not to inform or persuade God, but to come before God sincerely, purposely, consciously, and devotedly (Christian Counter-Culture: The Message of the Sermon on the Mount by: John Stott, lnterVarsity, 1978, pg.145).
Prayer is sharing the needs, burdens, and hunger of our hearts before our heavenly Father, who already knows what we need but also wants us to ask him. He wants to hear us, he wants to commune with us, more than we could ever want to commune with him because his love for us is so much greater than our love for him. Prayer is our giving God the opportunity to manifest His power, majesty, love, and providence (John 14:13).
5. Did Jesus intend for this prayer to be prayed repetitiously by rote memory? (Matthew 6:9) Jesus taught them to pray “in this way” or “in this manner” or “along these lines.” The prayer is a model, not a liturgy. It is notable for its brevity, simplicity, and comprehensiveness. Of the six petitions, three are directed to God (Matthew 6:9-10) and three toward human needs (Matthew 6:11-13).
6. How are we to address God? (Luke 11:2; Matthew 6:9) God is addressed as Father only for those who have been spiritually born into God’s family through faith in Christ’s substitutionary death and resurrection (John 1:12-13; John 3:3, 5-7).
But Scripture makes it unmistakably clear that God’s fatherhood of unbelievers is only in the sense of being their Creator. Spiritually, unbelievers have another father. In his severest condemnation of the Jewish leaders who opposed and rejected Him, Jesus said, ”You are of your father the devil” (John 8:44). It is only to those who receive Him that Jesus gives “the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name” (John 1:12; cf. Romans 8:14; Galatians 3:26; Hebrews 2:11-14; 2 Peter 1:4). Because believers belong to God the Son, they can come to God the Father as his beloved children. “Our Father,” indicates God’s eagerness to lend his ear, his power, and his eternal blessing to the petitions of his children if it serves them best and further reveals his purpose and glory.
7. What does “hallowed be Thy Name” tell us about God’s person? (Luke 11:2; Matthew 6:9) Hallowed is an archaic English word used to translate a form of the Greek word that means to make holy. Words from the same root are translated “holy, saint, sanctify, sanctification,” etc. God’s people are commanded to be holy (1 Peter 1:16), but God is acknowledged as “being” holy. That is the meaning of praying hallowed “be” Thy name: to attribute to God the holiness that already is his, (it always has been, supremely and uniquely His). To hallow God’s name is to revere, honor, glorify, and obey him as singularly perfect. As John Calvin observed, that God’s name should be hallowed was nothing other than to say that God should have his own honor, of which he was so worthy, that men should never think or speak of Him without the greatest veneration (A Harmony of the Gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Baker, 1979, pg. 318).
8. What is involved in praying for God’s program? (Luke 11:2; Matthew 6:10) All prayer, first of all, willingly submits to God’s purposes, plans, and glory. Our greatest desire should be to see the Lord reigning as King in his kingdom, to have the honor and authority that have always been his but that he has not yet come to claim.
The word kingdom does not refer primarily to a geographical territory but to sovereignty and dominion. Therefore when we pray “Thy kingdom come,” we are praying for God’s rule through Christ’s enthronement to come, his glorious reign on earth to begin. The verb “come” is an aorist active imperative, which denotes a sudden, instantaneous coming (Matthew 24:27). It is the coming kingdom of God, not an effort to create a more godly society on earth through the progressive, human-oriented work of Christians.
To pray ”Thy kingdom come” is to pray for God’s kingdom, the kingdom over which he, and he alone, is Lord and King. It will be a kingdom on earth (Matthew 6:10a), but it will not be a kingdom of this world, like the present world system. Jesus told Pilate that his kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). We do not advance God’s kingdom to improve human society, no matter how worth y the cause. Supporting those causes neither build the earthly kingdom of Jesus Christ nor bring it closer.
Practically as we pray for God’s kingdom to come we need to ask ourselves if we have surrendered to the reign of Christ in our lives. Our ministries’ focus ought to bring everything within our sphere of influence under Christ’s reign.
9. How often should we pray for God’s provision? (Luke 11:3; Matthew 6:11) God wants us to have a daily dependence upon Him (see Rev.3:17). The word translated “daily” was difficult to translate for centuries, since this is the only place the word occurs inside or outside the Bible. Then a few years ago, an archeologist dug up a papyrus fragment that contained a housewife’s shopping list. Next to several items the woman had scribbled this word for daily: It probably meant, “Enough for the coming day” The phrase should be translated, “give us today bread enough for tomorrow” When prayed in the morning, it is a prayer for the needs in the hours ahead. Prayed in the evening, it is a request for the needs of the next day. The implication is that God will supply what we need to honor Him and do His will.
