Meet the Author

Archive for January, 2010

Week 4 – Matthew 16:1-20:34

“Who do you say that I am?” Maybe the most compelling question ever asked, and Jesus asked it in such a way that it demands a personal response. It is not enough to know what others think about Jesus. The fact that He stands as the unique personality of all time calls us to take a closer look at just who He is. Perhaps Mark Twain had Jesus question in mind when he penned these words, “In religion and politics people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing.” Concerning Jesus, second-hand knowledge just won’t do.

Peter knew the answer, and he delivered it with conviction – “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” But his conclusion wasn’t derived at through human intellect or wisdom. It was revealed to Him by God the Father. How else would he know the answer, and as far as that goes, how will we know the answer? It is far different than answering a question like, who was Abe Lincoln, or who is Tiger Woods. These are mere men, but Jesus, He is another story. Peter knew this, and he opened his mind to see Jesus through God’s eyes. When the question was directed at him, Peter made the confession that stands as the cornerstone of Christianity. What about you? What is your response?

Week 3 – Matthew 11:1-15:39

As recorded in the 15^th chapter of Matthew, beginning in verse 1, some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus with the accusation that the disciples had transgressed “the tradition of the elders” by not washing their hands before eating.

Knowing, as we do, the ultimate intent of these religious leaders, answer this question: Which issue do you think the Pharisees were more concerned about: a) the health and well-being of their fellow Jews who were not washing up before dinner like good boys, or b) upholding the religious tradition?

My thought: neither! The scribes and Pharisees wanted nothing other than the death of Jesus. Thus, they would use every tool at their disposal to entrap Him and bring him before the Sanhedrin and High Priest Caiaphas to be condemned.

After rebuking these religious leaders for their own hypocrisy, “… Jesus called the crowd to Him, [and] He said to them, ‘Hear and understand. It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man’.”

When the encounter was over and the disciples were again alone with the Lord, Peter said to Him, “Explain the parable to us.”

Jesus said, “Are you still lacking in understanding also?

“Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated?

“But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man.

“For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.

“These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.”

So once again, Jesus goes directly to the heart of the matter. He was more interested in the heart of man—and what’s in it—than in the observance of some spiritually empty hand-washing tradition.

He drew the line clearly, showing that men do not condemn themselves by what they eat or what is on their dirty hands when they do, but by what the mouth reveals.

The prophet Jeremiah said:
The heart is deceitful above all things,
And desperately wicked;
Who can know it?

According to Jesus, we can know the heart by what proceeds out of the mouth.

(So wash your hands and keep your mouth shut. Ha! Just kidding!)

Week 2 – Matthew 6:1-10:42

In Matthew 5 Jesus explained to those gathered before Him the stringency of the law and further expounds on it in the next several chapters.

Perhaps the best known passages are found in Matthew 6:9-14 – ‘The Lord’s Prayer’. What catches my attention is the depth of the wisdom found in these chapters. Indeed it was obvious to the crowds… they were amazed at His teaching because He taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law. Matthew 6:28-29

His authority is displayed on several occasions including:

• The centurion’s faith concerning the healing of his servant simply by Jesus’ authority. Jesus was astonished and declared, “I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.”
• The rebuking of the waves in the midst of the storm.
• His command to the demons – “GO!”

There are several more and I’ll leave those for you to find and ponder.

When the question of forgiveness is raised, ‘The Lord’s Prayer’ is often cited as a passage directing us to ‘ask for forgiveness’. But as Bob has often encouraged listeners, keep reading. “If you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.”

If Jesus’ explanation of meaning of the law was not enough to bury us in our sins, certainly this statement is. How many times have we chosen not to forgive someone? But even in our sin Jesus established His authority. Just look at Matthew 9:2, “Take heart, son: your sins are forgiven.”

Even the teachers of the law knew that no man could forgive sins. Only God could do that. Jesus establishes His authority over everything, including that which separates God from man – sin – when He declares: “…so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins….” He said to the paralytic, “Get up, take your mat and go home.”

What greater news is there? The Son of Man has the authority to forgive sins!

And He has done it.

Week 1 – Matthew 1:1-5:48

I’ve always been fascinated by the women included in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus.

The last one mentioned, Mary, is the easiest to figure out. Obviously, she was Jesus’ mother, and Matthew clearly declares the reality of the virgin birth. Joseph was Jesus’ legal father, and one could trace His right to David’s throne through Joseph (just as Luke proved the same right through Mary). But legal father and physical father are two different things. Therefore, once Matthew demonstrated Jesus’ legal connection to David through Joseph he immediately states, “…of Mary, by whom Jesus was born” (Matthew 1:16 NASB).

The other four women, Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and “her of Uriah” (that is, Bathsheba) are telling.

First is Tamar (Verse 3). This is one of those sordid, warts-and-all stories found in the Old Testament (see Genesis 38). Due to Judah’s failure to follow through on his pledge to give her his youngest son when he was old enough, Tamar prostituted herself to Judah, got pregnant, and then exposed him as the father.

Rahab (Verse 5) was a prostitute in Jericho. She protected the spies sent there by Joshua and was saved when that city was destroyed (see Joshua 2).

Ruth was not even Israeli, but from Moab (see the book of Ruth).

Bathsheba and David’s dalliance is well-known (see 2 Samuel 11).

All four of these women were mothers in the Davidic line. Why mention them, especially when doing so certainly could result in criticism of Jesus?

I think Matthew (the tax collector), understood what it meant to be used of God, regardless of background, nationality, sinfulness, etc. In other words, if God’s grace was sufficient to include these four women in Jesus’ genealogy, then His grace is sufficient for me. Nothing I’ve done is beyond God’s power to restore and renew.