In our culture, with freezers and refrigerators, we seldom purchase food for a single day. We store up food in such abundance that we mutter only thoughtless words of thanks as we eat. We hardly acknowledge that the meal we eat and clothes we wear have come from the Father’s hand. We must re-establish a daily dependence upon the Lord.
10. What happens when we pray for God’s pardon but have been unwilling to forgive others? (Luke 11:4: Matthew 6:12, 14-15) God doesn’t forgive us. In Luke’s account, Jesus says to tell God you’re forgiving everybody, so please do the same for us, but in Matthew 6:12, Jesus made it more conditional, “And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.” Jesus instructed them to ask the Father to forgive them only to the degree that they forgive other people. Jesus provides a brief commentary on this aspect of the prayer in Matthew 6:14-15 “For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you… but if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.
The kind of forgiveness that the disciples are seeking in the Lord’s Prayer is “parental forgiveness.” They are already members in the family of God; this is why they are instructed to address God as their “Father.” These verses are not suggesting that God will withdraw justification (Judicial Forgiveness) from those who have already received the free pardon he extends to all believers. Judicial forgiveness is a permanent and complete acquittal from the guilt and ultimate penalty of sin, and belongs to all who are in Christ (John 5:24; Romans 8:1; Ephesians 1:7). Yet, Scripture also teaches that God chastens His children who disobey (Heb. 12:5-7). Believers are to confess their sins in order to obtain a day-to-day cleansing (1 John 1:9). This sort of forgiveness (parental forgiveness) is a simple washing from the worldly defilements of sin; not a repeat of the wholesale cleansing from sin’s corruption that comes with justification. It is like a washing of the feet rather than a bath (see John 13:10). Forgiveness in this sense is what God threatens to withhold from Christians who refuse to forgive others (Matthew 18:23-35).
11. Why do we need to pray for God’s protection? (Luke 11:4; Matthew 6:13) God does not tempt men toward sin (James 1:13), but he will subject them to trials that may expose them to spiritual assaults from the enemy, as in the case of Job and Peter (Luke 22:31, 32). This petition reflects the believing one’s desire to avoid the dangers of sin altogether. God knows what we need before we ask (Matthew 6:8), and he promises that no one will be subjected to testing beyond what can be endured. He also promises a way of escape, often through endurance (1 Corinthians 10:13).
12. What two aspects of prayer are being stressed in the story found in Luke 11:5-8? Jesus tells the story of a one-room house with a common sleeping area shared by the whole family, which was common in Palestine at that time. If one person arose and lit a lamp to get bread, all would be awakened. The man in the story finally responds to the request because of his neighbor’s persistence. The word “persistence” can be translated ”without shame, without embarrassment, without modesty.” Vines suggest “shamelessness.”
Jesus’ point is if shameless persistence can obtain bread from a neighbor who doesn’t want to be bothered, then certainly earnest prayer will receive our Father’s answer.
The second aspect of prayer that is being stressed here is interceding on behalf of others. The reason this man was so immodest about his asking was he wasn’t asking for himself. This is the pattern of the Lord’s Prayer. Jesus didn’t say to pray “My Father, give me this day my daily bread, do not lead me into temptation, but deliver me from the Evil One.” Jesus taught them to pray “our” and “us.” The strength of our prayer life is not determined by how much time you spend on your knees pleading for your own needs, but for the needs of others.
13. What are we commanded to do in Luke 11:9? Jesus commanded His disciples to keep on “asking, and it will be given to you; seeking, and you will find; knocking, and it will be opened to you” (all present imperatives).
14. What bizarre examples does Jesus give to point out that God will respond to our petitions only in kindness? (Luke 11:11-12; Matthew 7:9-11) Asking for a fish (get a snake), ask for an egg (get a scorpion).
15. Why does God only respond to us in kindness? (Luke 11:13) God’s gifts reflect His character or his nature. God is good all the time, in contrast with man who is “evil” (James 1:17).
16. What have we already been given at salvation that the disciples had to ask for? (Luke 11:13) We were given the Holy Spirit at Salvation. Romans 8:9 says, “However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.” Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit was ”with” them but when He came at Pentecost the Spirit would be “in” them (John 14:16). Since Pentecost the Holy Spirit takes up residence in the life of every believer at the moment of salvation (Romans 5:5; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20) and baptizes them into the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12-13). At Pentecost, the apostles prayed (Acts 1:12-14) and the Holy Spirit came in great power.
Commentary: 1
Luke 11:2 – The model prayer which the Lord Jesus gave to them at this time is somewhat different from the so-called Lord’s Prayer in Matthew’s gospel. These differences all have a purpose and meaning. None of them is without significance.
First of all, the Lord taught the disciples to address God as Our Father. This intimate family relationship was unknown to believers in the OT. It simply means that believers are now to speak to God as to a loving heavenly Father. Next, we are taught to pray that God’s name should be hallowed. This expresses the longing of the believer’s heart that He should be reverenced, magnified, and adored. In the petition, “Your kingdom come,” we have a prayer that the day will soon arrive when God will put down the forces of evil and, in the Person of Christ, reign supreme over the earth, where His will shall be done as it is in heaven.
Luke 11:3 – Having thus sought first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, the petitioner is taught to make known his personal needs and desires. The ever-recurring need for food, both physical and spiritual, is introduced. We are to live in daily dependence upon Him, acknowledging Him as the source of every good.
Luke 11:4 Next there is the prayer for the forgiveness of sins, based on the fact that we have shown a forgiving spirit to others. Obviously this does not refer to forgiveness from the penalty of sin. That forgiveness is based upon the finished work of Christ on Calvary, and is received through faith alone. But here we are dealing with parental or governmental forgiveness. After we are saved, God deals with us as with children. If he finds a hard and unforgiving spirit in our hearts, he will chastise us until we are broken and brought back into fellowship with himself. This forgiveness has to do with fellowship with God, rather than with relationship.
The plea “And do not lead us into temptation” presents difficulties to some. We know that God never tempts anyone to sin. But He does allow us to experience trials and testings in life, and these are designed for our good. Here the thought seems to be that we should constantly be aware of our own proneness to wander and fall into sin. We should ask the Lord to keep us from falling into sin, even if we ourselves might want to do it. We should pray that the opportunity to sin and the desire to do so should never coincide. The prayer expresses a healthy distrust of our own ability to resist temptation. The prayer ends with a plea for deliverance from the evil one.
Luke 11:5–8 – Continuing with the subject of prayer, the Lord gave an illustration designed to show God’s willingness to hear and answer the petitions of his children. In applying this illustration we must be careful to avoid certain conclusions. It doesn’t mean that God is annoyed by our persistent requests. And it doesn’t suggest that the only way to get our prayers answered is to be persistent.
It does teach that if a man is willing to help a friend because of his persistence, God is much more willing to hear the cries of His children.
Luke 11:9 teaches that we should not grow weary or discouraged in our prayer life. “Keep on asking … keep on seeking … keep on knocking …” Sometimes God answers our prayers the first time we ask. But in other cases he answers only after prolonged asking.
Luke 11:10 teaches that everyone who asks receives, everyone who seeks finds, and everyone who knocks has it opened to him. This is a promise that when we pray, God always gives us what we ask or he gives us something better.
Luke 11:11-12 teaches that God will never deceive us.
Luke 11:13 – A human father would not give bad gifts; even though he has a sinful nature, he knows how to give good gifts to his children. How much more is our heavenly Father willing to give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him. J. G. Bellet says, “It is significant that the gift he selects as the one we most need, and the one He most desires to give, is the Holy Spirit.” When Jesus spoke these words, the Holy Spirit had not yet been given (John 7:39). We should not pray today for the Holy Spirit to be given to us because he comes to indwell us at the time of our conversion (Romans 8:9; Ephesians 1:13-14).
But it is certainly proper and necessary for us to pray for the Holy Spirit in other ways. We should pray that we will be teachable by the Holy Spirit, that we will be guided by the Spirit, and that his power will be poured out on us in all our service for Christ.
It is quite possible that when Jesus taught the disciples to ask for the Holy Spirit, He was referring to the power of the Spirit enabling them to live the other-worldly type of discipleship which He had been teaching in the preceding chapters. By this time, they were probably feeling how utterly impossible it was for them to meet the tests of discipleship in their own strength. This is, of course, true. The Holy Spirit is the power that enables one to live the Christian life. So Jesus pictured God as anxious to give this power to those who ask.
In the original Greek, Luke 11:13 does not say that God will give the Holy Spirit, but rather He will “give Holy Spirit” (without the article). Professor H. B. Swete pointed out that when the article is present, it refers to the Person himself, but when the article is absent, it refers to his gifts or operations on our behalf. So in this passage, it is not so much a prayer for the Person of the Holy Spirit, but rather for his ministries in our lives. This is further borne out by the parallel passage in Matthew 7:11 which reads, “… how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!”
1 MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (p. 1411). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
2 Wiersbe, W. W. (1991). With the Word Bible Commentary (Luke 11:1). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
[Questions and responses by Richard D. Leineweber, Jr. c. 2000]
This past March we had our annual DNow weekend. Here are some photos in a slideshow put to music, (Jason Gray’s, I Am New).
We are so please to have the best youth pastor ever, Beth Anderson, investing so much into the lives of our young people.
The visiting worship team was from Christopher Newport University, and seven of the nine Bible study leaders were former students of the King’s Grant Baptist Church student ministry, who are currently making a difference on their own college campuses as well.